@inproceedings{acharya-2026-generating,
title = "Generating Curriculum Grounded {N}epali Questions Based On Bloom{'}s Taxonomy",
author = "Acharya, Prabigya",
editor = "Atwell, Katherine and
Borah, Angana and
Dementieva, Daryna and
Kreiss, Elisa and
Kotonya, Neema and
Liu, Jiarui and
Olson, Liz and
Wan, Ruyuan and
Zhao, Jieyu",
booktitle = "Proceedings of the Fifth Workshop on {NLP} for Positive Impact ({NLP}4{PI})",
month = oct,
year = "2026",
address = "Budapest, Hungary",
publisher = "Association for Computational Linguistics",
url = "https://aclanthology.org/2026.nlp4pi-1.18/",
pages = "198--210",
ISBN = "979-8-89176-495-8",
abstract = "The development of conversational large language models has brought a drastic change in educational settings, both in school and at home. While the Curriculum Development Centre of Nepal publishes detailed guides for teachers to create and use teaching materials in their classrooms, for subjects like Nepali these remain largely unused: theoretical topics are taught by rote learning and reproduced in examinations, making it a subject in which students score lowest and feel least confident. With the advent of LLMs, there is a real opportunity to turn these unused guidelines into large amounts of diverse teaching and evaluation material without adding to teachers' burden. In this work, we use conversational LLMs to generate curriculum-grounded questions for the Grade 7 and 10 Nepali subject and evaluate their usability in a classroom setting. Results show that Nepali objectives require more than one Bloom{'}s taxonomy level to define them: forcing a single level per objective drops teacher agreement to near chance $\kappa = 0.13$, while allowing multiple levels recovers agreement on at least one level for 84.6{\%} of objectives. We also observe that LLMs consistently dumb down the taxonomy level of objectives, plateauing at roughly 0.50 Macro F1, whereas a supervised classifier over frozen multilingual encoders reaches 0.612. Finally, teachers evaluated the generated questions through a modified eight-item rubric: grounding questions in the relevant taxonomy levels raised teacher endorsement from 12.5{\%} to 88{\%}. The question generation tool made from this approach is currently deployed in a government school in Nepal."
}<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<modsCollection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3">
<mods ID="acharya-2026-generating">
<titleInfo>
<title>Generating Curriculum Grounded Nepali Questions Based On Bloom’s Taxonomy</title>
</titleInfo>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Prabigya</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Acharya</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<originInfo>
<dateIssued>2026-10</dateIssued>
</originInfo>
<typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource>
<relatedItem type="host">
<titleInfo>
<title>Proceedings of the Fifth Workshop on NLP for Positive Impact (NLP4PI)</title>
</titleInfo>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Katherine</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Atwell</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Angana</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Borah</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Daryna</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Dementieva</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Elisa</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Kreiss</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Neema</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Kotonya</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Jiarui</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Liu</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Liz</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Olson</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Ruyuan</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Wan</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Jieyu</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Zhao</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<originInfo>
<publisher>Association for Computational Linguistics</publisher>
<place>
<placeTerm type="text">Budapest, Hungary</placeTerm>
</place>
</originInfo>
<genre authority="marcgt">conference publication</genre>
<identifier type="isbn">979-8-89176-495-8</identifier>
</relatedItem>
<abstract>The development of conversational large language models has brought a drastic change in educational settings, both in school and at home. While the Curriculum Development Centre of Nepal publishes detailed guides for teachers to create and use teaching materials in their classrooms, for subjects like Nepali these remain largely unused: theoretical topics are taught by rote learning and reproduced in examinations, making it a subject in which students score lowest and feel least confident. With the advent of LLMs, there is a real opportunity to turn these unused guidelines into large amounts of diverse teaching and evaluation material without adding to teachers’ burden. In this work, we use conversational LLMs to generate curriculum-grounded questions for the Grade 7 and 10 Nepali subject and evaluate their usability in a classroom setting. Results show that Nepali objectives require more than one Bloom’s taxonomy level to define them: forcing a single level per objective drops teacher agreement to near chance ąppa = 0.13, while allowing multiple levels recovers agreement on at least one level for 84.6% of objectives. We also observe that LLMs consistently dumb down the taxonomy level of objectives, plateauing at roughly 0.50 Macro F1, whereas a supervised classifier over frozen multilingual encoders reaches 0.612. Finally, teachers evaluated the generated questions through a modified eight-item rubric: grounding questions in the relevant taxonomy levels raised teacher endorsement from 12.5% to 88%. The question generation tool made from this approach is currently deployed in a government school in Nepal.</abstract>
<identifier type="citekey">acharya-2026-generating</identifier>
<location>
<url>https://aclanthology.org/2026.nlp4pi-1.18/</url>
</location>
<part>
<date>2026-10</date>
<extent unit="page">
<start>198</start>
<end>210</end>
</extent>
</part>
</mods>
</modsCollection>
%0 Conference Proceedings
%T Generating Curriculum Grounded Nepali Questions Based On Bloom’s Taxonomy
%A Acharya, Prabigya
%Y Atwell, Katherine
%Y Borah, Angana
%Y Dementieva, Daryna
%Y Kreiss, Elisa
%Y Kotonya, Neema
%Y Liu, Jiarui
%Y Olson, Liz
%Y Wan, Ruyuan
%Y Zhao, Jieyu
%S Proceedings of the Fifth Workshop on NLP for Positive Impact (NLP4PI)
%D 2026
%8 October
%I Association for Computational Linguistics
%C Budapest, Hungary
%@ 979-8-89176-495-8
%F acharya-2026-generating
%X The development of conversational large language models has brought a drastic change in educational settings, both in school and at home. While the Curriculum Development Centre of Nepal publishes detailed guides for teachers to create and use teaching materials in their classrooms, for subjects like Nepali these remain largely unused: theoretical topics are taught by rote learning and reproduced in examinations, making it a subject in which students score lowest and feel least confident. With the advent of LLMs, there is a real opportunity to turn these unused guidelines into large amounts of diverse teaching and evaluation material without adding to teachers’ burden. In this work, we use conversational LLMs to generate curriculum-grounded questions for the Grade 7 and 10 Nepali subject and evaluate their usability in a classroom setting. Results show that Nepali objectives require more than one Bloom’s taxonomy level to define them: forcing a single level per objective drops teacher agreement to near chance ąppa = 0.13, while allowing multiple levels recovers agreement on at least one level for 84.6% of objectives. We also observe that LLMs consistently dumb down the taxonomy level of objectives, plateauing at roughly 0.50 Macro F1, whereas a supervised classifier over frozen multilingual encoders reaches 0.612. Finally, teachers evaluated the generated questions through a modified eight-item rubric: grounding questions in the relevant taxonomy levels raised teacher endorsement from 12.5% to 88%. The question generation tool made from this approach is currently deployed in a government school in Nepal.
%U https://aclanthology.org/2026.nlp4pi-1.18/
%P 198-210
Markdown (Informal)
[Generating Curriculum Grounded Nepali Questions Based On Bloom’s Taxonomy](https://aclanthology.org/2026.nlp4pi-1.18/) (Acharya, NLP4PI 2026)
ACL