Date
Publisher
arXiv
Designing good reflection questions is pedagogically important but time-consuming and unevenly supported across teachers. This paper introduces a reflection-in-reflection framework for automated generation of reflection questions with large language models (LLMs). Our approach coordinates two role-specialized agents, a Student-Teacher and a Teacher-Educator, that engage in a Socratic multi-turn dialogue to iteratively refine a single question given a teacher-specified topic, key concepts, student level, and optional instructional materials. The Student-Teacher proposes candidate questions with brief rationales, while the Teacher-Educator evaluates them along clarity, depth, relevance, engagement, and conceptual interconnections, responding only with targeted coaching questions or a fixed signal to stop the dialogue. We evaluate the framework in an authentic lower-secondary ICT setting on the topic, using GPT-4o-mini as the backbone model and a stronger GPT- 4-class LLM as an external evaluator in pairwise comparisons of clarity, relevance, depth, and overall quality. First, we study how interaction design and context (dynamic vs.fixed iteration counts; presence or absence of student level and materials) affect question quality. Dynamic stopping combined with contextual information consistently outperforms fixed 5- or 10-step refinement, with very long dialogues prone to drift or over-complication. Second, we show that our two-agent protocol produces questions that are judged substantially more relevant and deeper, and better overall, than a one-shot baseline using the same backbone model.
Study at a glance
- Question: Can a two-agent AI framework using Socratic questioning generate higher-quality reflection questions than a single-prompt approach?
- Setting and data: Czech lower-secondary 8th–9th grade curriculum materials (students aged 13–15) on internet fundamentals, evaluated across 3,300 pairwise comparisons.
- Method: Pairwise model evaluation using a larger language model to compare multi-turn agent configurations against each other and a baseline.
Why it matters
Designing good reflection prompts is demanding and time-consuming for teachers. Most automated question generation systems focus on factual recall rather than open-ended reflection, creating a practical bottleneck for scalable, high-quality reflective practice.
Key findings
- A two-agent Socratic dialogue produced reflection questions judged consistently superior in relevance and depth compared to a one-shot baseline.
- Dynamic stopping based on pedagogical feedback consistently outperformed fixed 5-step or 10-step iteration schemes across clarity, relevance, depth, and overall quality.
- Very long refinement dialogues showed a tendency to drift off-topic or add excessive complexity that could reduce question accessibility and clarity.
Summary drafted with AI from the full paper 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
