The integration of generative AI in education is expanding, yet empirical analyses of large-scale and real-world interactions between students and AI systems still remain limited. Addressing this gap, we present RECIPE4U (RECIPE for University), a dataset sourced from a semester-long experiment with 212 college students in English as Foreign Language (EFL) writing courses. During the study, students engaged in dialogues with ChatGPT to revise their essays. RECIPE4U includes comprehensive records of these interactions, including conversation logs, students’ intent, students’ self-rated satisfaction, and students’ essay edit histories. In particular, we annotate the students’ utterances in RECIPE4U with 13 intention labels based on our coding schemes. We establish baseline results for two subtasks in task-oriented dialogue systems within educational contexts: intent detection and satisfaction estimation. As a foundational step, we explore student-ChatGPT interaction patterns through RECIPE4U and analyze them by focusing on students’ dialogue, essay data statistics, and students’ essay edits. We further illustrate potential applications of RECIPE4U dataset for enhancing the incorporation of LLMs in educational frameworks. RECIPE4U is publicly available at https://zeunie.github.io/RECIPE4U/.

***Warning**: this paper contains content that may be offensive or upsetting.*Most hate speech datasets neglect the cultural diversity within a single language, resulting in a critical shortcoming in hate speech detection. To address this, we introduce **CREHate**, a **CR**oss-cultural **E**nglish **Hate** speech dataset.To construct CREHate, we follow a two-step procedure: 1) cultural post collection and 2) cross-cultural annotation.We sample posts from the SBIC dataset, which predominantly represents North America, and collect posts from four geographically diverse English-speaking countries (Australia, United Kingdom, Singapore, and South Africa) using culturally hateful keywords we retrieve from our survey.Annotations are collected from the four countries plus the United States to establish representative labels for each country.Our analysis highlights statistically significant disparities across countries in hate speech annotations.Only 56.2% of the posts in CREHate achieve consensus among all countries, with the highest pairwise label difference rate of 26%.Qualitative analysis shows that label disagreement occurs mostly due to different interpretations of sarcasm and the personal bias of annotators on divisive topics.Lastly, we evaluate large language models (LLMs) under a zero-shot setting and show that current LLMs tend to show higher accuracies on Anglosphere country labels in CREHate.Our dataset and codes are available at: https://github.com/nlee0212/CREHate