Generative AI in Education

Follow this topic Ask about this topic

This field studies how generative AI can assist learners and educators, from tutoring and writing feedback to lesson, quiz, and multimedia creation. Common approaches include retrieval-augmented generation grounded in course materials, pedagogically guided prompts and agents, and personalized support based on learner progress, often with teachers reviewing outputs. Researchers assess these systems through classroom trials, learning and transfer measures, interaction analysis, and benchmarks for pedagogical quality, accuracy, and safety. A central tension is that AI can improve task performance and access to help without necessarily building durable understanding or learner agency, while reliability, bias, privacy, and academic integrity remain open concerns.

Latest papers

289 papers13 papers in the last four weeks, down 41% on the four weeks before. 0.1% of all new papers.

Apr 12, 2026

Measuring Changes in Instructor Class Design and Student Learning After the Release of Large Language Models (LLMs)

Student use of Generative AI (GenAI) products in completing their classwork, with or without their professors' knowledge and/or approval, has resulted in substantial shifts in higher education. While GenAI use is widespread, its impact on student study methods, faculty course development, grade reporting, and overall learning is not well documented. This is a mixed-methods, multi-course study using retrospective quantitative analysis, instructor surveys, and anonymous student surveys at a university in the New England region of the United States. This research seeks to identify and document patterns in student and faculty perceptions of, and experiences in, the use of LLMs as a learning tool inside and outside of the university classroom. Alongside quantitative and thematic analysis of both faculty and student survey responses, historical grade data as reported to the university registrar is used to triangulate the phenomenon of learning achievement in pre- and post-LLM eras. It is hoped that this research can serve as a pilot study for a broader set of institutions. Results from this study can inform GenAI policy for professors, universities, and other educational institutions that are trying to maximize student learning in the age of AI.

Amanda Potasznik, Daniel Haehn

University of Massachusetts, Boston, USA

Generative AI in Education Educational Technology

Apr 9, 2026

Human-AI Collaboration Reconfigures Group Regulation from Socially Shared to Hybrid Co-Regulation

Generative AI (GenAI) is increasingly used in collaborative learning, yet its effects on how groups regulate collaboration remain unclear. Effective collaboration depends not only on what groups discuss, but on how they jointly manage goals, participation, strategy use, monitoring, and repair through co-regulation and socially shared regulation. We compared collaborative regulation between Human-AI and Human-Human groups in a parallel-group randomised experiment with 71 university students completing the same collaborative tasks with GenAI either available or unavailable. Focusing on human discourse, we used statistical analyses to examine differences in the distribution of collaborative regulation across regulatory modes, regulatory processes, and participatory focuses. Results showed that GenAI availability shifted regulation away from predominantly socially shared forms towards more hybrid co-regulatory forms, with selective increases in directive, obstacle-oriented, and affective regulatory processes. Participatory-focus distributions, however, were broadly similar across conditions. These findings suggest that GenAI reshapes the distribution of regulatory responsibility in collaboration and offer implications for the human-centred design of AI-supported collaborative learning.

Yujing Zhang, Xianghui Meng, Shihui Feng +1

The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China · Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA, USA · Monash University, Clayton, VIC, Australia

Human-AI Collaboration Generative AI in Education

Apr 8, 2026

Generative AI in K-12 Classrooms: A Midyear Implementation Report

This mid-year report summarizes teacher use of Colleague AI across 12 Washington State school districts from September 1 to December 31, 2025. Produced jointly by Colleague AI and AmplifyLearn.AI at the University of Washington, this report aggregates platform data and district-provided administrative records to provide an early look at how teachers engaged with AI during the first half of the 2025-26 school year. The districts vary in size from small districts with a few thousand students to large districts with up to thirty thousand students. The districts are rural, suburban, and urban. Only a subset of districts were able to provide mid-year administrative data, and findings that link teachers' use of Colleague AI to student characteristics should be interpreted as preliminary signals.

Lief Esbenshade, Alex Liu, Michael Xiao +6

University of Washington · Colleague AI

Generative AI in Education Educational Technology

Apr 8, 2026

Why teaching resists automation in an AI-inundated era: Human judgment, non-modular work, and the limits of delegation

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.

Songhee Han

Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL 32306, USA

AI in Education Generative AI in Education Human-AI Collaboration

Apr 8, 2026

Designing Safe and Accountable GenAI as a Learning Companion with Women Banned from Formal Education

In gender-restrictive and surveilled contexts, where access to formal education may be restricted for women, pursuing education involves safety and privacy risks. When women are excluded from schools and universities, they often turn to online self-learning and generative AI (GenAI) to pursue their educational and career aspirations. However, we know little about what safe and accountable GenAI support is required in the context of surveillance, household responsibilities, and the absence of learning communities. We present a remote participatory design study with 20 women in Afghanistan, informed by a recruitment survey (n = 140), examining how participants envision GenAI for learning and employability. Participants describe using GenAI less as an information source and more as an always-available peer, mentor, and source of career guidance that helps compensate for the absence of learning communities. At the same time, they emphasize that this companionship is constrained by privacy and surveillance risks, contextually unrealistic and culturally unsafe support, and direct-answer interactions that can undermine learning by creating an illusion of progress. Beyond eliciting requirements, envisioning the future with GenAI through participatory design was positively associated with significant increases in participants' aspirations (p=.01), perceived agency (p=.01), and perceived avenues (p=.03). These outcomes show that accountable and safe GenAI is not only about harm reduction but can also actively enable women to imagine and pursue viable learning and employment futures. Building on this, we translate participants' proposals into accountability-focused design directions that center on safety-first interaction and user control, context-grounded support under constrained resources, and offer pedagogically aligned assistance that supports genuine learning rather than quick answers.

Hamayoon Behmanush, Freshta Akhtari, Ingmar Weber +1

Saarland Informatics Campus, Saarland University, Saarbrücken, Germany · Computer Science Faculty, Parwan University, Parwan, Afghanistan

Generative AI in Education AI Companions AI Accountability Human-Centered AI Human-AI Co-Creation

Apr 8, 2026

AI Slop or AI-enhancement? Student perceptions of AI-generated media for an English for Academic Purposes course

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.

David James Woo, Deliang Wang, Kai Guo

Everwrite Limited, Hong Kong, China · Faculty of Education, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China · Faculty of Education, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China

AI in Education Generative AI in Education

Apr 7, 2026

"Don't Be Afraid, Just Learn": Insights from Industry Practitioners to Prepare Software Engineers in the Age of Generative AI

Although tension between university curricula and industry expectations has existed in some form for decades, the rapid integration of generative AI (GenAI) tools into software development has recently widened the gap between the two domains. To better understand this disconnect, we surveyed 51 industry practitioners (software developers, technical leads, upper management, \etc) and conducted 11 follow-up interviews focused on hiring practices, required job skills, perceived shortcomings in university curricula, and views on how university learning outcomes can be improved. Our results suggest that GenAI creates demand for new skills (\eg prompting and output evaluation), while strengthening the importance of soft-skills (\eg problem solving and critical thinking) and traditional competencies (\eg architecture design and debugging). We synthesize these findings into actionable recommendations for academia (\eg how to incorporate GenAI into curricula and evaluation redesign). Our work offers empirical guidance to help educators prepare students for modern software engineering environments.

Daniel Otten, Trevor Stalnaker, Nathan Wintersgill +3

William & Mary, Williamsburg, VA, USA

Computer Science Education Generative AI in Education

Apr 7, 2026

Dialogue Act Patterns in GenAI-Mediated L2 Oral Practice: A Sequential Analysis of Learner-Chatbot Interactions

While generative AI (GenAI) voice chatbots offer scalable opportunities for second language (L2) oral practice, the interactional processes related to learners' gains remain underexplored. This study investigates dialogue act (DA) patterns in interactions between Grade 9 Chinese English as a foreign language (EFL) learners and a GenAI voice chatbot over a 10-week intervention. Seventy sessions from 12 students were annotated by human coders using a pedagogy-informed coding scheme, yielding 6,957 coded DAs. DA distributions and sequential patterns were compared between high- and low-progress sessions. At the DA level, high-progress sessions showed more learner-initiated questions, whereas low-progress sessions exhibited higher rates of clarification-seeking, indicating greater comprehension difficulty. At the sequential level, high-progress sessions were characterised by more frequent prompting-based corrective feedback sequences, consistently positioned after learner responses, highlighting the role of feedback type and timing in effective interaction. Overall, these findings underscore the value of a dialogic lens in GenAI chatbot design, contribute a pedagogy-informed DA coding framework, and inform the design of adaptive GenAI chatbots for L2 education.

Liqun He, Shijun, Chen +2

Cindy · University College London, London, United Kingdom · University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China

Generative AI in Education Human-AI Interaction Conversational Agents

Apr 6, 2026

An AI Teaching Assistant for Motion Picture Engineering

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).

Deirdre O'Regan, Anil C. Kokaram

Department of Electronic and Electrical Engineering, Trinity College Dublin, Ireland

Intelligent Tutoring Systems Educational Technology AI in Education Generative AI in Education

Apr 6, 2026

EduIllustrate: Towards Scalable Automated Generation Of Multimodal Educational Content

Large language models are increasingly used as educational assistants, yet evaluation of their educational capabilities remains concentrated on question-answering and tutoring tasks. A critical gap exists for multimedia instructional content generation -- the ability to produce coherent, diagram-rich explanations that combine geometrically accurate visuals with step-by-step reasoning. We present EduIllustrate, a benchmark for evaluating LLMs on interleaved text-diagram explanation generation for K-12 STEM problems. The benchmark comprises 230 problems spanning five subjects and three grade levels, a standardized generation protocol with sequential anchoring to enforce cross-diagram visual consistency, and an 8-dimension evaluation rubric grounded in multimedia learning theory covering both text and visual quality. Evaluation of ten LLMs reveals a wide performance spread: Gemini 3.0 Pro Preview leads at 87.8%, while Kimi-K2.5 achieves the best cost-efficiency (80.8% at \

0.12/problem). Workflow ablation confirms sequential anchoring improves Visual Consistency by 13\% at 94\% lower cost. Human evaluation with 20 expert raters validates LLM-as-judge reliability for objective dimensions (

ρ\geq 0.83$) while revealing limitations on subjective visual assessment.

Shuzhen Bi, Mingzi Zhang, Zhuoxuan Li +3

Shanghai Innovation Institute · University of Science and Technology of China · East China Normal University

Generative AI in Education Multimodal Generation Education

Apr 6, 2026

Exploring how EFL students talk to and through AI to develop texts

Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) introduces new considerations for English as a foreign language (EFL) writing pedagogy. This study explores how students talk to and through AI by prompt engineering and negotiating authorship, respectively, and whether any patterns in the latter relate to students' writing performance. Using an exploratory mixed methods design, we analyzed screen recordings of 44 Hong Kong secondary students completing a Curricular Writing Task with AI Chatbots. Content analysis identified ten types of prompting strategies students employed, including questions, searches, and detailed instructions. From clustering these strategies, three distinct profiles of human-AI rhetorical load responsibility emerged: AI-dominant (52% of students), Human-dominant (25%) and Collaborative human-AI (14%). A MANOVA analysis indicated no significant multivariate effect of rhetorical load responsibility on three dimensions of students' writing performance: content, language, and organization. Students' prompting strategies and rhetorical load responsibility patterns have implications for their engagement and autonomy in EFL writing pedagogy.

David James Woo, Yangyang Yu, Yilin Huang +3

Everwrite Limited, Hong Kong, China · Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China · The Education University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China +2

Human-AI Collaboration Generative AI in Education Prompt Engineering

Apr 5, 2026

MisEdu-RAG: A Misconception-Aware Dual-Hypergraph RAG for Novice Math Teachers

Novice math teachers often encounter students' mistakes that are difficult to diagnose and remediate. Misconceptions are especially challenging because teachers must explain what went wrong and how to solve them. Although many existing large language model (LLM) platforms can assist in generating instructional feedback, these LLMs loosely connect pedagogical knowledge and student mistakes, which might make the guidance less actionable for teachers. To address this gap, we propose MisEdu-RAG, a dual-hypergraph-based retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) framework that organizes pedagogical knowledge as a concept hypergraph and real student mistake cases as an instance hypergraph. Given a query, MisEdu-RAG performs a two-stage retrieval to gather connected evidence from both layers and generates a response grounded in the retrieved cases and pedagogical principles. We evaluate on MisstepMath, a dataset of math mistakes paired with teacher solutions, as a benchmark for misconception-aware retrieval and response generation across topics and error types. Evaluation results on MisstepMath show that, compared with baseline models, MisEdu-RAG improves token-F1 by 10.95% and yields up to 15.3% higher five-dimension response quality, with the largest gains on Diversity and Empowerment. To verify its applicability in practical use, we further conduct a pilot study through a questionnaire survey of 221 teachers and interviews with 6 novices. The findings suggest that MisEdu-RAG provides diagnosis results and concrete teaching moves for high-demand misconception scenarios. Overall, MisEdu-RAG demonstrates strong potential for scalable teacher training and AI-assisted instruction for misconception handling. Our code is available on GitHub: https://github.com/GEMLab-HKU/MisEdu-RAG.

Zhihan Guo, Yuting Lu, Jionghao Lin

The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China · Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh PA 15213, USA · Monash University, Clayton VIC 3800, Australia

Retrieval-Augmented Generation Knowledge Augmentation for Language Models Generative AI in Education Hypergraph-Based RAG Mathematics Education

Apr 5, 2026

CODE-GEN: A Human-in-the-Loop RAG-Based Agentic AI System for Multiple-Choice Question Generation

We present CODE-GEN, a human-in-the-Loop, retrieval-augmented generation (RAG)-based agentic AI system for generating context-aligned multiple-choice questions to develop student code reasoning and comprehension abilities. CODE-GEN employs an agentic AI architecture in which a Generator agent produces multiple-choice coding comprehension questions aligned with course-specific learning objectives, while a Validator agent independently assesses content quality across seven pedagogical dimensions. Both agents are augmented with specialized tools that enhance computational accuracy and verify code outputs. To evaluate the effectiveness of CODE-GEN, we conducted an evaluation study involving six human subject-matter experts (SMEs) who judged 288 AI-generated questions. The SMEs produced a total of 2,016 human-AI rating pairs, indicating agreement or disagreement with the assessments of Validator, along with 131 instances of qualitative feedback. Analyses of SME judgments show strong system performance, with human-validated success rates ranging from 79.9% to 98.6% across the seven pedagogical dimensions. The analysis of qualitative feedback reveals that CODE-GEN achieves high reliability on dimensions well suited to computational verification and explicit criteria matching, including question clarity, code validity, concept alignment, and correct answer validity. In contrast, human expertise remains essential for dimensions requiring deeper instructional judgment, such as designing pedagogically meaningful distractors and providing high-quality feedback that reinforces understanding. These findings inform the strategic allocation of human and AI effort in AI-assisted educational content generation.

Xiaojing Duan, Frederick Nwanganga, Chaoli Wang

University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame IN 46556, USA

Multiple-Choice Question Generation Generative AI in Education Human-in-the-Loop AI Agentic AI Retrieval-Augmented Generation

Apr 3, 2026

Sociodemographic Biases in Educational Counselling by Large Language Models

As Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly integrated into educational settings, understanding their potential biases is critical. This study examines sociodemographic biases in LLM-based educational counselling. We evaluate responses from six LLMs answering questions about 900 vignettes describing students in diverse circumstances. Each vignette is systematically tested across 14 sociodemographic identifiers - spanning race and gender, socioeconomic status, and immigrant background - along with a control condition, yielding 243,000 model responses. Our findings indicate that (1) all models exhibit measurable biases, (2) bias patterns partially align with documented human biases but diverge in notable ways, (3) the magnitude of these biases is strongly influenced by the precision of the student descriptions, where vague or minimal information amplifies disparities nearly threefold, while concrete, individualised metrics substantially reduce them, and (4) bias profiles vary substantially across models. These results demonstrate the importance of context-rich and personalised educational representations, suggesting that AI-driven educational decisions benefit from detailed student-specific information to promote fairness and equity.

Tomasz Adamczyk, Wiktoria Mieleszczenko-Kowszewicz, Beata Bajcar +6

Wrocław University of Science and Technology, Wrocław, Poland · University of Silesia in Katowice, Katowice, Poland

Demographic Bias in Language Models Language Model Bias Evaluation Generative AI in Education

Apr 3, 2026

Comparing the Impact of Pedagogy-Informed Custom and General-Purpose GAI Chatbots on Students' Science Problem-Solving Processes and Performance Using Heterogeneous Interaction Network Analysis

Problem solving plays an essential role in science education, and generative AI (GAI) chatbots have emerged as a promising tool for supporting students' science problem solving. However, general-purpose chatbots (e.g., ChatGPT), which often provide direct, ready-made answers, may lead to students' cognitive offloading. Prior research has rarely focused on custom chatbots for facilitating students' science problem solving, nor has it examined how they differently influence problem-solving processes and performance compared to general-purpose chatbots. To address this gap, we developed a pedagogy-informed custom GAI chatbot grounded in the Socratic questioning method, which supports students by prompting them with guiding questions. This study employed a within-subjects counterbalanced design in which 48 secondary school students used both custom and general-purpose chatbot to complete two science problem-solving tasks. 3297 student-chatbot dialogues were collected and analyzed using Heterogeneous Interaction Network Analysis (HINA). The results showed that: (1) students demonstrated significantly higher interaction intensity and cognitive interaction diversity when using custom chatbot than using general-purpose chatbot; (2) students were more likely to follow custom chatbot's guidance to think and reflect, whereas they tended to request general-purpose chatbot to execute specific commands; and (3) no statistically significant difference was observed in students' problem-solving performance evaluated by solution quality between two chatbot conditions. This study provides novel theoretical insights and empirical evidence that custom chatbots are less likely to induce cognitive offloading and instead foster greater cognitive engagement compared to general-purpose chatbots. This study also offers insights into the design and integration of GAI chatbots in science education.

Hanyu Su, Huilin Zhang, Shihui Feng

Faculty of Education, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong 999077, China

Generative AI in Education Human-AI Interaction Cognitive Offloading

Apr 2, 2026

Mapping generative AI use in the human brain: divergent neural, academic, and mental health profiles of functional versus socio emotional AI use

The widespread adoption of generative artificial intelligence conversational agents (AICAs) among university students constitutes a novel cognitive social environment whose impact on the maturing brain remains elusive. Combining surveys with high resolution structural MRI, we examined patterns of general, functional, and socio emotional AICA use, academic performance, mental health, and brain structural signatures in a comparatively large sample of 222 young individuals. Across computational anatomy, meta analytic network level, and behavioral decoding analyses, we observed use specific associations. Higher general and functional AICA use frequencies were linked to better academic outcomes (GPA), larger dorsolateral prefrontal and calcarine gray matter volume, and enhanced hippocampal network clustering and local efficiency. In contrast, more frequent socio emotional AICA use was associated with poorer mental health (depression, social anxiety) and lower volume of superior temporal and amygdalar regions central to social and affective processing. These findings indicate that the same class of AI tools exerts distinct effects depending on usage patterns and motivations, engaging prefrontal hippocampal systems that support cognition versus socio emotional systems that may track distress linked usage. These heterogeneities are crucial for designing environments that harness the educational benefits of AI while mitigating mental health risks.

Junjie Wang, Xianyang Gan, Dan Liu +7

The Center of Psychosomatic Medicine, Sichuan Provincial Center for Mental Health, Sichuan Provincial People’s Hospital, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, China · The Clinical Hospital of Chengdu Brain Science Institute, MOE Key Laboratory for Neuroinformation, School of Life Science and Technology, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, China · Brain-Computer Interface & Brain-Inspired Intelligence Key Laboratory of Sichuan Province, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, China +5

Human-AI Interaction Generative AI in Education

Apr 2, 2026

Generative AI Spotlights the Human Core of Data Science: Implications for Education

Generative AI (GAI) reveals an irreducible human core at the center of data science: advances in GAI should sharpen, rather than diminish, the focus on human reasoning in data science education. GAI can now execute many routine data science workflows, including cleaning, summarizing, visualizing, modeling, and drafting reports. Yet the competencies that matter most remain irreducibly human: problem formulation, measurement and design, causal identification, statistical and computational reasoning, ethics and accountability, and sensemaking. Drawing on Donoho's Greater Data Science framework, Nolan and Temple Lang's vision of computational literacy, and the McLuhan-Culkin insight that we shape our tools and thereafter our tools shape us, this paper traces the emergence of data science through three converging lineages: Tukey's intellectual vision of data analysis as a science, the commercial logic of surveillance capitalism that created industrial demand for data scientists, and the academic programs that followed. Mapping GAI's impact onto Donoho's six divisions of Greater Data Science shows that computing with data (GDS3) has been substantially automated, while data gathering, preparation, and exploration (GDS1) and science about data science (GDS6) still require essential human input. The educational implication is that data science curricula should focus on this human core while teaching students how to contribute effectively within iterative prompt-output-prompt cycles using retrieval-augmented generation, and that learning outcomes and assessments should explicitly evaluate reasoning and judgment.

Nathan Taback

Department of Statistical Sciences, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Generative AI in Education Human-AI Collaboration Human-Centered AI

Apr 1, 2026

Trust and Reliance on AI in Education: AI Literacy and Need for Cognition as Moderators

As generative AI systems are integrated into educational settings, students often encounter AI-generated output while working through learning tasks, either by requesting help or through integrated tools. Trust in AI can influence how students interpret and use that output, including whether they evaluate it critically or exhibit overreliance. We investigate how students' trust relates to their appropriate reliance on an AI assistant during programming problem-solving tasks, and whether this relationship differs by learner characteristics. With 432 undergraduate participants, students' completed Python output-prediction problems while receiving recommendations and explanations from an AI chatbot, including accurate and intentionally misleading suggestions. We operationalize reliance behaviorally as the extent to which students' responses reflected appropriate use of the AI assistant's suggestions, accepting them when they were correct and rejecting them when they were incorrect. Pre- and post-task surveys assessed trust in the assistant, AI literacy, need for cognition, programming self-efficacy, and programming literacy. Results showed a non-linear relationship in which higher trust was associated with lower appropriate reliance, suggesting weaker discrimination between correct and incorrect recommendations. This relationship was significantly moderated by students' AI literacy and need for cognition. These findings highlight the need for future work on instructional and system supports that encourage more reflective evaluation of AI assistance during problem-solving.

Griffin Pitts, Neha Rani, Weedguet Mildort

North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC, USA · University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA

Trust in AI Generative AI in Education Computer Science Education AI Literacy

Mar 31, 2026

Human-in-the-Loop Control of Objective Drift in LLM-Assisted Computer Science Education

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly embedded in computer science education through AI-assisted programming tools, yet such workflows often exhibit objective drift, in which locally plausible outputs diverge from stated task specifications. Existing instructional responses frequently emphasize tool-specific prompting practices, limiting durability as AI platforms evolve. This paper adopts a human-centered stance, treating human-in-the-loop (HITL) control as a stable educational problem rather than a transitional step toward AI autonomy. Drawing on systems engineering and control-theoretic concepts, we frame objectives and world models as operational artifacts that students configure to stabilize AI-assisted work. We propose a pilot undergraduate CS laboratory curriculum that explicitly separates planning from execution and trains students to specify acceptance criteria and architectural constraints prior to code generation. In selected labs, the curriculum also introduces deliberate, concept-aligned drift to support diagnosis and recovery from specification violations. We report a sensitivity power analysis for a three-arm pilot design comparing unstructured AI use, structured planning, and structured planning with injected drift, establishing detectable effect sizes under realistic section-level constraints. The contribution is a theory-driven, methodologically explicit foundation for HITL pedagogy that renders control competencies teachable across evolving AI tools.

Mark Dranias, Adam Whitley

Asheville Institute for Memory and Longevity. Mills River, NC USA · University of North Carolina Asheville, Asheville, NC USA

Generative AI in Education Human-in-the-Loop AI Computer Science Education AI Alignment

Mar 31, 2026

From Domain Understanding to Design Readiness: a playbook for GenAI-supported learning in Software Engineering

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.

Rafal Wlodarski

Electrical & Computer Engineering, Carnegie Mellon University Silicon Valley, Mountain View, CA, USA

AI in Education Generative AI in Education Computer Science Education Intelligent Tutoring Systems Generative AI Evaluation

Mar 31, 2026

Beyond the Steeper Curve: AI-Mediated Metacognitive Decoupling and the Limits of the Dunning-Kruger Metaphor

The common claim that generative AI simply amplifies the Dunning-Kruger effect is too coarse to capture the available evidence. The clearest findings instead suggest that large language model (LLM) use can improve observable output and short-term task performance while degrading metacognitive accuracy and flattening the classic competence-confidence gradient across skill groups. This paper synthesizes evidence from human-AI interaction, learning research, and model evaluation, and proposes the working model of AI-mediated metacognitive decoupling: a widening gap among produced output, underlying understanding, calibration accuracy, and self-assessed ability. This four-variable account better explains overconfidence, over- and under-reliance, crutch effects, and weak transfer than the simpler metaphor of a uniformly steeper Dunning-Kruger curve. The paper concludes with implications for tool design, assessment, and knowledge work.

Christopher Koch

Independent Researcher

Human-AI Collaboration Human-AI Interaction Generative AI in Education

Mar 31, 2026

Kwame 2.0: Human-in-the-Loop Generative AI Teaching Assistant for Large Scale Online Coding Education in Africa

Providing timely and accurate learning support in large-scale online coding courses is challenging, particularly in resource-constrained contexts. We present Kwame 2.0, a bilingual (English-French) generative AI teaching assistant built using retrieval-augmented generation and deployed in a human-in-the-loop forum within SuaCode, an introductory mobile-based coding course for learners across Africa. Kwame 2.0 retrieves relevant course materials and generates context-aware responses while encouraging human oversight and community participation. We deployed the system in a 15-month longitudinal study spanning 15 cohorts with 3,717 enrollments across 35 African countries. Evaluation using community feedback and expert ratings shows that Kwame 2.0 provided high-quality and timely support, achieving high accuracy on curriculum-related questions, while human facilitators and peers effectively mitigated errors, particularly for administrative queries. Our findings demonstrate that human-in-the-loop generative AI systems can combine the scalability and speed of AI with the reliability of human support, offering an effective approach to learning assistance for underrepresented populations in resource-constrained settings at scale.

George Boateng, Samuel Boateng, Victor Kumbol

ETH Zurich, Switzerland · Kwame AI Inc., U.S. · Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Germany

Generative AI in Education Intelligent Tutoring Systems Programming Education Human-in-the-Loop AI

Mar 31, 2026

REFINE: Real-world Exploration of Interactive Feedback and Student Behaviour

Formative feedback is central to effective learning, yet providing timely, individualised feedback at scale remains a persistent challenge. While recent work has explored the use of large language models (LLMs) to automate feedback, most existing systems still conceptualise feedback as a static, one-way artifact, offering limited support for interpretation, clarification, or follow-up. In this work, we introduce REFINE, a locally deployable, multi-agent feedback system built on small, open-source LLMs that treats feedback as an interactive process. REFINE combines a pedagogically-grounded feedback generation agent with an LLM-as-a-judge-guided regeneration loop using a human-aligned judge, and a self-reflective tool-calling interactive agent that supports student follow-up questions with context-aware, actionable responses. We evaluate REFINE through controlled experiments and an authentic classroom deployment in an undergraduate computer science course. Automatic evaluations show that judge-guided regeneration significantly improves feedback quality, and that the interactive agent produces efficient, high-quality responses comparable to a state-of-the-art closed-source model. Analysis of real student interactions further reveals distinct engagement patterns and indicates that system-generated feedback systematically steers subsequent student inquiry. Our findings demonstrate the feasibility and effectiveness of multi-agent, tool-augmented feedback systems for scalable, interactive feedback.

Fares Fawzi, Seyed Parsa Neshaei, Marta Knezevic +2

EPFL, Lausanne, Switzerland

Educational Feedback Generation Generative AI in Education Multi-Agent LLM Systems Educational Assessment Intelligent Tutoring Systems

Mar 30, 2026

Evaluating LLMs for Answering Student Questions in Introductory Programming Courses

The rapid emergence of Large Language Models (LLMs) presents both opportunities and challenges for programming education. While students increasingly use generative AI tools, direct access often hinders the learning process by providing complete solutions rather than pedagogical hints. Concurrently, educators face significant workload and scalability challenges when providing timely, personalized feedback. This study investigates the capabilities of LLMs to safely and effectively assist educators in answering student questions within a CS1 programming course. To achieve this, we established a rigorous, reproducible evaluation process by curating a benchmark dataset of 170 authentic student questions from a learning management system, paired with ground-truth responses authored by subject matter experts. Because traditional text-matching metrics are insufficient for evaluating open-ended educational responses, we developed and validated a custom LLM-as-a-Judge metric optimized for assessing pedagogical accuracy. Our findings demonstrate that models, such as Gemini 3 flash, can surpass the quality baseline of typical educator responses, achieving high alignment with expert pedagogical standards. To mitigate persistent risks like hallucination and ensure alignment with course-specific context, we advocate for a "teacher-in-the-loop" implementation. Finally, we abstract our methodology into a task-agnostic evaluation framework, advocating for a shift in the development of educational LLM tools from ad-hoc, post-deployment testing to a quantifiable, pre-deployment validation process.

Thomas Van Mullem, Bart Mesuere, Peter Dawyndt

AI in Education Generative AI in Education Computer Science Education LLM Evaluation LLM-as-a-Judge

Mar 30, 2026

SLOW: Strategic Logical-inference Open Workspace for Cognitive Adaptation in AI Tutoring

While Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable fluency in educational dialogues, most generative tutors primarily operate through intuitive, single-pass generation. This reliance on fast thinking precludes a dedicated reasoning workspace, forcing multiple diagnostic and strategic signals to be processed in a conflated manner. As a result, learner cognitive diagnosis, affective perception, and pedagogical decision-making become tightly entangled, which limits the tutoring system's capacity for deliberate instructional adaptation. We propose SLOW, a theory-informed tutoring framework that supports deliberate learner-state reasoning within a transparent decision workspace. Inspired by dual-process accounts of human tutoring, SLOW explicitly separates learner-state inference from instructional action selection. The framework integrates causal evidence parsing from learner language, fuzzy cognitive diagnosis with counterfactual stability analysis, and prospective affective reasoning to anticipate how instructional choices may influence learners' emotional trajectories. These signals are jointly considered to guide pedagogically and affectively aligned tutoring strategies. Evaluation using hybrid human-AI judgments demonstrates significant improvements in personalization, emotional sensitivity, and clarity. Ablation studies further confirm the necessity of each module, showcasing how SLOW enables interpretable and reliable intelligent tutoring through a visualized decision-making process. This work advances the interpretability and educational validity of LLM-based adaptive instruction.

Yuang Wei, Ruijia Li, Bo Jiang

Shanghai Institute of Artificial Intelligence for Education, Shanghai, China

Intelligent Tutoring Systems AI in Education Generative AI in Education User Modeling

Mar 29, 2026

Evaluating Prompt Injection Defenses for Educational LLM Tutors: Security-Usability-Latency Trade-offs

Educational LLM tutors face a core AI alignment challenge: they must follow user intent while preserving pedagogical constraints and safety policies. We present an evaluation methodology for prompt-injection defenses in this setting, showing that guardrail design entails explicit trade-offs among adversarial robustness, benign-task usability, and response latency. We evaluate a domain-specific multi-layer safeguard pipeline combining deterministic pattern filters, structural validation, contextual sandboxing, and session-level behavioral checks. On a controlled holdout benchmark, the pipeline reaches low bypass and false positive rates with optimized average latency - an operating point that prioritizes pedagogical usability (zero false positives) while maintaining measurable attack resistance. We provide a reproducible benchmark protocol for head-to-head comparison under identical conditions, including stratified bootstrap confidence intervals, paired McNemar significance tests, multi-seed sensitivity sweeps, and direct evaluation of Prompt Guard and NeMo Guardrails on the same split with unified instrumentation. Results expose operational trade-offs: NeMo reaches 0 percent bypass at 16.22 percent FPR and roughly 1.5s latency, while Prompt Guard yields 38.48 percent bypass with 3.60 percent FPR. The framework supports evidence-based guardrail selection for AI tutoring systems under different institutional risk and usability requirements.

Alexandre Cristovão Maiorano

Prompt Injection Defense LLM Guardrails Language Model Safety Evaluation Prompt Injection Attacks on LLMs Generative AI in Education

Mar 29, 2026

Understanding Teacher Revisions of Large Language Model-Generated Feedback

Large language models (LLMs) increasingly generate formative feedback for students, yet little is known about how teachers revise this feedback before it reaches learners. Teachers' revisions shape what students receive, making revision practices central to evaluating AI classroom tools. We analyze a dataset of 1,349 instances of AI-generated feedback and corresponding teacher-edited explanations from 117 teachers. We examine (i) textual characteristics associated with teacher revisions, (ii) whether revision decisions can be predicted from the AI feedback text, and (iii) how revisions change the pedagogical type of feedback delivered. First, we find that teachers accept AI feedback without modification in about 80% of cases, while edited feedback tends to be significantly longer and subsequently shortened by teachers. Editing behavior varies substantially across teachers: about 50% never edit AI feedback, and only about 10% edit more than two-thirds of feedback instances. Second, machine learning models trained only on the AI feedback text as input features, using sentence embeddings, achieve fair performance in identifying which feedback will be revised (AUC=0.75). Third, qualitative coding shows that when revisions occur, teachers often simplify AI-generated feedback, shifting it away from high-information explanations toward more concise, corrective forms. Together, these findings characterize how teachers engage with AI-generated feedback in practice and highlight opportunities to design feedback systems that better align with teacher priorities while reducing unnecessary editing effort.

Conrad Borchers, Luiz Rodrigues, Newarney Torrezão da Costa +2

Carnegie Mellon University · Federal Technological University of Paraná – UTFPR · Instituto Federal Goiano – IF Goiano +1

AI in Education Generative AI in Education Educational Feedback Generation Educational Assessment

Mar 29, 2026

Exploring Student Perception on Gen AI Adoption in Higher Education: A Descriptive Study

The rapid proliferation of Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) is reshaping pedagogical practices and assessment models in higher education. While institutional and educator perspectives on GenAI integration are increasingly documented, the student perspective remains comparatively underexplored. This study examines how students perceive, use, and evaluate GenAI within their academic practices, focusing on usage patterns, perceived benefits, and expectations for institutional support. Data were collected through a questionnaire administered to 436 postgraduate Computer Science students at the University of Hertfordshire and analysed using descriptive methods. The findings reveal a Confidence-Competence Paradox: although more than 60% of students report high familiarity with tools such as ChatGPT, daily academic use remains limited and confidence in effective application is only moderate. Students primarily employ GenAI for cognitive scaffolding tasks, including concept clarification and brainstorming, rather than fully automated content generation. At the same time, respondents express concerns regarding data privacy, reliability of AI-generated information, and the potential erosion of critical thinking skills. The results also indicate strong student support for integrating AI literacy into curricula and programme Knowledge, Skills, and Behaviours (KSBs). Overall, the study suggests that universities should move beyond a policing approach to GenAI and adopt a pedagogical framework that emphasises AI literacy, ethical guidance, and equitable access to AI tools.

Harpreet Singh, Jaspreet Singh, Satwant Singh +4

Generative AI in Education AI Literacy Computer Science Education

Mar 29, 2026

Instructor-Created Custom GPTs as Pedagogical Partners Fostering Immersion in Online Higher Education: Two Case Studies

As online higher education expands, sustaining student engagement remains a critical challenge. This paper approaches immersive learning by investigating how custom GPTs foster immersion (as a state of deep mental involvement) for students and instructors. While large language models (LLMs) offer potential for enhancing feedback, little research has examined instructor-created custom GPTs designed to align with specific pedagogical goals. This paper addresses this gap, employing the Immersive Learning Cube framework, which conceptualizes immersion through three dimensions: system (envelopment by the environment), narrative (meaningful context), and agency (commitment to meaning-making). Through a qualitative analysis of two distinct case studies, an accelerated graduate grant writing course in the US and an undergraduate software engineering course in Portugal, we analyze course-embedded artifacts to map how custom GPTs influence these immersion dimensions. In the grant writing course, the custom GPT functioned as a feedback partner, fostering system immersion through its immediacy, narrative immersion by reinforcing the proposal's evolving story, and agency immersion by empowering students to negotiate feedback and take ownership of revisions. In the software engineering course, a diegetically-framed custom GPT acted as a metacognitive tutor, enhancing system immersion via its permanent availability, narrative immersion through its role-play function and agency immersion by scaffolding students' self- and co-regulated learning. Our findings demonstrate that thoughtfully integrated custom GPTs can act as powerful pedagogical partners that leverage all three dimensions of immersion. Rather than replacing human instructors, they can amplify immediacy, coherence, and learner autonomy, creating more engaging and immersive online learning environments.

Dennis Beck, Leonel Morgado

University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, USA · Universidade Aberta & INESC TEC, Lisbon & Porto, Portugal

Generative AI in Education Educational Technology Online Learning Intelligent Tutoring Systems

Mar 27, 2026

Multi-Level Barriers to Generative AI Adoption Across Disciplines and Professional Roles in Higher Education

Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) is rapidly reshaping higher education, yet barriers to its adoption across different disciplines and institutional roles remain underexplored. Existing literature frequently attributes adoption barriers to individual-level factors such as perceived usefulness and ease of use. This study instead investigates whether such barriers are structurally produced. Drawing on a multi-method survey analysis of 272 academic and professional services (PSs) staff at a Russell Group university, we examine how disciplinary contexts and institutional roles shape perceived barriers. By integrating multinomial logistic regression (MLR), structural equation modelling (SEM), and semantic clustering of open-ended responses, we move beyond descriptive accounts to provide a multi-level explanation of GenAI adoption. Our findings reveal clear, systematic differences: non-STEM academics primarily report ethical and cultural barriers related to academic integrity, whereas STEM and PSs staff disproportionately emphasize institutional, governance, and infrastructure constraints. We conclude that GenAI adoption barriers are deeply embedded in organizational ecosystems and epistemic norms, suggesting that universities must move beyond generalized training to develop role-specific governance and support frameworks.

Jianhua Yang, Kerem Öge, Adrian von Mühlenen +3

Warwick Manufacturing Group, The University of Warwick, Coventry CV4 7AL, UK · Department of Politics and International Studies, The University of Warwick, Coventry CV4 7AL, UK · Department of Psychology, The University of Warwick, Coventry CV4 7AL, UK +1

Generative AI in Education AI Governance