ArguAgent: AI-Supported Real-Time Grouping for Productive Argumentation in STEM Classrooms
Argumentation is a core practice in STEM education, but its productivity depends on who participates and how they interact. Higher-achieving students often dominate the talk and decision-making, while lower-achieving peers may disengage, defer, or comply without contributing substantive reasoning. Forming groups strategically based on students' stances and argumentation skills could help foster inclusive, evidence-based discourse. In practice, however, teachers are constrained in implementing this grouping strategy because it requires real-time insight into students' positions and the quality of their argumentation, information that is difficult to assess reliably and at scale during instruction. We present a generative AI-powered system, ArguAgent, that creates groups optimizing for stance heterogeneity while constraining argumentation quality differences to +/-1 level on a validated learning progression. ArguAgent uses a two-component assessment pipeline: first scoring student arguments on a 0-4 rubric, then clustering positions via semantic analysis. We validated the scoring component against human expert consensus (Krippendorff's ααα = 0.817) using 200 expert-generated scores. Testing three OpenAI models (GPT-4o-mini, GPT-5.1, GPT-5.2) with identical calibrated prompts, we found that systematic prompt engineering informed by human disagreement analysis contributed 89% of scoring improvement (QWK: 0.531 to 0.686), while model upgrades contributed an additional 11% (QWK: 0.686 to 0.708). Simulation testing across 100 classes demonstrated that the grouping algorithm achieves 95.4% of groups that meet both design criteria, a 3.2x improvement over random assignment. These results suggest ArguAgent can enable real-time, theoretically grounded grouping that promotes productive STEM argumentation in classrooms.
Code (0)
등록된 구현이 없습니다.
Tasks
Prompt EngineeringSimilar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
Exploring the evolution of a trade-off between vigilance and foraging in group-living organisms
Despite the fact that grouping behavior has been actively studied for over a century, the relative importance of the numerous proposed fitness benefits of grouping remain unclear. We use a digital model of evolving prey …
Designing for human-AI complementarity in K-12 education
Recent work has explored how complementary strengths of humans and artificial intelligence (AI) systems might be productively combined. However, successful forms of human-AI partnership have rarely been demonstrated in r…
Decision MakingReflexis: Supporting Reflexivity and Rigor in Collaborative Qualitative Analysis through Design for Deliberation
Reflexive Thematic Analysis (RTA) is a critical method for generating deep interpretive insights. Yet its core tenets, including researcher reflexivity, tangible analytical evolution, and productive disagreement, are oft…
Inequality in the use frequency of patent technology codes
Technology codes are assigned to each patent for classification purposes and to identify the components of its novelty. Not all the technology codes are used with the same frequency - if we study the use frequency of cod…
Making AI-Generated Feedback Matter: A Large-Scale Study of Feedback Workflows and Student Enactment
Feedback processes strongly influence student learning, yet their educational value depends on addressing two distinct challenges: providing high-quality, timely, and individualised feedback at scale, and supporting stud…