Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 cited by

On the application of Large Language Models for language teaching and assessment technology

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2307.08393 v1 pith:CBXMOVJE submitted 2023-07-17 cs.CL cs.LG

classification cs.CLcs.LG
keywords languagemodelslargetechnologyeducationgenerationofferassessment
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

The recent release of very large language models such as PaLM and GPT-4 has made an unprecedented impact in the popular media and public consciousness, giving rise to a mixture of excitement and fear as to their capabilities and potential uses, and shining a light on natural language processing research which had not previously received so much attention. The developments offer great promise for education technology, and in this paper we look specifically at the potential for incorporating large language models in AI-driven language teaching and assessment systems. We consider several research areas and also discuss the risks and ethical considerations surrounding generative AI in education technology for language learners. Overall we find that larger language models offer improvements over previous models in text generation, opening up routes toward content generation which had not previously been plausible. For text generation they must be prompted carefully and their outputs may need to be reshaped before they are ready for use. For automated grading and grammatical error correction, tasks whose progress is checked on well-known benchmarks, early investigations indicate that large language models on their own do not improve on state-of-the-art results according to standard evaluation metrics. For grading it appears that linguistic features established in the literature should still be used for best performance, and for error correction it may be that the models can offer alternative feedback styles which are not measured sensitively with existing methods. In all cases, there is work to be done to experiment with the inclusion of large language models in education technology for language learners, in order to properly understand and report on their capacities and limitations, and to ensure that foreseeable risks such as misinformation and harmful bias are mitigated.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 4 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Superstudent intelligence in thermodynamics

    cs.CE 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    OpenAI's o3 model scored higher than all 90 students on a real university thermodynamics exam, zero-shot, including problems with graphical output.

  2. Explanation based In-Context Demonstrations Retrieval for Multilingual Grammatical Error Correction

    cs.CL 2025-02 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Retrieving in-context demonstrations by matching natural-language grammatical error explanations beats input-text similarity for few-shot multilingual GEC.

  3. Enhancing LLM Character-Level Manipulation via Divide and Conquer

    cs.CL 2025-02 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    ToCAD, a three-stage divide-and-conquer prompt, atomizes words into spaced letters, edits them, and reconstructs, sharply improving LLM exact-match accuracy on deletion, insertion, and substitution tasks.

  4. Position: LLMs Can be Good Tutors in English Education

    cs.CL 2025-02 conditional novelty 3.0 of 10

    A literature-based taxonomy casts LLMs as data enhancers, task predictors, and agents, arguing they can be effective tutors in English education without presenting new experiments.

Pith tools