Date
Publisher
arXiv
Although vision-language and large language models (VLM and LLM) offer
promising opportunities for AI-driven educational assessment, their
effectiveness in real-world classroom settings, particularly in
underrepresented educational contexts, remains underexplored. In this study, we
evaluated the performance of a state-of-the-art VLM and several LLMs on 646
handwritten exam responses from grade 4 students in six Indonesian schools,
covering two subjects: Mathematics and English. These sheets contain more than
14K student answers that span multiple choice, short answer, and essay
questions. Assessment tasks include grading these responses and generating
personalized feedback. Our findings show that the VLM often struggles to
accurately recognize student handwriting, leading to error propagation in
downstream LLM grading. Nevertheless, LLM-generated feedback retains some
utility, even when derived from imperfect input, although limitations in
personalization and contextual relevance persist.
Study at a glance
- Question: How well can AI models read, grade, and give feedback on handwritten elementary student exams?
- Setting and data: 646 handwritten math and English exam sheets with over 14,000 answers from grade 4 students across six Indonesian schools.
- Method: Tests how well AI models read handwriting, grade student responses, and generate personalized feedback.
Why it matters
Vision-language and large language models offer promising opportunities for AI-driven educational assessment. However, their effectiveness in real-world classroom settings, particularly in underrepresented educational contexts, remains underexplored.
Key findings
- In six Indonesian elementary schools, vision AI often struggled to read fourth-grade handwritten math and English exams, causing errors in downstream automated grading.
- Automated feedback retained some usefulness for assessment even when generated from imperfectly recognized student handwriting.
- Language models showed persistent limitations in providing personalized and contextually relevant student feedback.
Summary drafted with AI from the paper’s abstract and may contain errors. See the full paper for details.
What is the application?
Who is the user?
Who age?
Why use AI?
Study design
