journal article·2025-07-06Open access

Multi-Agentic LLMs for Personalizing STEM Texts

Michael Vaccaro, Mikayla Friday, Arash Zaghi

Applied Sciences· Volume 15· Issue 13

Abstract

Multi-agent large language models promise flexible, modular architectures for delivering personalized educational content. Drawing on a pilot randomized controlled trial with middle school students (n = 23), we introduce a two-agent GPT-4 framework in which a Profiler agent infers learner-specific preferences and a Rewrite agent dynamically adapts science passages via an explicit message-passing protocol. We implement structured system and user prompts as inter-agent communication schemas to enable real-time content adaptation. The results of an ordinal logistic regression analysis hinted that students may be more likely to prefer texts aligned with their profile, demonstrating the feasibility of multi-agent system-driven personalization and highlighting the need for additional work to build upon this pilot study. Beyond empirical validation, we present a modular multi-agent architecture detailing agent roles, communication interfaces, and scalability considerations. We discuss design best practices, ethical safeguards, and pathways for extending this framework to collaborative agent networks—such as feedback-analysis agents—in K-12 settings. These results advance both our theoretical and applied understanding of multi-agent LLM systems for personalized learning.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Intelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive Learning · Topic Modeling · Natural Language Processing Techniques

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, College of Engineering, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT 06269, USA

Funding

National Science Foundation · National Science Foundation Research Traineeship (NRT)

References (91)

Show source-provided references
1. Wooldridge, M. (2009). An Introduction to Multiagent Systems, John Wiley & Sons Ltd.. [2nd ed.].
2. Guyon, I., Luxburg, U., Von Bengio, S., Wallach, H., Fergus, R., Vishwanathan, S., and Garnett, R. (2017, January 4–9). Emergence of Language with Multi-Agent Games: Learning to Communicate with Sequences of Symbols. Proceedings of the Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, Long Beach, CA, USA.
3. Han, S., Zhang, Q., Yao, Y., Jin, W., and Xu, Z. (2024). LLM Multi-Agent Systems: Challenges and Open Problems. arXiv.
4. Li, G., Al Kadeer Hammoud, H.A., Itani, H., and Khizbullin, D. (2023, January 10–16). CAMEL: Communicative Agents for “Mind” Exploration of Large Language Model Society. Proceedings of the Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 36, New Orleans, LA, USA.
5. Explainable AI (XAI)
6. Insights from 200+ Years of Personalized Learning10.1038/s41539-018-0033-x ↗
7. (2024, June 07). National Academy of Engineering Grand Challenges for Engineering—Advance Personalized Learning. Available online: http://www.engineeringchallenges.org/challenges/learning.aspx.
8. A Systematic Literature Review of Personalized Learning Terms10.1186/s40561-020-00140-9 ↗
9. Appraising Research on Personalized Learning: Definitions, Theoretical Alignment, Advancements, and Future Directions10.1080/15391523.2020.1747757 ↗
10. A Systematic Review of Research on Personalized Learning: Personalized by Whom, to What, How, and for What Purpose(s)?10.1007/s10648-021-09615-8 ↗
11. Understanding the Implementation of Personalized Learning: A Research Synthesis10.1016/j.edurev.2020.100339 ↗
12. U.S. Department of Education (2017). National Education Technology Plan Update.
13. Zhang, L., Carter, R.A., Bernacki, M.L., and Greene, J.A. (2024). Personalization, Individualization, and Differentiation: What Do They Mean and How Do They Differ for Students with Disabilities?. Exceptionality.10.1080/09362835.2024.2446219 ↗
14. Adelman, H.S., and Taylor, L.L. (2018). Addressing Barriers to Learning: In the Classroom and Schoolwide, University of California, Los Angeles.
15. Barriers to Student Learning and Participation in an Inclusive School as Perceived by Future Education Professionals10.7821/naer.2019.1.321 ↗
16. Developing Personalized Education: A Dynamic Framework10.1007/s10648-020-09570-w ↗
17. Effectiveness of Intelligent Tutoring Systems: A Meta-Analytic Review10.3102/0034654315581420 ↗
18. Mathtutor: A Multi-Agent Intelligent Tutoring System
19. A Multi-Agent System Model to Integrate Virtual Learning Environments and Intelligent Tutoring Systems
20. Innovations in Multi-Agent Systems10.1016/j.jnca.2006.04.005 ↗
21. Multi-Agent Systems: A Survey10.1109/ACCESS.2018.2831228 ↗
22. Language Models Are Few-Shot Learners
23. Guyon, I., Luxburg, U., Von Bengio, S., Wallach, H., Fergus, R., Vishwanathan, S., and Garnett, R. (2017, January 4–9). Attention Is All You Need. Proceedings of the Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, Long Beach, CA, USA.
24. When Large Language Models Meet Personalization: Perspectives of Challenges and Opportunities10.1007/s11280-024-01276-1 ↗
25. Henkel, O., Hills, L., Boxer, A., Roberts, B., and Levonian, Z. (2024, January 18–20). Can Large Language Models Make the Grade? An Empirical Study Evaluating LLMs Ability To Mark Short Answer Questions in K-12 Education. Proceedings of the Eleventh ACM Conference on Learning @ Scale, Atlanta, GA, USA.10.1145/3657604.3664693 ↗
26. Nunes, D., Primi, R., Pires, R., Lotufo, R., and Nogueira, R. (2023). Evaluating GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 Models on Brazilian University Admission Exams. arXiv.
27. Friday, M., Vaccaro, M., and Zaghi, A. (2025, January 22–25). Leveraging Large Language Models for Early Study Optimization in Educational Research. Proceedings of the 2025 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Montreal, QC, Canada.
28. The Nature of Experiences Responsible for the Generation and Maintenance of Interest in STEM
29. Fox, R.A., and Buchanan, N.K. (2017). A Brief History of Public Education in the United States. The Wiley Handbook of School Choice, John Wiley & Sons, Inc.10.1002/9781119082361 ↗
30. Personalisation in Educational Technology: The Absence of Underlying Pedagogies10.1186/s41239-018-0095-0 ↗
31. From Gaming to Computational Thinking: An Adaptive Educational Computer Game-Based Learning Approach10.1177/0735633120965919 ↗
32. Intelligent Tutoring Systems Work as a Math Gap Reducer in 6th Grade After-School Program10.1016/j.lindif.2016.01.012 ↗
33. Investigating the Effect of an Adaptive Learning Intervention on Students’ Learning10.1007/s11423-017-9542-1 ↗
34. Price, T.W., Dong, Y., and Lipovac, D. (2017, January 8–11). ISnap: Towards Intelligent Tutoring in Novice Programming Environments. Proceedings of the 2017 ACM SIGCSE Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, Seattle, WA, USA.10.1145/3017680.3017762 ↗
35. Feasibility of Adaptive Teaching with Technology: Which Implementation Conditions Matter?10.1016/j.compedu.2024.105108 ↗
36. Shute, V.J., and Psotka, J. (1994). Intelligent Tutoring Systems: Past, Present, and Future. Handbook of Research for Educational Communications and Technology, Macmillian.10.21236/ADA280011 ↗
37. Reiser, B.J., Anderson, J.R., and Farrel, R.G. (1985, January 18–23). Dynamic Student Modelling in an Intelligent Tutor for Lisp Programming. Proceedings of the IJCAI 1985, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
38. A New Intelligent Tutoring System10.1111/j.1467-8535.2008.00819.x ↗
39. Heffernan, N.T., and Koedinger, K.R. (2002). An Intelligent Tutoring System Incorporating a Model of an Experienced Human Tutor. International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems, Springer.10.1007/3-540-47987-2_61 ↗
40. ZOSMAT: Web-Based Intelligent Tutoring System for Teaching–Learning Process10.1016/j.eswa.2007.11.064 ↗
41. The Relative Effectiveness of Human Tutoring, Intelligent Tutoring Systems, and Other Tutoring Systems10.1080/00461520.2011.611369 ↗
42. The Effectiveness of Intelligent Tutoring Systems on K-12 Students’ Reading Comprehension: A Meta-analysis10.1111/bjet.12758 ↗
43. Using an Adaptive Learning Tool to Improve Student Performance and Satisfaction in Online and Face-to-Face Education for a More Personalized Approach10.1186/s40561-024-00292-y ↗
44. Personalized Learning in ISTART: Past Modifications and Future Design10.1080/15391523.2020.1716201 ↗
45. Personalized Learning: The Conversations We’re Not Having
46. Chen, E., Lee, J.-E., Lin, J., and Koedinger, K. (2024, January 18–20). GPTutor: Great Personalized Tutor with Large Language Models for Personalized Learning Content Generation. Proceedings of the Eleventh ACM Conference on Learning @ Scale, Atlanta, GA, USA.10.1145/3657604.3664718 ↗
47. What Do You Prefer? Using Preferences to Enhance Learning Technology10.1109/TLT.2008.5 ↗
48. Mind Meets Machine: Unravelling GPT-4’s Cognitive Psychology10.1016/j.tbench.2023.100139 ↗
49. Lee, D.H., and Chung, C.K. (2024, January 26–28). Enhancing Neural Decoding with Large Language Models: A GPT-Based Approach. Proceedings of the 12th International Winter Conference on Brain-Computer Interface (BCI), Gangwon, Republic of Korea.10.1109/BCI60775.2024.10480499 ↗
50. GPT-4: A New Era of Artificial Intelligence in Medicine10.1007/s11845-023-03377-8 ↗
51. (2024, June 27). OpenAI GPT-4. Available online: https://openai.com/index/gpt-4-research/.
52. Transforming Conversations with AI—A Comprehensive Study of ChatGPT10.1007/s12559-023-10236-2 ↗
53. GPT-4 Passes the Bar Exam10.1098/rsta.2023.0254 ↗
54. Roy, S., Khatua, A., Ghoochani, F., Hadler, U., Nejdl, W., and Ganguly, N. (2024, January 14–18). Beyond Accuracy: Investigating Error Types in GPT-4 Responses to USMLE Questions. Proceedings of the SIGIR ’24, 47th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, Washington, DC, USA.10.1145/3626772.3657882 ↗
55. Toward AI Grading of Student Problem Solutions in Introductory Physics: A Feasibility Study10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.19.020163 ↗
56. Doughty, J., Wan, Z., Bompelli, A., Qayum, J., Wang, T., Zhang, J., Zheng, Y., Doyle, A., Sridhar, P., and Agarwal, A. (February, January 29). A Comparative Study of AI-Generated (GPT-4) and Human-Crafted MCQs in Programming Education. Proceedings of the 26th Australasian Computing Education Conference, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
57. Can Students Make STEM Progress With the Large Language Models (LLMs)? An Empirical Study of LLMs Integration Within Middle School Science and Engineering Practice10.1177/07356331241312365 ↗
58. Effect of Large Language Models Artificial Intelligence Chatgpt Chatbot on Achievement of Computer Education Students10.1007/s10639-024-13293-8 ↗
59. Mizrahi, G. (2024). Understanding Prompting and Prompt Techniques. Unlocking the Secrets of Prompt Engineering: Master the Art of Creative Language Generation to Accelerate Your Journey from Novice to Pro, Packt Publishing Limited.
60. Prompt Engineering in Medical Education10.3390/ime2030019 ↗
61. Prompt Engineering for Knowledge Creation: Using Chain-of-Thought to Support Students’ Improvable Ideas10.3390/ai5030069 ↗
62. Leinonen, J., Denny, P., MacNeil, S., Sarsa, S., Bernstein, S., Kim, J., Tran, A., and Hellas, A. (2023, January 10–12). Comparing Code Explanations Created by Students and Large Language Models. Proceedings of the 2023 Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education V. 1 (ITiCSE 2023), Turku, Finland.10.1145/3587102.3588785 ↗
63. A Systematic Review of ChatGPT Use in K-12 Education10.1111/ejed.12599 ↗
64. Chu, Z., Wang, S., Xie, J., Zhu, T., Yan, Y., Ye, J., Zhong, A., Hu, X., Liang, J., and Yu, P.S. (2025). LLM Agents for Education: Advances and Applications. arXiv.
65. Jauhiainen, J.S., and Guerra, A.G. (2023). Generative AI and ChatGPT in School Children’s Education: Evidence from a School Lesson. Sustainability, 15.10.3390/su151814025 ↗
66. Wang, T., Zhan, Y., Lian, J., Hu, Z., Yuan, N.J., Zhang, Q., Xie, X., and Xiong, H. (May, January 28). LLM-Powered Multi-Agent Framework for Goal-Oriented Learning in Intelligent Tutoring System. Proceedings of the Companion ACM on Web Conference 2025, Sydney, NSW, Australia.10.1145/3701716.3715244 ↗
67. (2024, May 31). OpenAI Prompt Engineering. Available online: https://platform.openai.com/docs/guides/prompt-engineering.
68. Few-Shot Is Enough: Exploring ChatGPT Prompt Engineering Method for Automatic Question Generation in English Education10.1007/s10639-023-12249-8 ↗
69. Learning and Teaching Styles in Engineering Education
70. Stop Propagating the Learning Styles Myth10.1016/j.compedu.2016.12.006 ↗
71. NGSS Lead States (2013). Next Generation Science Standards: For States, By States, National Academies Press.
72. Vaccaro, M., Friday, M., and Zaghi, A. (2025, March 18). LLMs and Personalized Learning. Available online: https://github.com/m-vaccaro/LLMs-and-Personalized-Learning.
73. (2024, January 11). Wikipedia Contributors Electricity. Available online: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Electricity&oldid=1194309762.
74. Schimansky, T. (2024, June 05). CustomTkinter. Available online: https://customtkinter.tomschimansky.com/.
75. Floyd Mueller, F., Kyburz, P., Williamson, J.R., Sas, C., Wilson, M.L., Toups Dugas, P., and Shklovski, I. (2024, January 11–16). Unlock Life with a Chat(GPT): Integrating Conversational AI with Large Language Models into Everyday Lives of Autistic Individuals. Proceedings of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Honolulu, HI, USA.
76. Rogers, M.P., Hillberg, H.M., and Groves, C.L. (2024, January 20–23). Attitudes Towards the Use (and Misuse) of ChatGPT: A Preliminary Study. Proceedings of the 55th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education V. 1, Portland, OR, USA.10.1145/3626252.3630784 ↗
77. Using LLMs to Bring Evidence-Based Feedback into the Classroom: AI-Generated Feedback Increases Secondary Students’ Text Revision, Motivation, and Positive Emotions10.1016/j.caeai.2023.100199 ↗
78. Chin, C. (2001, January 10–14). Student-Generated Questions: What They Tell Us about Students’ Thinking. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Seattle, WA, USA.
79. Elyoseph, Z., Hadar-Shoval, D., Asraf, K., and Lvovsky, M. (2023). ChatGPT Outperforms Humans in Emotional Awareness Evaluations. Front. Psychol., 14.10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1199058 ↗
80. Who Benefits and Who Is Excluded?: Transformative Learning, Equity, and Generative Artificial Intelligence
81. Chrysochoou, M., Zaghi, A.E., and Syharat, C.M. (2022). Reframing Neurodiversity in Engineering Education. Front. Educ., 7.10.3389/feduc.2022.995865 ↗
82. Maya, J., Luesia, J.F., and Pérez-Padilla, J. (2021). The Relationship between Learning Styles and Academic Performance: Consistency among Multiple Assessment Methods in Psychology and Education Students. Sustainability, 13.10.3390/su13063341 ↗
83. ChatGPT for Good? On Opportunities and Challenges of Large Language Models for Education10.1016/j.lindif.2023.102274 ↗
84. A Critical Perspective on Learning Analytics and Educational Data Mining
85. Educational Data Mining: Prediction of Students’ Academic Performance Using Machine Learning Algorithms10.1186/s40561-022-00192-z ↗
86. Unveiling Security, Privacy, and Ethical Concerns of ChatGPT
87. Generative Language Models Exhibit Social Identity Biases10.1038/s43588-024-00741-1 ↗
88. Biases in Large Language Models: Origins, Inventory, and Discussion
89. UNESCO (2022). Recommendation on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence, UNESCO.
90. Potgieter, I. (2020). Privacy Concerns in Educational Data Mining and Learning Analytics. Int. Rev. Inf. Ethics, 28.10.29173/irie384 ↗
91. (2024, June 18). OpenAI Creating Video from Text. Available online: https://openai.com/index/sora/.