A Generalized Apprenticeship Learning Framework for Capturing Evolving Student Pedagogical Strategies

While apprenticeship learning has shown promise for inducing effective pedagogical policies directly from student interactions in e-learning environments, most existing approaches rely on optimal or near-optimal expert demonstrations under a fixed reward. Real-world student interactions, however, are often inherently imperfect and evolving: students explore, make errors, revise strategies, and refine their goals as understanding develops. In this work, we argue that imperfect student demonstrations are not noise to be discarded, but structured signals-provided their relative quality is ranked. We introduce HALIDE, Hierarchical Apprenticeship Learning from Imperfect Demonstrations with Evolving Rewards, which not only leverages sub-optimal student demonstrations, but ranks them within a hierarchical learning framework. HALIDE models student behavior at multiple levels of abstraction, enabling inference of higher-level intent and strategy from suboptimal actions while explicitly capturing the temporal evolution of student reward functions. By integrating demonstration quality into hierarchical reward inference,HALIDE distinguishes transient errors from suboptimal strategies and meaningful progress toward higher-level learning goals. Our results show that HALIDE more accurately predicts student pedagogical decisions than approaches that rely on optimal trajectories, fixed rewards, or unranked imperfect demonstrations.

Reinforcement learning (RL) is increasingly used to personalize instruction in intelligent tutoring systems, yet the field lacks a formal framework for defining and evaluating pedagogical safety. We introduce a four-layer model of pedagogical safety for educational RL comprising structural, progress, behavioral, and alignment safety and propose the Reward Hacking Severity Index (RHSI) to quantify misalignment between proxy rewards and genuine learning. We evaluate the framework in a controlled simulation of an AI tutoring environment with 120 sessions across four conditions and three learner profiles, totaling 18{,}000 interactions. Results show that an engagement-optimized agent systematically over-selected a high-engagement action with no direct mastery gain, producing strong measured performance but limited learning progress. A multi-objective reward formulation reduced this problem but did not eliminate it, as the agent continued to favor proxy-rewarding behavior in many states. In contrast, a constrained architecture combining prerequisite enforcement and minimum cognitive demand substantially reduced reward hacking, lowering RHSI from 0.317 in the unconstrained multi-objective condition to 0.102. Ablation results further suggest that behavioral safety was the most influential safeguard against repetitive low-value action selection. These findings suggest that reward design alone may be insufficient to ensure pedagogically aligned behavior in educational RL, at least in the simulated environment studied here. More broadly, the paper positions pedagogical safety as an important research problem at the intersection of AI safety and intelligent educational systems.

Large Language Models (LLMs) show strong potential as educational tutors. Existing approaches typically train them to solve problems and provide correct answers, but this problem-solving-centered paradigm overlooks key requirements of effective tutoring: progressive guidance and the coordination of multiple pedagogical objectives across multi-turn interactions. Developing such tutors remains challenging because student behavior varies substantially with individual knowledge states, pedagogical effectiveness depends on multiple factors beyond final-answer correctness, and coordinating these objectives over tutor-student interactions is inherently difficult. To address these challenges, we propose PEARL, a PEdagogically Aligned Reinforcement Learning framework for training Socratic tutoring agents. First, we introduce a controllable student simulator that disentangles latent cognitive states from response generation, enabling simulation of diverse abilities and misconceptions. Second, we develop a pedagogically aligned reward model that jointly assesses pedagogical quality and objective correctness. Finally, we propose a stable multi-objective reinforcement learning approach that balances competing pedagogical objectives during tutor training. Experiments across multiple benchmarks show that PEARL performs competitively against tutoring-specific open-source systems and leading proprietary LLMs.