用语义嵌入匹配学生与项目,提升学习公平性与团队多样性。
TeamUp: Semantic Project Matching and Team Formation for Learning at Scale

- 基于预训练模型的语义嵌入实现精准匹配
- 83%学生匹配到难度合适的项目,团队覆盖超3个技术领域
- 系统快速透明,每生成本低于0.1美元
项目式学习能提升学生参与度与学习成效,但在大规模教学中,如何将学生分配至合适难度的项目并组建认知多样化的团队仍具挑战。传统方法(如手动表格、偏好调查)难以构建认知互补的团队,导致高能力学生占据显性项目,弱势群体机会受限。本文提出TeamUp,一种轻量级、基于嵌入的团队组建系统,旨在提升大规模项目式课程的学习效果与公平性。该系统利用预训练语言模型生成的语义嵌入,将学生与项目按技能水平匹配,并采用融合余弦相似度与教学约束(难度对齐、领域偏好、需求平衡)的混合排序算法,生成个性化且透明的推荐。此外,通过嵌入方差建模技能互补性,确保团队具备分布均衡的能力而非同质优势。在包含250名学生和60个项目的虚拟实验中,结果表明:(1)匹配质量显著提升(平均余弦相似度0.74 vs. 0.43);(2)难度对齐更优(83%位于相邻难度级别,对比组仅34%);(3)团队多样性更强(82%覆盖三个以上技术领域,对比组41%);(4)推荐延迟低于1秒,单人运营成本不足0.10美元。
原文摘要 · Abstract (English)
Project-based learning improves student engagement and learning outcomes, yet allocating students to appropriately challenging projects while forming cognitively diverse teams remains difficult at scale. Traditional allocation methods (manual spreadsheets, preference surveys) can't construct the cognitively diverse teams that that collaborate cognitively. This mismatch perpetuates equity issues: high-performing students self-select visible projects while under-represented students face reduced access to opportunity. We propose TeamUp, a lightweight, embedding-based team-forming system designed to improve learning outcomes and equity in large-scale project-based courses. TeamUp uses semantic embeddings from pretrained language models to match students to projects aligned with their skill level. The system employs a hybrid ranking algorithm combining cosine similarity with pedagogical constraints (difficulty alignment, domain preferences, and demand balancing) to generate personalised and transparent recommendations. Beyond individual matching, TeamUp constructs cognitively diverse teams by modelling skill complementarity through embedding variance, ensuring teams possess well-distributed capabilities rather than homogeneous strengths. We evaluated TeamUp through a virtual experiment using 250 student profiles and 60 project descriptions. Results show: (1) substantially higher match quality (mean cosine similarity of 0.74 vs. 0.43); (2) better difficulty alignment (83% placed within one level vs. 34%); (3) more diverse teams (82% covering three or more technical areas vs. 41%); and (4) sub-second recommendation latency at operational costs under $0.10 per student.
Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品;中文卡片由大模型生成,请以原文为准。