Abstract
Collaborative science learning requires nuanced interpretation of student dialogue to characterize how learners identify knowledge gaps, build explanations, and work toward resolution - a theory-driven analysis that is labor-intensive and difficult to scale. We investigate whether instruction-tuned large language models (LLMs) can support multidimensional analysis of collaborative sensemaking without task-specific training, and whether structured knowledge-state information improves model inference. We evaluate two mid-size LLMs on 23 richly annotated, expert-labeled episodes across prompting conditions that vary definitional scaffolding, reasoning mode, and turn structure. Without reasoning, models tend to overpredict successful sensemaking; reasoning-enabled prompting improves identification of unsuccessful cases. Knowledge-state diagnostics provide additional grounding, improving detection of unsuccessful sensemaking and increasing agreement with expert annotations. No single configuration performs best across all sensemaking dimensions, underscoring the multidimensional nature of the task.
Abstract (translated)
URL
https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.31046
