这篇论文验证了旧的教学反馈分类协议是否还能用，发现即使用最新的LLM也不一定有优势，选什么模型看预算就行。
该研究基于一个此前提出的教学评价反馈分类协议，该协议使用2019年的冻结嵌入在西班牙语语料上取得良好效果。研究者在三个表示世代（稀疏词特征、冻结Transformer嵌入、提示大语言模型）上重新测试，并将情感分类任务迁移到英语（使用45,000条评论的平衡语料与方面标注数据集对比）。结果显示，2026年的前沿模型在西班牙语最难任务上取得最高主题F1分数，但情感任务上没有对廉价模型表现出优势；模型选择成为部署决策而非方法属性。
A Durability and Cross-Language Transfer Benchmark for a Validated Teaching-Feedback Classification Protocol
Institutions collect far more open-ended teaching-evaluation feedback than they read. A prior study introduced a validated protocol for classifying such comments by thematic category and sentiment, built from a documented annotation guide, an intra-annotator reliability measurement, stratified cross-validation, and a held-out evaluation on a Spanish institutional corpus with a frozen-encoder design. Two questions limit its reuse: whether a protocol fixed to 2019-era frozen embeddings stays competitive as representation methods advance, and whether it transfers to a second language. We re-run it on the original Spanish data across three representation generations, sparse lexical features, frozen transformer embeddings, and prompted large language models, and transfer its sentiment task to English with a balanced 45,000-comment corpus checked against an aspect-labeled education dataset. Treating paired comparisons as descriptive, we find the protocol durable: a 2026 frontier model posts the highest thematic F1 on the hardest Spanish task, yet shows no sentiment advantage over a cheap model and no descriptive separation from it on English, so model choice is a deployment decision, not a property of the method.