Teaching AI Through Benchmark Construction: QuestBench as a Course-Based Practice for Accountable Knowledge Work
arXiv AIArchived May 22, 2026✓ Full text saved
arXiv:2605.21413v2 Announce Type: new Abstract: As AI becomes part of everyday learning, many courses teach students to use it mainly as a productivity tool: how to prompt, search, summarize, write, code, and use tools more efficiently. We argue that AI education also needs a setting in which students learn to test AI and understand their own role in judging machine-produced knowledge. To this end, we introduce a course-based practice that teaches AI through benchmark construction, using deep re
Full text archived locally
✦ AI Summary· Claude Sonnet
Computer Science > Artificial Intelligence
[Submitted on 20 May 2026 (v1), last revised 21 May 2026 (this version, v2)]
Teaching AI Through Benchmark Construction: QuestBench as a Course-Based Practice for Accountable Knowledge Work
Haiyang Shen, Jiuzheng Wang, Taian Guo, Mugeng Liu, Wenchun Jing, Chongyang Pan, Siqi Zhong, Zhiyang Chen, Weichen Bi, Yudong Han, Xiaoying Bai, Yun Ma
As AI becomes part of everyday learning, many courses teach students to use it mainly as a productivity tool: how to prompt, search, summarize, write, code, and use tools more efficiently. We argue that AI education also needs a setting in which students learn to test AI and understand their own role in judging machine-produced knowledge. To this end, we introduce a course-based practice that teaches AI through benchmark construction, using deep research systems as a concrete example of AI-era knowledge work. Students turn disciplinary knowledge into verifiable expert-level questions, review one another's designs for ambiguity and shortcuts, and evaluate AI systems on the resulting tasks. This activity gives students direct exposure to a powerful tool while asking them to specify what a trustworthy answer would require. The produced benchmark, QuestBench, consists of 256 questions across 14 humanities and social-science domains. Evaluation on QuestBench shows that student-designed tasks reveal hidden failures in current deep research systems: across thirteen evaluated systems, the mean question-level pass rate is only 16.85%, and the best-performing system, GPT-5.5, reaches a 57.58% pass rate. The failures are educationally useful because they show how fluent, source-backed answers can still miss the right query, source, term, or evidence standard. Reflections from five student contributors suggest that benchmark construction can help students see professional knowledge not only as content AI may retrieve, but as the basis for judging AI outputs. We present QuestBench as a benchmark artifact and as a reusable classroom setting for a larger educational question: how students can remain responsible knowledge actors as AI enters learning and professional work. The dataset is available at this https URL.
Comments: 24 pages, 5 figures, 4 tables
Subjects: Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)
Cite as: arXiv:2605.21413 [cs.AI]
(or arXiv:2605.21413v2 [cs.AI] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2605.21413
Focus to learn more
Submission history
From: Haiyang Shen [view email]
[v1] Wed, 20 May 2026 17:09:56 UTC (2,691 KB)
[v2] Thu, 21 May 2026 09:20:07 UTC (2,691 KB)
Access Paper:
HTML (experimental)
view license
Current browse context:
cs.AI
< prev | next >
new | recent | 2026-05
Change to browse by:
cs
References & Citations
NASA ADS
Google Scholar
Semantic Scholar
Export BibTeX Citation
Bookmark
Bibliographic Tools
Bibliographic and Citation Tools
Bibliographic Explorer Toggle
Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?)
Connected Papers Toggle
Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?)
Litmaps Toggle
Litmaps (What is Litmaps?)
scite.ai Toggle
scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?)
Code, Data, Media
Demos
Related Papers
About arXivLabs
Which authors of this paper are endorsers? | Disable MathJax (What is MathJax?)