AI in Education

The rapid evolution of Large Language Models (LLMs) has made them powerful tools for enhancing student writing. This study explores the extent and limitations of LLMs in assisting secondary-level English as a Foreign Language (EFL) students with their writing tasks. While existing studies focus on output quality, our research examines the developmental shift in LLMs and their impact on EFL students, assessing whether smarter models act as true scaffolds or mere compensatory crutches. To achieve this, we analyse student compositions assisted by LLMs before and after ChatGPT's release, using both expert qualitative scoring and quantitative metrics (readability tests, Pearson's correlation coefficient, MTLD, and others). Our results indicate that advanced LLMs boost assessment scores and lexical diversity for lower-proficiency learners, potentially masking their true ability. Crucially, increased LLM assistance correlated negatively with human expert ratings, suggesting surface fluency without deep coherence. To transform AI-assisted practice into genuine learning, pedagogy must shift from focusing on output quality to verifying the learning process. Educators should align AI functions, specifically differentiating ideational scaffolding from textual production, within the learner's Zone of Proximal Development.

Generative Agents, owing to their precise modeling and simulation capabilities of human behavior, have become a pivotal tool in the field of Artificial Intelligence in Education (AIEd) for uncovering complex cognitive processes of learners. However, existing educational agents predominantly rely on static personas to simulate student learning behaviors, neglecting the decisive role of deep cognitive capabilities in learning outcomes during practice interactions. Furthermore, they struggle to characterize the dynamic fluidity of knowledge internalization, transfer, and cognitive state transitions. To overcome this bottleneck, this paper proposes a human-like educational agent capable of simulating student cognitive evolution: CogEvolution. Specifically, we first construct a cognitive depth perceptron based on the Interactive, Constructive, Active, Passive (ICAP) taxonomy from cognitive psychology, achieving precise quantification of learner cognitive engagement. Subsequently, we propose a memory retrieval method based on Item Response Theory (IRT) to simulate the connection and assimilation of new and prior knowledge. Finally, we design a dynamic cognitive update mechanism based on evolutionary algorithms to simulate the real-time integration of student learning behaviors and cognitive evolution processes. Comprehensive evaluations demonstrate that CogEvolution not only significantly outperforms baseline models in behavioral fidelity and learning curve fitting but also uniquely reproduces plausible and robust cognitive evolutionary paths consistent with educational psychology expectations, providing a novel paradigm for constructing highly interpretable educational agents.

Learning Path Recommendation (LPR) is critical for personalized education, yet current methods often fail to account for historical interaction uncertainty (e.g., lucky guesses or accidental slips) and lack adaptability to diverse learning goals. We propose U-GLAD (Uncertainty-aware Generative Learning Path Recommendation with Cognition-Adaptive Diffusion). To address representation bias, the framework models cognitive states as probability distributions, capturing the learner's underlying true state via a Gaussian LSTM. To ensure highly personalized recommendation, a goal-oriented concept encoder utilizes multi-head attention and objective-specific transformations to dynamically align concept semantics with individual learning goals, generating uniquely tailored embeddings. Unlike traditional discriminative ranking approaches, our model employs a generative diffusion model to predict the latent representation of the next optimal concept. Extensive evaluations on three public datasets demonstrate that U-GLAD significantly outperforms representative baselines. Further analyses confirm its superior capability in perceiving interaction uncertainty and providing stable, goal-driven recommendation paths.

AI-driven education platforms have made some progress in personalisation, yet most remain constrained to static adaptation--predefined quizzes, uniform pacing, or generic feedback--limiting their ability to respond to learners' evolving understanding. This shortfall highlights the need for systems that are both context-aware and adaptive in real time. We introduce PAL (Personal Adaptive Learner), an AI-powered platform that transforms lecture videos into interactive learning experiences. PAL continuously analyzes multimodal lecture content and dynamically engages learners through questions of varying difficulty, adjusting to their responses as the lesson unfolds. At the end of a session, PAL generates a personalized summary that reinforces key concepts while tailoring examples to the learner's interests. By uniting multimodal content analysis with adaptive decision-making, PAL contributes a novel framework for responsive digital learning. Our work demonstrates how AI can move beyond static personalization toward real-time, individualized support, addressing a core challenge in AI-enabled education.

Perceptions of intelligence shape how learners evaluate and rely on artificial intelligence (AI) systems. Despite rapid advances in AI capabilities, the impact of sustained exposure to these tools on students' valuation of human intelligence (HI) relative to AI remains underexplored. This paper presents a longitudinal analysis of classroom poll responses collected between 2020 and 2026 in AI-focused undergraduate and MSc courses in computer science. Data from 471 students across technical courses (such as Machine Learning and Deep Graph Learning) and design-oriented courses (such as Design Thinking for AI) reveal four recurring phases: hype, distrust, trust, and dependency. While early responses in 2020 slightly favored AI, a consistent shift toward HI emerged from 2024 onward across all MSc cohorts. By 2026, preference for HI reached 65 percent in a technical course (a 12 percentage-point increase from 2025) and 90 percent in a design-oriented course (a 36 percentage-point increase). These findings suggest a gradual reappraisal of human intelligence as AI becomes a routine tool, with implications for learner autonomy and epistemic agency. We conclude by reflecting on this cognitive shift from favoring artificial intelligence toward prioritizing human intelligence.

This scoping review examines the emerging field of Large Language Model (LLM)-based pedagogical agents in educational settings. While traditional pedagogical agents have been extensively studied, the integration of LLMs represents a transformative advancement with unprecedented capabilities in natural language understanding, reasoning, and adaptation. Following PRISMA-ScR guidelines, we analyzed 52 studies across five major databases from November 2022 to January 2025. Our findings reveal diverse LLM-based agents spanning K-12, higher education, and informal learning contexts across multiple subject domains. We identified four key design dimensions characterizing these agents: interaction approach (reactive vs. proactive), domain scope (domain-specific vs. general-purpose), role complexity (single-role vs. multi-role), and system integration (standalone vs. integrated). Emerging trends include multi-agent systems that simulate naturalistic learning environments, virtual student simulation for agent evaluation, integration with immersive technologies, and combinations with learning analytics. We also discuss significant research gaps and ethical considerations regarding privacy, accuracy, and student autonomy. This review provides researchers and practitioners with a comprehensive understanding of LLM-based pedagogical agents while identifying crucial areas for future development in this rapidly evolving field.

Background: Traditional research on collaborative learning scaffolding is often time-consuming and resource-heavy, which hinders the rapid iteration and optimization of instructional strategies. LLM-based multi-agent systems have recently emerged as a powerful tool to simulate complex social interactions and provide a novel paradigm for educational research. Objectives: This study proposes an LLM-based multi-agent simulation approach to investigate collaborative learning processes and the effectiveness of instructional scaffolds prior to actual classroom deployment. The research specifically examines the feasibility of simulating group discussions and the alignment of these simulations with established learning science theories. Methods: The simulation system was implemented using the MetaGPT framework and GPT-4o, comprising one teacher agent and five distinct student roles (Leader, Supporter, Expounder, Rebutter, and Summarizer). Two scaffolding strategies, "Deep Think before Speak" and "Direct Speak", were compared across ten classical Chinese poetry appreciation tasks. Evaluation was conducted through discourse analysis of quality and behavior. Results and Conclusions: The introduction of the "Deep Think before Speak" scaffold significantly improved the agents' discourse diversity and interaction depth while notably reducing content repetitiveness. Behavioral analysis showed that the scaffold encouraged more complex interaction patterns, such as reflecting, rebutting, and explaining. These findings align with the ICAP framework, as the scaffold prompted agents to move from simple "Active" participation to "Constructive" and "Interactive" knowledge co-construction. This study demonstrates the feasibility and ecological validity of using LLM-based multi-agent systems to simulate authentic collaborative learning dynamics.

Knowledge Tracing (KT) infers a student's knowledge state from past interactions to predict future performance. Conventional Deep Learning (DL)-based KT models are typically tied to platform-specific identifiers and latent representations, making them hard to transfer and interpret. Large Language Model (LLM)-based methods can be either ungrounded under prompting or overly domain-dependent under fine-tuning. In addition, most existing KT methods are developed and evaluated under a same-distribution assumption. In real deployments, educational data often arise from heterogeneous platforms with substantial distribution shift, which often degrades generalization. To this end, we propose RAG-KT, a retrieval-augmented paradigm that frames cross-platform KT as reliable context constrained inference with LLMs. It builds a unified multi-source structured context with cross-source alignment via Question Group abstractions and retrieves complementary rich and reliable context for each prediction, enabling grounded prediction and interpretable diagnosis. Experiments on three public KT benchmarks demonstrate consistent gains in accuracy and robustness, including strong performance under cross-platform conditions.

Artificial students -- models that simulate how learners act and respond within educational systems -- are a promising tool for evaluating tutoring strategies and feedback mechanisms at scale. However, most existing approaches rely on prompting large, proprietary language models, limiting adaptability to specific courses and raising concerns around privacy, cost, and dependence. In this work, we propose a framework for training open-weight artificial programming learners directly from authentic student process data. Our approach serializes temporal log traces into a conversational format, representing each student's problem-solving process as a dialogue between the learner and their automated assessment system. Student code submissions and environment feedback, such as test outcomes, grades, and error traces, form alternating conversational turns, enabling models to learn from the iterative debugging process. We additionally introduce a training pipeline combining supervised fine-tuning with preference optimization to align models with authentic student debugging behavior. We evaluate our framework by training Qwen models at 4B and 8B scales on a large-scale dataset of real student submissions to Python programming assignments. Our results show that incorporating environment feedback strengthens models' ability to replicate student debugging behavior, improving over both prior code-only approaches and prompted large language models baselines in functional alignment and code similarity. We release our code to support reproducibility.

Large-scale AI deployment data and controlled learning experiments characterize different consequences of the same technology. Deployment telemetry shows that AI use is concentrated in skilled work and frequently supports immediate task performance. It observes tasks, interaction patterns, and outputs, however, not whether users become more capable of performing those tasks independently. Controlled studies measure independent capability more directly, but only in narrower populations and settings, with outcomes that vary substantially by interaction design. We formulate this discrepancy as a stock--formation measurement gap: current systems observe the use of existing expertise more readily than the formation of future expertise. Because formation has historically been society's recovery mechanism through technological change, the gap matters well beyond any single classroom. We synthesize the experimental and observational evidence by identification strength, use public deployment data as a descriptive illustration of the gap, and identify the missing bridge between interaction traces and unassisted retention and transfer. We then propose a research program that links consented usage records to independent assessments while experimentally varying whether AI supplies answers, hints, feedback, or evaluation. The claim is not that AI has been shown to erode skill formation at population scale. It is that existing measurement cannot determine whether it does, and that this question is both measurable and designable.

As Vision-Language Models (VLMs) become integral to educational decision-making, ensuring their fairness is paramount. However, current text-centric evaluations neglect the visual modality, leaving an unregulated channel for latent social biases. To bridge this gap, we present Edu-MMBias, a systematic auditing framework grounded in the tri-component model of attitudes from social psychology. This framework diagnoses bias across three hierarchical dimensions: cognitive, affective, and behavioral. Utilizing a specialized generative pipeline that incorporates a self-correct mechanism and human-in-the-loop verification, we synthesize contamination-resistant student profiles to conduct a holistic stress test on state-of-the-art VLMs. Our extensive audit reveals critical, counter-intuitive patterns: models exhibit a compensatory class bias favoring lower-status narratives while simultaneously harboring deep-seated health and racial stereotypes. Crucially, we find that visual inputs act as a safety backdoor, triggering a resurgence of biases that bypass text-based alignment safeguards and revealing a systematic misalignment between latent cognition and final decision-making. The contributions of this paper are available at: https://anonymous.4open.science/r/EduMMBias-63B2.

Student engagement is crucial for improving learning outcomes in group activities. Highly engaged students perform better both individually and contribute to overall group success. However, most existing automated engagement recognition methods are designed for online classrooms or estimate engagement at the individual level. Addressing this gap, we propose DualEngage, a novel two-stream framework for group-level engagement recognition from in-classroom videos. It models engagement as a joint function of both individual and group-level behaviors. The primary stream models person-level motion dynamics by detecting and tracking students, extracting dense optical flow with the Recurrent All-Pairs Field Transforms network, encoding temporal motion patterns using a transformer encoder, and finally aggregating per-student representations through attention pooling into a unified representation. The secondary stream captures scene-level spatiotemporal information from the full video clip, leveraging a pretrained three-dimensional Residual Network. The two-stream representations are combined via softmax-gated fusion, which dynamically weights each stream's contribution based on the joint context of both features. DualEngage learns a joint representation of individual actions with overarching group dynamics. We evaluate the proposed approach using fivefold cross-validation on the Classroom Group Engagement Dataset developed by Ocean University of China, achieving an average classification accuracy of 0.9621+/-0.0161 with a macro-averaged F1 of 0.9530+/-0.0204. To understand the contribution of each branch, we further conduct an ablation study comparing single-stream variants against the two-stream model. This work is among the first in classroom engagement recognition to adopt a dual-stream design that explicitly leverages motion cues as an estimator.

Supporting students in developing diagnostic reasoning is a key challenge across educational domains. Novices often face cognitive biases such as premature closure and over-reliance on heuristics, and they struggle to transfer diagnostic strategies to new cases. Scenario-based learning (SBL) enhanced by Learning Analytics (LA) and large language models (LLM) offers a promising approach by combining realistic case experiences with personalized scaffolding. Yet, how different scaffolding approaches shape reasoning processes remains insufficiently explored. This study introduces PharmaSim Switch, an SBL environment for pharmacy technician training, extended with an LA- and LLM-powered pharmacist agent that implements pedagogical conversations rooted in two theory-driven scaffolding approaches: structuring and problematizing, as well as a student learning trajectory. In a between-groups experiment, 63 vocational students completed a learning scenario, a near-transfer scenario, and a far-transfer scenario under one of the two scaffolding conditions. Results indicate that both scaffolding approaches were effective in supporting the use of diagnostic strategies. Performance outcomes were primarily influenced by scenario complexity rather than students' prior knowledge or the scaffolding approach used. The structuring approach was associated with more accurate Active and Interactive participation, whereas problematizing elicited more Constructive engagement. These findings underscore the value of combining scaffolding approaches when designing LA- and LLM-based systems to effectively foster diagnostic reasoning.

The growing use of artificial intelligence (AI) in education, particularly large language models (LLMs), has increased interest in intelligent tutoring systems. However, LLMs often show limited adaptivity and struggle to model learners' evolving knowledge over time, highlighting the need for dedicated learner modelling approaches. Although deep knowledge tracing methods achieve strong predictive performance, their opacity and susceptibility to bias can limit alignment with pedagogical principles. To address this, we propose Responsible-DKT, a neural-symbolic deep knowledge tracing approach that integrates symbolic educational knowledge (e.g., mastery and non-mastery rules) into sequential neural models for responsible learner modelling. Experiments on a real-world dataset of students' math interactions show that Responsible-DKT outperforms both a neural-symbolic baseline and a fully data-driven PyTorch DKT model across training settings. The model achieves over 0.80 AUC with only 10% of training data and up to 0.90 AUC, improving performance by up to 13%. It also demonstrates improved temporal reliability, producing lower early- and mid-sequence prediction errors and the lowest prediction inconsistency rates across sequence lengths, indicating that prediction updates remain directionally aligned with observed student responses over time. Furthermore, the neural-symbolic approach offers intrinsic interpretability via a grounded computation graph that exposes the logic behind each prediction, enabling both local and global explanations. It also allows empirical evaluation of pedagogical assumptions, revealing that repeated incorrect responses (non-mastery) strongly influence prediction updates. These results indicate that neural-symbolic approaches enhance both performance and interpretability, mitigate data limitations, and support more responsible, human-centered AI in education.

Learning theories have historically changed when the conditions of learning evolved. Generative and agentic AI create a new condition by allowing learners to delegate explanation, writing, problem solving, and other cognitive work to systems that can generate, recommend, and sometimes act on the learner's behalf. This creates a fundamental challenge for learning theory: successful performance can no longer be assumed to indicate learning. Learners may complete tasks effectively with AI support while developing less understanding, weaker judgment, and limited transferable capability. We argue that this problem is not fully captured by existing learning theories. Behaviourism, cognitivism, constructivism, and connectivism remain important, but they do not directly explain when AI-assisted performance becomes durable human capability. We propose Agentivism, a learning theory for human-AI interaction. Agentivism defines learning as durable growth in human capability through selective delegation to AI, epistemic monitoring and verification of AI contributions, reconstructive internalization of AI-assisted outputs, and transfer under reduced support. The importance of Agentivism lies in explaining how learning remains possible when intelligent delegation is easy and human-AI interaction is becoming a persistent and expanding part of human learning.

Enabling AI literacy in the general population at scale is a complex challenge requiring multiple stakeholders and institutions collaborating together. Industry and technology companies are important actors with respect to AI, and as a field, we have the opportunity to consider how researchers and companies might be partners toward shared goals. In this symposium, we focus on a collection of partnership projects that all involve Google and all address AI literacy as a comparative set of examples. Through a combination of presentations, commentary, and moderated group discussion, the session, we will identify (1) at what points in the life cycle do research, practice, and industry partnerships clearly intersect; (2) what factors and histories shape the directional focus of the partnerships; and (3) where there may be future opportunities for new configurations of partnership that are jointly beneficial to all parties.

Debates about artificial intelligence (AI) in education often portray teaching as a modular and procedural job that can increasingly be automated or delegated to technology. This brief communication paper argues that such claims depend on treating teaching as more separable than it is in practice. Drawing on recent literature and empirical studies of large language models and retrieval-augmented generation systems, I argue that although AI can support some bounded functions, instructional work remains difficult to automate in meaningful ways because it is inherently interpretive, relational, and grounded in professional judgment. More fundamentally, teaching and learning are shaped by human cognition, behavior, motivation, and social interaction in ways that cannot be fully specified, predicted, or exhaustively modeled. Tasks that may appear separable in principle derive their instructional value in practice from ongoing contextual interpretation across learners, situations, and relationships. As long as educational practice relies on emergent understanding of human cognition and learning, teaching remains a form of professional work that resists automation. AI may improve access to information and support selected instructional activities, but it does not remove the need for human judgment and relational accountability that effective teaching requires.

Activation-based steering enables inference-time personalization of large language models, but its effects in educational applications are not well understood. We study activation-based persona vectors representing seven character traits in short-answer generation and automated scoring on the ASAP-SAS benchmark, across three language models spanning dense and mixture-of-experts architectures. Persona steering lowers answer quality overall, with much larger effects on open-ended English Language Arts (ELA) prompts than on factual science prompts. Interpretive and argumentative tasks are particularly sensitive, showing up to 11$\times$ larger degradation. On the scoring side, we observe predictable valence-aligned calibration shifts: evil'' and impolite'' scorers grade more harshly, while good'' and optimistic'' scorers grade more leniently. ELA tasks are 2.5-3$\times$ more susceptible to scorer personalization than science tasks, and the mixture-of-experts model shows roughly 6$\times$ larger calibration shifts than the dense models. To our knowledge, this is the first study to systematically examine the effects of activation-steered persona traits in educational generation and scoring. Our findings highlight the need for task- and architecture-aware calibration when deploying personalized models in educational settings.

Artificial intelligence (AI) retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) tools now enable educators to transform course materials into diverse multimedia at scale. However, it remains unclear whether such AI-generated content functions as a pedagogical scaffold or AI slop: high volume, low quality material. This innovative practice paper reports on the development, implementation, and evaluation of teacher-prompted, AI-generated supplemental materials in an English for Academic Purposes (EAP) course at a Hong Kong Community College. Using primarily Google Notebook LM, the instructor generated videos, podcasts, infographics, and individualized feedback reports from course materials and student work for 106 English as a Foreign Language learners. An explanatory sequential mixed-methods design comprising a survey, semi-structured interviews, and correlation analysis with academic scores was employed to examine students' preferences, perceptions, and learning outcomes. Findings are framed through the Technology Acceptance Model and Cognitive Load Theory. Students rated the materials highly for perceived usefulness and ease of use, and preferred assessment-linked content presented in visual and multimodal formats, particularly videos and infographics. Video preference correlated positively with academic performance; however, higher cognitive load was negatively associated with course grades, indicating that material complexity must be carefully calibrated. Notably, some lower-performing students independently adopted the materials as remedial scaffolds. The practice demonstrates that RAG tools enable scalable personalized feedback that would be less feasible through traditional methods. When aligned with student goals and cognitive principles, teacher-prompted AI generation can meaningfully enhance the EAP learning ecosystem rather than producing AI slop.

Learner representations play a central role in educational AI systems, yet it is often unclear whether they preserve meaningful differences between students when instructional outcomes are unavailable or highly context-dependent. This work examines how to evaluate learner representations based on whether they retain separation between learners under a shared comparison rule. We introduce distinctiveness, a representation-level measure that evaluates how each learner differs from others in the cohort using pairwise distances, without requiring clustering, labels, or task-specific evaluation. Using student-authored questions collected through a conversational AI agent in an online learning environment, we compare representations based on individual questions with representations that aggregate patterns across a student's interactions over time. Results show that learner-level representations yield higher separation, stronger clustering structure, and more reliable pairwise discrimination than interaction-level representations. These findings demonstrate that learner representations can be evaluated independently of instructional outcomes and provide a practical pre-deployment criterion using distinctiveness as a diagnostic metric for assessing whether a representation supports differentiated modeling or personalization.

Public higher education systems face increasing financial pressures from expanding student populations, rising operational costs, and persistent demands for equitable access. Artificial Intelligence (AI), including generative tools such as ChatGPT, learning analytics, intelligent tutoring systems, and predictive models, has been proposed as a means of enhancing efficiency and reducing costs. This study conducts a scoping review of the literature on AI applications in public higher education, based on systematic searches in Scopus and IEEE Xplore that identified 241 records, of which 21 empirical studies met predefined eligibility criteria and were thematically analyzed. The findings show that AI enables cost savings by automating administrative tasks, optimizing resource allocation, supporting personalized learning at scale, and applying predictive analytics to improve student retention and institutional planning. At the same time, concerns emerge regarding implementation costs, unequal access across institutions, and risks of widening digital divides. Overall, the thematic analysis highlights both the promises and limitations of AI-driven cost reduction in higher education, offering insights for policymakers, university administrators, and educators on the economic implications of AI adoption, while also pointing to gaps that warrant further empirical research.

People often optimize for long-term goals in collaboration: A mentor or companion doesn't just answer questions, but also scaffolds learning, tracks progress, and prioritizes the other person's growth over immediate results. In contrast, current AI systems are fundamentally short-sighted collaborators -- optimized for providing instant and complete responses, without ever saying no (unless for safety reasons). What are the consequences of this dynamic? Here, through a series of randomized controlled trials on human-AI interactions (N=1,222), we provide causal evidence for two key consequences of AI assistance: reduced persistence and impairment of unassisted performance. Across a variety of tasks, including mathematical reasoning and reading comprehension, we find that although AI assistance improves performance in the short-term, people perform significantly worse without AI and are more likely to give up. These findings are particularly concerning because persistence is foundational to skill acquisition and is one of the strongest predictors of long-term learning. We posit that persistence is reduced because AI conditions people to expect immediate answers, thereby denying them the experience of working through challenges on their own. These results add to the growing literature on cognitive offloading and AI-induced deskilling, and suggest the need for AI model development to prioritize scaffolding long-term competence alongside immediate task completion.

The rapid rise of LLMs over the last few years has promoted growing experimentation with LLM-driven AI tutors. However, the details of implementation, as well as the benefit in a teaching environment, are still in the early days of exploration. This article addresses these issues in the context of implementation of an AI Teaching Assistant (AI-TA) using Retrieval Augmented Generation (RAG) for Trinity College Dublin's Master's Motion Picture Engineering (MPE) course. We provide details of our implementation (including the prompt to the LLM, and code), and highlight how we designed and tuned our RAG pipeline to meet course needs. We describe our survey instrument and report on the impact of the AI-TA through a number of quantitative metrics. The scale of our experiment (43 students, 296 sessions, 1,889 queries over 7 weeks) was sufficient to have confidence in our findings. Unlike previous studies, we experimented with allowing the use of the AI-TA in open-book examinations. Statistical analysis across three exams showed no performance differences regardless of AI-TA access (p > 0.05), demonstrating that thoughtfully designed assessments can maintain academic validity. Student feedback revealed that the AI-TA was beneficial (mean = 4.22/5), while students had mixed feelings about preferring it over human tutoring (mean = 2.78/5).

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.

AI tutoring systems in engineering labs face a tension between providing sufficient assistance and preserving learning opportunities. Existing systems typically offer instructors limited control over assistance timing, content, or cost. This paper describes a routing and governance system for LLM-based lab assistance comprising two components: Routiium, an OpenAI-compatible gateway that manages multiple LLM backends with configurable prompt modifications and usage logging, and EduRouter, a policy-aware routing service that enforces per-lab budgets, approval workflows, and embedding-based question matching. We evaluated the system using trace-driven simulation calibrated from two engineering labs (LED characterization, RC circuit analysis) and a 100-query replay through live models. In simulations, governed policies (P1/P2) increased challenge-alignment index from 0.90 to 0.98 and overlay-adherence score from 0.69 to 0.87 compared to ungoverned operation (P0). The productive-struggle window metric increased from 1.4 to 3.6 simulated turns before high-scaffold hints appeared. In the 100-query replay, EduRouter routed 75% of queries to a local model, reducing token costs by 66% ($0.087 vs.$0.26 for all-premium routing) while maintaining canonical hit rate of 1.0 for the curated 89-intent question bank. We release Routiium, EduRouter, canonical-task tooling, and simulator configurations to support replication and future classroom studies.

Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) offer an opportunity to support multimedia learning through conversational systems grounded in educational content. However, while conversational AI is known to boost engagement, its impact on learning in visually-rich STEM domains remains under-explored. Moreover, there is limited understanding of how multimodality and conversationality jointly influence learning in generative AI systems. This work reports findings from a randomized controlled online study (N = 124) comparing three approaches to learning biology from textbook content: (1) a document-grounded conversational AI with interleaved text-and-image responses (MuDoC), (2) a document-grounded conversational AI with text-only responses (TexDoC), and (3) a textbook interface with semantic search and highlighting (DocSearch). Learners using MuDoC achieved the highest post-test scores and reported the most positive learning experience. Notably, while TexDoC was rated as significantly more engaging and easier to use than DocSearch, it led to the lowest post-test scores, revealing a disconnect between student perceptions and learning outcomes. Interpreted through the lens of the Cognitive Load Theory, these findings suggest that conversationality reduces extraneous load, while visual-verbal integration induced by multimodality increases germane load, leading to better learning outcomes. When conversationality is not complemented by multimodality, reduced cognitive effort may instead inflate perceived understanding without improving learning outcomes.

Dyslexic spelling errors exhibit systematic phonological and orthographic patterns that distinguish them from the errors produced by typically developing writers. While this observation has motivated dyslexic-specific spell-checking and assistive writing tools, prior work has focused predominantly on error correction rather than attribution, and has largely neglected the ethical risks. The risk of harmful labelling, covert screening, algorithmic bias, and institutional misuse that automated classification of learners entails requires the development of robust ethical and legal frameworks for research in this area. This paper addresses both gaps. We formulate dyslexic error attribution as a binary classification task. Given a misspelt word and its correct target form, determine whether the error pattern is characteristic of a dyslexic or non-dyslexic writer. We develop a comprehensive feature set capturing orthographic, phonological, and morphological properties of each error, and propose a twin-input neural model evaluated against traditional machine learning baselines under writer-independent conditions. The neural model achieves 93.01% accuracy and an F1-score of 94.01%, with phonetically plausible errors and vowel confusions emerging as the strongest attribution signals. We situate these technical results within an explicit ethics-first framework, analysing fairness across subgroups, the interpretability requirements of educational deployment, and the conditions, consent, transparency, human oversight, and recourse, under which a system could be responsibly used. We provide concrete guidelines for ethical deployment and an open discussion of the systems limitations and misuse potential. Our results demonstrate that dyslexic error attribution is feasible at high accuracy while underscoring that feasibility alone is insufficient for deployment in high-stakes educational contexts.

Despite emerging use in Indonesian classrooms, there is limited large-scale, teacher-centred evidence on how AI is used in practice and what support teachers need, hindering the development of context-appropriate AI systems and policies. To address this gap, we conduct a nationwide survey of 349 K-12 teachers across elementary, junior high, and senior high schools. We find increasing use of AI for pedagogy, content development, and teaching media, although adoption remains uneven. Elementary teachers report more consistent use, while senior high teachers engage less; mid-career teachers assign higher importance to AI, and teachers in Eastern Indonesia perceive greater value. Across levels, teachers primarily use AI to reduce instructional preparation workload (e.g., assessment, lesson planning, and material development). However, generic outputs, infrastructure constraints, and limited contextual alignment continue to hinder effective classroom integration.

Previous studies have illustrated the potential of analysing gaze behaviours in collaborative learning to provide educationally meaningful information for students to reflect on their learning. Over the past decades, machine learning approaches have been developed to automatically detect gaze behaviours from video data. Yet, since these approaches often require large amounts of labelled data for training, human annotation remains necessary. Additionally, researchers have questioned the cross-configuration robustness of machine learning models developed, as training datasets often fail to encompass the full range of situations encountered in educational contexts. To address these challenges, this study proposes a scalable artificial intelligence approach that leverages pretrained and foundation models to automatically detect gaze behaviours in face-to-face collaborative learning contexts without requiring human-annotated data. The approach utilises pretrained YOLO11 for person tracking, YOLOE-26 with text-prompt capability for education-related object detection, and the Gaze-LLE model for gaze target prediction. The results indicate that the proposed approach achieves an F1-score of 0.829 in detecting students' gaze behaviours from video data, with strong performance for laptop-directed gaze and peer-directed gaze, yet weaker performance for other gaze targets. Furthermore, when compared to other supervised machine learning approaches, the proposed method demonstrates superior and more stable performance in complex contexts, highlighting its better cross-configuration robustness. The implications of this approach for supporting students' collaborative learning in real-world environments are also discussed.

Software engineering courses often require rapid upskilling in supporting knowledge areas such as domain understanding and modeling methods. We report an experience from a two-week milestone in a master's course where 29 students used a customized ChatGPT (GPT-3.5) tutor grounded in a curated course knowledge base to learn cryptocurrency-finance basics and Domain-Driven Design (DDD). We logged all interactions and evaluated a 34.5% random sample of prompt-answer pairs (60/~174) with a five-dimension rubric (accuracy, relevance, pedagogical value, cognitive load, supportiveness), and we collected pre/post self-efficacy. Responses were consistently accurate and relevant in this setting: accuracy averaged 98.9% with no factual errors and only 2/60 minor inaccuracies, and relevance averaged 92.2%. Pedagogical value was high (89.4%) with generally appropriate cognitive load (82.78%), but supportiveness was low (37.78%). Students reported large pre-post self-efficacy gains for genAI-assisted domain learning and DDD application. From these observations we distill seventeen concrete teaching practices spanning prompt/configuration and course/workflow design (e.g., setting expected granularity, constraining verbosity, curating guardrail examples, adding small credit with a simple quality rubric). Within this single-course context, results suggest that genAI-supported learning can complement instruction in domain understanding and modeling tasks, while leaving room to improve tone and follow-up structure.