TutorTrace is a new dataset and behavioral abstraction pipeline that captures learners’ low‑level IDE telemetry to make their behavioral context visible and computable in real time. The dataset, collected across 480 students in two introductory Python courses, includes 180 K telemetry events, 13 633 behavioral segments, and 27 continuously computed metrics, and it underpins a taxonomy of learner activity before, between, and after AI queries. Preliminary classroom tests show that behavior‑aware prompts reduce the time between queries, and the system can predict upcoming queries with AUROC scores of .726 and .717 on two held‑out tasks.
By David Barron, Xiaohang Tang, Rezky Dwisantika, Minsun Kim, David H. Smith IV, Jiaming Cui, Yan Chen
arXiv:2606. 15766v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: A central pedagogical value evaluated in AI tutor benchmarks is scaffolding: guiding students through graduated steps toward a solution.
By Alexandra Neagu, Jeffrey T. H. Wong, Marcus Messer, Rhodri Nelson, Peter B. Johnson
arXiv:2607. 03303v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: While Large Language Models (LLMs) can provide personalized support in learning, several studies have raised concerns regarding their use in education.
By Jerome Brender, Laila El-Hamamsy, Kim Uittenhove, Aitor Perez, Patrick Jermann, Francesco Mondada, Engin Bumbacher
The study analyzes 20,462 student turns from 1,260 sessions with a guided LLM chemistry tutor, identifying 6,630 impasse turns categorized as conceptual errors, expressed uncertainty, or help‑seeking. Three tutoring conditions—baseline, no‑direct‑answer, and guided—were simulated, revealing that the baseline tutor often gave direct answers, the no‑direct‑answer tutor always asked follow‑up questions, and the guided tutor varied its responses based on context. Impasse trajectories showed that each additional impasse turn reduced the likelihood of recovery, while addressing errors became increasingly beneficial compared to repeated scripted questioning.
By Bakhtawar Ahtisham, Kirk Vanacore, Alessandra Napoli, Josh Arens, Ksenia Ionova, Clayton Cohn, Shima Salehi, Rene Kizilcec
The paper presents a tutoring platform that combines a generative AI chatbot with a reinforcement learning algorithm to adaptively sequence practice problems for students learning Python. In a five‑month field study across ten high schools, the adaptive sequencing improved unassisted final exam performance by 0.15 standard deviations, with mediation analysis indicating that higher engagement drove the gains. The study demonstrates that signals from student‑chatbot interactions can be leveraged to personalize and optimize learning at scale.
By Angel Tsai-Hsuan Chung, Botong Zhang, Ling-Chieh Kung, Hamsa Bastani, Osbert Bastani
arXiv:2610.15692v2 Announce Type: replace
Abstract: Large language models can produce fluent tu- toring dialogue, but whether they actually help students learn remains unclear. We present a process-c...
By Sayantan Adak, Rima Hazra, Koyel Mukherjee, Digbalay Bose, Somnath Banerjee
arXiv:2506.04920v2 Announce Type: replace-cross
Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated the ability to generate formative feedback and instructional hints in English, making them inc...
By Junior Cedric Tonga, KV Aditya Srivatsa, Kaushal Kumar Maurya, Fajri Koto, Ekaterina Kochmar
arXiv:2607. 21306v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used as tutors and thought partners, helping users reason through problems.
By Verona Teo, Raghav Jain, Tobias Gerstenberg, Max Kleiman-Weiner
The paper introduces Disengagement-Aware Student Simulators (DAS2), a protocol that models five learner-engagement states—engaged, gaming, wheel-spinning, off-task, and mixed—to evaluate AI tutor performance before deployment. Using annotated tutoring sessions from ASSISTments09, DAS2’s rule-based labels matched human consensus in 81% of cases, and conditioning simulations on intended states narrowed the correctness-rate gap between simulated and authentic sessions for gaming and wheel-spinning behaviors. The study also compares five AI tutors across these states, finding stable relative rankings but state-specific performance differences, and notes that automated evaluation does not fully align with human judgment.
By Xianghui Meng, Jionghao Lin
arXiv:2610.19532v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: Existing student models in educational applications largely focus on student responses to questions. However, as tutoring becomes more accessible at...
By Zhangqi Duan, Simon Woodhead, Maya Miller-Vedam, Andrew Lan
arXiv:2606. 01584v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Conversational tutoring agents have been shown to improve learning engagement and student outcomes, and large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used in these systems to provide scalable, personalized feedback.
By Aitor Arronte Alvarez, Naiyi Xie Fincham
arXiv:2609.28470v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Artificial intelligence offers an unprecedented opportunity to augment human capabilities, yet progress at the frontier has focused primarily on advanc...
By Curtis Northcutt, Inaara Hasmani, Kevin Feng, Trevor Khangi, Andreas Plesner, Jonas Mueller