Search and Filter

Repository Feedback

Your feedback helps us improve the repository's content relevance and usability. Please share your thoughts to help us better serve researchers and practitioners.

Submit feedback

Submit a research study

Contribute to the repository:

Add a paper

EduThink4AI: Translating Educational Critical Thinking into Multi-Agent LLM Systems

Authors
Xinmeng Hou,
Zhouquan Lu,
Wenli Chen,
Hai Hu,
Qing Guo
Date
Publisher
arXiv
Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated significant potential as educational tutoring agents, capable of tailoring hints, orchestrating lessons, and grading with near-human finesse across various academic domains. However, current LLM-based educational systems exhibit critical limitations in promoting genuine critical thinking, failing on over one-third of multi-hop questions with counterfactual premises, and remaining vulnerable to adversarial prompts that trigger biased or factually incorrect responses. To address these gaps, we propose EDU-Prompting, a novel multi-agent framework that bridges established educational critical thinking theories with LLM agent design to generate critical, bias-aware explanations while fostering diverse perspectives. Our systematic evaluation across theoretical benchmarks and practical college-level critical writing scenarios demonstrates that EDU-Prompting significantly enhances both content truthfulness and logical soundness in AI-generated educational responses. The framework's modular design enables seamless integration into existing prompting frameworks and educational applications, allowing practitioners to directly incorporate critical thinking catalysts that promote analytical reasoning and introduce multiple perspectives without requiring extensive system modifications.
Study at a glance
  • Question: How can AI systems be designed to better encourage critical thinking and provide accurate explanations?
  • Setting and data: Practical college-level critical writing scenarios and theoretical benchmarks.
  • Method: Performance testing of a multi-agent AI framework across theoretical tasks and college writing scenarios.
Why it matters

Current LLM-based educational tutoring systems exhibit critical limitations in promoting genuine critical thinking. They fail on questions with counterfactual premises and remain vulnerable to adversarial prompts that trigger biased or factually incorrect responses.

Key findings
  • In college-level critical writing scenarios, a multi-agent critical-thinking framework significantly enhanced the truthfulness and logical soundness of AI-generated responses.
  • Current AI educational systems failed on over one-third of complex, multi-step questions that contained counterfactual premises.
  • Existing AI tutoring models remain vulnerable to manipulative prompts that trigger biased or factually incorrect educational explanations.

Summary drafted with AI from the paper’s abstract and may contain errors. See the full paper for details.

Who is the user?
Who age?