SciEval: A Benchmark for Automatic Evaluation of K-12 Science Instructional Materials

The need to evaluate instructional materials for K-12 science education has become increasingly important, as more educators use generative AI to create instructional materials. However, the review of instructional materials is time-consuming, expertise-intensive, and difficult to scale, motivating interest in automated evaluation approaches. While large language models (LLMs) have shown strong performance on general evaluation tasks, their performance and reliability on instructional materials remain unclear. To address this gap, we formulate Automatic Instructional Materials Evaluation (AIME) as a generative AI task that predicts scores and evidence using the rubric designed by the educator. We create a benchmark dataset and develop baseline models for AIME. First, we curate the first AIME dataset, SciEval, consisting of instructional materials annotated with pedagogy-aligned evaluation scores and evidence-based rationales. Expert annotations achieve high inter-rater reliability, resulting in a dataset of 273 lesson-level instructional materials evaluated across 13 criteria (N=3549) using the EQuIP rubric. Second, we test mainstream LLMs (GPT, Gemini, Llama, and Qwen) on SciEval and find that none achieve strong performance. Then we fine-tune Qwen3 on SciEval. Results on a held-out test set show that domain-aligned fine-tuning can achieve up to 11 percent performance gains, highlighting the importance of domain-specific fine-tuning for AIME and facilitating the use of LLMs in other educational tasks.

DrawSim-PD: Simulating Student Science Drawings to Support NGSS-Aligned Teacher Diagnostic Reasoning

Developing expertise in diagnostic reasoning requires practice with diverse student artifacts, yet privacy regulations prohibit sharing authentic student work for teacher professional development (PD) at scale. We present DrawSim-PD, the first generative framework that simulates NGSS-aligned, student-like science drawings exhibiting controllable pedagogical imperfections to support teacher training. Central to our approach are apability profiles--structured cognitive states encoding what students at each performance level can and cannot yet demonstrate. These profiles ensure cross-modal coherence across generated outputs: (i) a student-like drawing, (ii) a first-person reasoning narrative, and (iii) a teacher-facing diagnostic concept map. Using 100 curated NGSS topics spanning K-12, we construct a corpus of 10,000 systematically structured artifacts. Through an expert-based feasibility evaluation, K--12 science educators verified the artifacts' alignment with NGSS expectations (>84% positive on core items) and utility for interpreting student thinking, while identifying refinement opportunities for grade-band extremes. We release this open infrastructure to overcome data scarcity barriers in visual assessment research.