Abstract:As Vision-Language Models (VLMs) become integral to educational decision-making, ensuring their fairness is paramount. However, current text-centric evaluations neglect the visual modality, leaving an unregulated channel for latent social biases. To bridge this gap, we present Edu-MMBias, a systematic auditing framework grounded in the tri-component model of attitudes from social psychology. This framework diagnoses bias across three hierarchical dimensions: cognitive, affective, and behavioral. Utilizing a specialized generative pipeline that incorporates a self-correct mechanism and human-in-the-loop verification, we synthesize contamination-resistant student profiles to conduct a holistic stress test on state-of-the-art VLMs. Our extensive audit reveals critical, counter-intuitive patterns: models exhibit a compensatory class bias favoring lower-status narratives while simultaneously harboring deep-seated health and racial stereotypes. Crucially, we find that visual inputs act as a safety backdoor, triggering a resurgence of biases that bypass text-based alignment safeguards and revealing a systematic misalignment between latent cognition and final decision-making. The contributions of this paper are available at: https://anonymous.4open.science/r/EduMMBias-63B2.
Abstract:Large language models are increasingly used as educational assistants, yet evaluation of their educational capabilities remains concentrated on question-answering and tutoring tasks. A critical gap exists for multimedia instructional content generation -- the ability to produce coherent, diagram-rich explanations that combine geometrically accurate visuals with step-by-step reasoning. We present EduIllustrate, a benchmark for evaluating LLMs on interleaved text-diagram explanation generation for K-12 STEM problems. The benchmark comprises 230 problems spanning five subjects and three grade levels, a standardized generation protocol with sequential anchoring to enforce cross-diagram visual consistency, and an 8-dimension evaluation rubric grounded in multimedia learning theory covering both text and visual quality. Evaluation of ten LLMs reveals a wide performance spread: Gemini 3.0 Pro Preview leads at 87.8\%, while Kimi-K2.5 achieves the best cost-efficiency (80.8\% at \\$0.12/problem). Workflow ablation confirms sequential anchoring improves Visual Consistency by 13\% at 94\% lower cost. Human evaluation with 20 expert raters validates LLM-as-judge reliability for objective dimensions ($ρ\geq 0.83$) while revealing limitations on subjective visual assessment.
Abstract:Large Language Models for Simulating Professions (SP-LLMs), particularly as teachers, are pivotal for personalized education. However, ensuring their professional competence and ethical safety is a critical challenge, as existing benchmarks fail to measure role-playing fidelity or address the unique teaching harms inherent in educational scenarios. To address this, we propose EduGuardBench, a dual-component benchmark. It assesses professional fidelity using a Role-playing Fidelity Score (RFS) while diagnosing harms specific to the teaching profession. It also probes safety vulnerabilities using persona-based adversarial prompts targeting both general harms and, particularly, academic misconduct, evaluated with metrics including Attack Success Rate (ASR) and a three-tier Refusal Quality assessment. Our extensive experiments on 14 leading models reveal a stark polarization in performance. While reasoning-oriented models generally show superior fidelity, incompetence remains the dominant failure mode across most models. The adversarial tests uncovered a counterintuitive scaling paradox, where mid-sized models can be the most vulnerable, challenging monotonic safety assumptions. Critically, we identified a powerful Educational Transformation Effect: the safest models excel at converting harmful requests into teachable moments by providing ideal Educational Refusals. This capacity is strongly negatively correlated with ASR, revealing a new dimension of advanced AI safety. EduGuardBench thus provides a reproducible framework that moves beyond siloed knowledge tests toward a holistic assessment of professional, ethical, and pedagogical alignment, uncovering complex dynamics essential for deploying trustworthy AI in education. See https://github.com/YL1N/EduGuardBench for Materials.
Abstract:Simulating Professions (SP) enables Large Language Models (LLMs) to emulate professional roles. However, comprehensive psychological and ethical evaluation in these contexts remains lacking. This paper introduces EMNLP, an Educator-role Moral and Normative LLMs Profiling framework for personality profiling, moral development stage measurement, and ethical risk under soft prompt injection. EMNLP extends existing scales and constructs 88 teacher-specific moral dilemmas, enabling profession-oriented comparison with human teachers. A targeted soft prompt injection set evaluates compliance and vulnerability in teacher SP. Experiments on 12 LLMs show teacher-role LLMs exhibit more idealized and polarized personalities than human teachers, excel in abstract moral reasoning, but struggle with emotionally complex situations. Models with stronger reasoning are more vulnerable to harmful prompt injection, revealing a paradox between capability and safety. The model temperature and other hyperparameters have limited influence except in some risk behaviors. This paper presents the first benchmark to assess ethical and psychological alignment of teacher-role LLMs for educational AI. Resources are available at https://e-m-n-l-p.github.io/.