2026 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Can Large Language Models Recognize Neurodiverse Student Challenges and Strengths? A Complementary Study with ChatGPT and Machine Learning

Presented at DSAI-Session 13: Equity, Inclusion, and Diverse Learner Needs in Engineering Education

Large language models (LLMs) such as ChatGPT are increasingly used by college students as on-demand learning companions, producing student-authored language that can surface how learners describe difficulties and successes. For neurodiverse students (e.g., autism, ADHD, specific learning differences), recognizing both challenges and strengths is essential for designing inclusive, strength-based educational technologies. This paper examines whether LLM-based methods can classify short qualitative excerpts related to neurodiverse students' experiences as expressing a challenge, a strength, or both.
As a pilot study, we curate a dataset of 284 literature-grounded excerpts describing neurodivergent experiences in academic contexts and label each excerpt through team-based human coding. We then evaluate (1) ChatGPT as a structured-output classifier in an agreement setting against human annotations, and (2) a supervised machine learning approach (contrastive learning) in a generalization setting using an 80/20 train–test split. ChatGPT achieves 0.71 accuracy (F1 = 0.77) with high mean self-reported confidence (0.91), demonstrating the strongest agreement for challenge-oriented excerpts and lower reliability for strength and mixed-category expressions. The contrastive learning model achieves 0.88 test accuracy, with strong separation between Challenge (0.97 class-wise accuracy) and Strength (0.81), but limited performance on the sparsely represented categories.
Overall, the results indicate that supervised representation learning can more reliably distinguish challenge- and strength-oriented expressions in small qualitative datasets, while LLM-based classification offers a useful but limited reference point for interpretive alignment with human judgment. These findings support the cautious use of AI as an assistive analytic tool for surfacing student-expressed challenges and assets, informing more inclusive and strength-based approaches to engineering education without inferring diagnoses or replacing human judgment.

Authors
  1. Dr. Zhuwei Qin San Francisco State University [biography]
  2. Yiyi Wang San Francisco State University [biography]
  3. Zhenyu Lin San Francisco State University
Note

The full paper will be available to logged in and registered conference attendees once the conference starts on June 21, 2026, and to all visitors after the conference ends on June 24, 2026