Rewarding How Models Think Pedagogically: Integrating Pedagogical Reasoning and Thinking Rewards for LLMs in Education

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed as intelligent tutoring systems, yet research on optimizing LLMs specifically for educational contexts remains limited. Recent works have proposed reinforcement learning approaches for training LLM tutors, but these methods focus solely on optimizing visible responses while neglecting the model's internal thinking process. We introduce PedagogicalRL-Thinking, a framework that extends pedagogical alignment to reasoning LLMs in education through two novel approaches: (1) Pedagogical Reasoning Prompting, which guides internal reasoning using domain-specific educational theory rather than generic instructions; and (2) Thinking Reward, which explicitly evaluates and reinforces the pedagogical quality of the model's reasoning traces. Our experiments reveal that domain-specific, theory-grounded prompting outperforms generic prompting, and that Thinking Reward is most effective when combined with pedagogical prompting. Furthermore, models trained only on mathematics tutoring dialogues show improved performance on educational benchmarks not seen during training, while preserving the base model's factual knowledge. Our quantitative and qualitative analyses reveal that pedagogical thinking reward produces systematic reasoning trace changes, with increased pedagogical reasoning and more structured instructional decision-making in the tutor's thinking process.

Pedagogical Alignment for Vision-Language-Action Models: A Comprehensive Framework for Data, Architecture, and Evaluation in Education

Science demonstrations are important for effective STEM education, yet teachers face challenges in conducting them safely and consistently across multiple occasions, where robotics can be helpful. However, current Vision-Language-Action (VLA) models require substantial computational resources and sacrifice language generation capabilities to maximize efficiency, making them unsuitable for resource-constrained educational settings that require interpretable, explanation-generating systems. We present \textit{Pedagogical VLA Framework}, a framework that applies pedagogical alignment to lightweight VLA models through four components: text healing to restore language generation capabilities, large language model (LLM) distillation to transfer pedagogical knowledge, safety training for educational environments, and pedagogical evaluation adjusted to science education contexts. We evaluate Pedagogical VLA Framework across five science demonstrations spanning physics, chemistry, biology, and earth science, using an evaluation framework developed in collaboration with science education experts. Our evaluation assesses both task performance (success rate, protocol compliance, efficiency, safety) and pedagogical quality through teacher surveys and LLM-as-Judge assessment. We additionally provide qualitative analysis of generated texts. Experimental results demonstrate that Pedagogical VLA Framework achieves comparable task performance to baseline models while producing contextually appropriate educational explanations.

Pedagogy-R1: Pedagogically-Aligned Reasoning Model with Balanced Educational Benchmark

Recent advances in large reasoning models (LRMs) show strong performance in structured domains such as mathematics and programming; however, they often lack pedagogical coherence and realistic teaching behaviors. To bridge this gap, we introduce Pedagogy-R1, a framework that adapts LRMs for classroom use through three innovations: (1) a distillation-based pipeline that filters and refines model outputs for instruction-tuning, (2) the Well-balanced Educational Benchmark (WBEB), which evaluates performance across subject knowledge, pedagogical knowledge, tracing, essay scoring, and teacher decision-making, and (3) a Chain-of-Pedagogy (CoP) prompting strategy for generating and eliciting teacher-style reasoning. Our mixed-method evaluation combines quantitative metrics with qualitative analysis, providing the first systematic assessment of LRMs' pedagogical strengths and limitations.