Research / Educational Technology / AI & Data Science

Student Error Explainer

A research tool that anonymises and cleans assessment exports, then produces batch explanations and Newman-style classifications of mathematical errors.

ongoingPhD research project

Problem & context

Problem

Convert raw mathematics-assessment exports into privacy-conscious, analysable records and help researchers interpret recurring student errors at scale.

Intended users

Mathematics education researchers and educators preparing and analysing student-response datasets.

Role and contributions

Workflow design, data processing and AI-assisted error-analysis implementation

Dataset / inputs

Paired grade and response exports, student answers, reference answers and optional mathematical context. The batch endpoint processes up to 50 valid rows per request.

Methods & architecture

The workflow assigns pseudonymous student identifiers, removes technical markers, normalises grades, filters unusable or fully correct rows when requested, and applies a three-stage language-model chain for explanation, Newman classification and concise summary.

Next.jsTypeScriptOpenAIOpenRouterMongoDBpandas-compatible CSV workflows

Implementation

  1. Anonymise student names into stable numeric identifiers
  2. Clean STACK response markers and normalise question grades
  3. Filter blank, invalid and explicitly no-error records
  4. Analyse rows with bounded concurrency and per-row failure isolation
  5. Support OpenAI and OpenRouter-assisted batch analysis
  6. Export prepared and analysed data for downstream research

Current evidence

The current implementation verifies the project foundation below; broader outcome claims will be added after evaluation.

50 rowsBatch limit
3Analysis concurrency
3Analysis stages
3Data workflows

Limitations & next steps

Current status
The local application contains no automated test suite, and its production build was not fully confirmed during this review. AI-generated explanations and error categories require human validation. The GitHub repository was not publicly accessible at review time and is behind the local code.

Add a labelled evaluation set, inter-rater validation, automated tests and a reproducible benchmark before reporting classification quality.

Attribution & licence

No licence file was verified in the local repository.