Searcharxiv⌕ Search

arXiv subjects

Mei Tan

Publications and source records attributed to Mei Tan.

6 recordsLinked to original sources
arXiv2026

Reflections and New Directions for Human-Centered Large Language Models

Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly shaping the private and professional lives of users, with numerous applications in business, education, finance, healthcare, law, and science. With this rise in global influence comes greater urgency to build, evaluate, and deploy these systems in a manner that prioritizes not only technical capabilities but also human priorities. This work presents a framework for developing Human-Centered Large Language Models (HCLLMs), which integrates perspectives from Natural Language Processing (NLP), Human-Computer Interaction (HCI), and responsible AI. Considering the ethics, economics, and technical objectives of language modeling, we argue that model developers need to address human concerns, preferences, values, and goals, not only during a cursory post-training stage, but rather with rigor and care at every stage of the pipeline. This paper offers human-centered insights and recommendations for developers at each stage, from system design to data sourcing, model training, evaluation, and responsible deployment. Then we conclude with a case study, applying these insights to understand the future of work with HCLLMs.

cs.CL↗
arXiv2026

Marked Pedagogies: Examining Linguistic Biases in Personalized Automated Writing Feedback

Effective personalized feedback is critical to students' literacy development. Though LLM-powered tools now promise to automate such feedback at scale, LLMs are not language-neutral: they privilege standard academic English and reproduce social stereotypes, raising concerns about how "personalization" shapes the feedback students receive. We examine how four widely used LLMs (GPT-4o, GPT-3.5-turbo, Llama-3.3 70B, Llama-3.1 8B) adapt written feedback in response to student attributes. Using 600 eighth-grade persuasive essays from the PERSUADE dataset, we generated feedback under prompt conditions embedding gender, race/ethnicity, learning needs, achievement, and motivation. We analyze lexical shifts across model outputs by adapting the Marked Words framework. Our results reveal systematic, stereotype-aligned shifts in feedback conditioned on presumed student attributes--even when essay content was identical. Feedback for students marked by race, language, or disability often exhibited positive feedback bias and feedback withholding bias--overuse of praise, less substantive critique, and assumptions of limited ability. Across attributes, models tailored not only what content was emphasized but also how writing was judged and how students were addressed. We term these instructional orientations Marked Pedagogies and highlight the need for transparency and accountability in automated feedback tools.

cs.CL↗
arXiv2025

IDEAlign: Comparing Ideas of Large Language Models to Domain Expert

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used to produce open-ended, interpretive annotations, yet there is no validated, scalable measure of idea-level similarity to expert annotations. We (i) introduce the content evaluation of LLM annotations as a core, understudied task, (ii) propose IDEAlign for capturing expert similarity judgments via pick-the-odd-one-out tasks, and (iii) benchmark various similarity methods (text embeddings, topic models, and LLM-as-a-judge) against these human ratings. Applying this approach to two real-world educational datasets (e.g., interpreting math reasoning and feedback generation), we find that most metrics fail to capture the nuanced dimensions of similarity meaningful to experts. LLM-as-a-judge performs best (11~18% improvement over other methods) but still falls short of expert alignment, making it useful as a triage tool rather than a substitute for human review. Our work demonstrates the difficulty of evaluating open-ended LLM annotations at scale, and positions IDEAlign as a reusable protocol for benchmarking on this task to help guide responsible deployment of LLMs.

cs.CL↗
arXiv2025

EduCoder: An Open-Source Annotation System for Education Transcript Data

We introduce EduCoder, a domain-specialized tool designed to support utterance-level annotation of educational dialogue. While general-purpose text annotation tools for NLP and qualitative research abound, few address the complexities of coding education dialogue transcripts -- with diverse teacher-student and peer interactions. Common challenges include defining codebooks for complex pedagogical features, supporting both open-ended and categorical coding, and contextualizing utterances with external features, such as the lesson's purpose and the pedagogical value of the instruction. EduCoder is designed to address these challenges by providing a platform for researchers and domain experts to collaboratively define complex codebooks based on observed data. It incorporates both categorical and open-ended annotation types along with contextual materials. Additionally, it offers a side-by-side comparison of multiple annotators' responses, allowing comparison and calibration of annotations with others to improve data reliability. The system is open-source, with a demo video available.

cs.CL↗
arXiv2023

Is a Seat at the Table Enough? Engaging Teachers and Students in Dataset Specification for ML in Education

Despite the promises of ML in education, its adoption in the classroom has surfaced numerous issues regarding fairness, accountability, and transparency, as well as concerns about data privacy and student consent. A root cause of these issues is the lack of understanding of the complex dynamics of education, including teacher-student interactions, collaborative learning, and classroom environment. To overcome these challenges and fully utilize the potential of ML in education, software practitioners need to work closely with educators and students to fully understand the context of the data (the backbone of ML applications) and collaboratively define the ML data specifications. To gain a deeper understanding of such a collaborative process, we conduct ten co-design sessions with ML software practitioners, educators, and students. In the sessions, teachers and students work with ML engineers, UX designers, and legal practitioners to define dataset characteristics for a given ML application. We find that stakeholders contextualize data based on their domain and procedural knowledge, proactively design data requirements to mitigate downstream harms and data reliability concerns, and exhibit role-based collaborative strategies and contribution patterns. Further, we find that beyond a seat at the table, meaningful stakeholder participation in ML requires structured supports: defined processes for continuous iteration and co-evaluation, shared contextual data quality standards, and information scaffolds for both technical and non-technical stakeholders to traverse expertise boundaries.

cs.CY↗
arXiv2023

More than Model Documentation: Uncovering Teachers' Bespoke Information Needs for Informed Classroom Integration of ChatGPT

ChatGPT has entered classrooms, but not via the typical route of other educational technology, which includes comprehensive training, documentation, and vetting. Consequently, teachers are urgently tasked to assess its capabilities to determine potential effects on student learning and instruct their use of ChatGPT. However, it is unclear what support teachers have and need and whether existing documentation, such as model cards, provides adequate direction for educators in this new paradigm. By interviewing 22 middle- and high-school teachers, we connect the discourse on AI transparency and documentation with educational technology integration, highlighting the critical information needs of teachers. Our findings reveal that teachers confront significant information gaps, lacking clarity on exploring ChatGPT's capabilities for bespoke learning tasks and ensuring its fit with the needs of diverse learners. As a solution, we propose a framework for interactive model documentation that empowers teachers to navigate the interplay between pedagogical and technical knowledge.

cs.HC↗