Abstract

In this paper, we investigate whether current state-of-the-art large languagemodels (LLMs) are effective as AI tutors and whether they demonstratepedagogical abilities necessary for good AI tutoring in educational dialogues.Previous efforts towards evaluation have been limited to subjective protocolsand benchmarks. To bridge this gap, we propose a unified evaluation taxonomywith eight pedagogical dimensions based on key learning sciences principles,which is designed to assess the pedagogical value of LLM-powered AI tutorresponses grounded in student mistakes or confusion in the mathematical domain.We release MRBench -- a new evaluation benchmark containing 192 conversationsand 1,596 responses from seven state-of-the-art LLM-based and human tutors,providing gold annotations for eight pedagogical dimensions. We assessreliability of the popular Prometheus2 LLM as an evaluator and analyze eachtutor's pedagogical abilities, highlighting which LLMs are good tutors andwhich ones are more suitable as question-answering systems. We believe that thepresented taxonomy, benchmark, and human-annotated labels will streamline theevaluation process and help track the progress in AI tutors' development.