Alex Ambrose

Yinuo Yang, Zheng Zhang, Ningzhi Tang et al.

AI-supported writing tools show strong potential for scaffolding students' learning of argumentative writing. Prior work has demonstrated the benefits of AI-supported cognitive scaffolds, such as idea exploration and argument refinement, but how these features function in authentic classroom settings remains underexplored. In this paper, we investigate the classroom integration of an AI-supported writing tool, VISAR. We deployed VISAR in an undergraduate writing course across three sections for one week each over two semesters (49 students total). Using a mixed-methods approach that combines interaction logs, writing artifact analysis, surveys, and interviews, we examine how students used VISAR features in authentic writing tasks. Our findings confirm that students appropriated AI-supported cognitive scaffolds for writing learning and achieved measurable learning gains. While prior studies suggest that students may bypass important cognitive processes when using AI writing assistants, our classroom deployment shows that when systems provide structured supports for planning and targeted generation, students naturally choose to engage with these cognition-preserving scaffolds. These learning-oriented interaction patterns were positively associated with argumentative writing quality, improved conceptual understanding, and emerging critical AI literacy, highlighting the design value of cognition-preserving features in AI writing tools. Together, these findings provide empirical evidence of how AI-supported writing scaffolds operate in authentic classroom contexts and offer design insights for future learning-oriented AI writing tools.

Si Chen, Isabel R. Molnar, Peiyu Li et al.

Large language models (LLMs) typically generate direct answers, yet they are increasingly used as learning tools. Studying instructors' usage is critical, given their role in teaching and guiding AI adoption in education. We designed and evaluated TeaPT, an LLM for pedagogical purposes that supports instructors' professional development through two conversational approaches: a Socratic approach that uses guided questioning to foster reflection, and a Narrative approach that offers elaborated suggestions to extend externalized cognition. In a mixed-method study with 41 higher-education instructors, the Socratic version elicited greater engagement, while the Narrative version was preferred for actionable guidance. Subgroup analyses further revealed that less-experienced, AI-optimistic instructors favored the Socratic version, whereas more-experienced, AI-cautious instructors preferred the Narrative version. We contribute design implications for LLMs for pedagogical purposes, showing how adaptive conversational approaches can support instructors with varied profiles while highlighting how AI attitudes and experience shape interaction and learning.