Conrad Borchers

Liang Zhang, Jionghao Lin, John Sabatini et al. · cmu

Learning performance data describe correct and incorrect answers or problem-solving attempts in adaptive learning, such as in intelligent tutoring systems (ITSs). Learning performance data tend to be highly sparse (80\%\(\sim\)90\% missing observations) in most real-world applications due to adaptive item selection. This data sparsity presents challenges to using learner models to effectively predict future performance explore new hypotheses about learning. This article proposes a systematic framework for augmenting learner data to address data sparsity in learning performance data. First, learning performance is represented as a three-dimensional tensor of learners' questions, answers, and attempts, capturing longitudinal knowledge states during learning. Second, a tensor factorization method is used to impute missing values in sparse tensors of collected learner data, thereby grounding the imputation on knowledge tracing tasks that predict missing performance values based on real observations. Third, a module for generating patterns of learning is used. This study contrasts two forms of generative Artificial Intelligence (AI), including Generative Adversarial Networks (GANs) and Generate Pre-Trained Transformers (GPT) to generate data associated with different clusters of learner data. We tested this approach on an adult literacy dataset from AutoTutor lessons developed for Adult Reading Comprehension (ARC). We found that: (1) tensor factorization improved the performance in tracing and predicting knowledge mastery compared with other knowledge tracing techniques without data augmentation, showing higher relative fidelity for this imputation method, and (2) the GAN-based simulation showed greater overall stability and less statistical bias based on a divergence evaluation with varying simulation sample sizes compared to GPT.

Conrad Borchers, Dalia Sara Gala, Benjamin Gilburt et al. · oxford

The growing capability and availability of generative language models has enabled a wide range of new downstream tasks. Academic research has identified, quantified and mitigated biases present in language models but is rarely tailored to downstream tasks where wider impact on individuals and society can be felt. In this work, we leverage one popular generative language model, GPT-3, with the goal of writing unbiased and realistic job advertisements. We first assess the bias and realism of zero-shot generated advertisements and compare them to real-world advertisements. We then evaluate prompt-engineering and fine-tuning as debiasing methods. We find that prompt-engineering with diversity-encouraging prompts gives no significant improvement to bias, nor realism. Conversely, fine-tuning, especially on unbiased real advertisements, can improve realism and reduce bias.

Conrad Borchers, Zachary A. Pardos

Course load analytics (CLA) inferred from LMS and enrollment features can offer a more accurate representation of course workload to students than credit hours and potentially aid in their course selection decisions. In this study, we produce and evaluate the first machine-learned predictions of student course load ratings and generalize our model to the full 10,000 course catalog of a large public university. We then retrospectively analyze longitudinal differences in the semester load of student course selections throughout their degree. CLA by semester shows that a student's first semester at the university is among their highest load semesters, as opposed to a credit hour-based analysis, which would indicate it is among their lowest. Investigating what role predicted course load may play in program retention, we find that students who maintain a semester load that is low as measured by credit hours but high as measured by CLA are more likely to leave their program of study. This discrepancy in course load is particularly pertinent in STEM and associated with high prerequisite courses. Our findings have implications for academic advising, institutional handling of the freshman experience, and student-facing analytics to help students better plan, anticipate, and prepare for their selected courses.

Yishan Du, Conrad Borchers, Mutlu Cukurova

As teachers increasingly turn to GenAI in their educational practice, we need robust methods to benchmark large language models (LLMs) for pedagogical purposes. This article presents an embedding-based benchmarking framework to detect bias in LLMs in the context of formative feedback. Using 600 authentic student essays from the AES 2.0 corpus, we constructed controlled counterfactuals along two dimensions: (i) implicit cues via lexicon-based swaps of gendered terms within essays, and (ii) explicit cues via gendered author background in the prompt. We investigated six representative LLMs (i.e. GPT-5 mini, GPT-4o mini, DeepSeek-R1, DeepSeek-R1-Qwen, Gemini 2.5 Pro, Llama-3-8B). We first quantified the response divergence with cosine and Euclidean distances over sentence embeddings, then assessed significance via permutation tests, and finally, visualised structure using dimensionality reduction. In all models, implicit manipulations reliably induced larger semantic shifts for male-female counterfactuals than for female-male. Only the GPT and Llama models showed sensitivity to explicit gender cues. These findings show that even state-of-the-art LLMs exhibit asymmetric semantic responses to gender substitutions, suggesting persistent gender biases in feedback they provide learners. Qualitative analyses further revealed consistent linguistic differences (e.g., more autonomy-supportive feedback under male cues vs. more controlling feedback under female cues). We discuss implications for fairness auditing of pedagogical GenAI, propose reporting standards for counterfactual evaluation in learning analytics, and outline practical guidance for prompt design and deployment to safeguard equitable feedback.

Haley Noh, Aarna Chowdhary, Jeroen Ooge et al.

Intelligent Tutoring Systems often grant learners shared control over skill and problem selection. Prior work suggests learners exhibit diverse task-selection strategies, such as avoiding challenge, which may interact with mastery learning systems that optimize task selection based on estimated knowledge. Algorithmic constraints on problem selection may help mitigate these effects, but testing such constraints in classrooms is costly. We propose a simulation-based framework to examine how learner task-selection strategies and system constraints shape mastery learning efficiency. Using interaction data from 261 students across two mathematical domains (equation solving and graph interpretation), we simulate strategies such as Weakness Targeting and Interleaving. We evaluate how these strategies affect overpractice as a measure of efficiency. Results show substantial variability across strategies, with risk-averse strategies producing higher levels of overpractice, especially for complex multi-step problems. Targeted system constraints significantly reduce inefficiencies for maladaptive strategies while minimally affecting already efficient strategies. These findings show how simulation grounded in student data can guide the redesign of shared-control tutoring systems before classroom deployment.

Conrad Borchers, Olga Viberg, René F. Kizilcec

As AI-mediated learning systems increasingly shape how learners plan, decide, and progress through education, learner agency is becoming both more consequential and harder to conceptualize at scale. Existing research often treats agency as a proxy for engagement and self-regulation, leaving unclear who actually holds decision-making authority in large-scale, automated learning environments. This paper reframes learner agency as the allocation of decision authority across learners, educators, institutions, and AI systems. We introduce the Agency Allocation Framework (AAF) for analyzing how decisions are distributed, how choices are architected, what evidence supports them, and over what time horizons their consequences unfold. Drawing on a focused review of Learning@Scale literature and an illustrative tutoring-system example, we identify four recurring challenges for studying learner agency at scale: (1) conceptual ambiguity, (2) reliance on behavioral proxies, (3) trade-offs between efficiency and learner control, and (4) the redistribution of agency through AI-mediated systems. Rather than advocating more or less automation, the AAF supports systematic analysis of when AI scaffolds learners' capacity to act and when it substitutes for it. By making decision authority explicit, the framework provides researchers and designers with analytic tools for studying, comparing, and evaluating agency-preserving learning systems in increasingly automated educational contexts.

Devika Venugopalan, Ziwen Yan, Conrad Borchers et al. · cmu

Caregivers (i.e., parents and members of a child's caring community) are underappreciated stakeholders in learning analytics. Although caregiver involvement can enhance student academic outcomes, many obstacles hinder involvement, most notably knowledge gaps with respect to modern school curricula. An emerging topic of interest in learning analytics is hybrid tutoring, which includes instructional and motivational support. Caregivers assert similar roles in homework, yet it is unknown how learning analytics can support them. Our past work with caregivers suggested that conversational support is a promising method of providing caregivers with the guidance needed to effectively support student learning. We developed a system that provides instructional support to caregivers through conversational recommendations generated by a Large Language Model (LLM). Addressing known instructional limitations of LLMs, we use instructional intelligence from tutoring systems while conducting prompt engineering experiments with the open-source Llama 3 LLM. This LLM generated message recommendations for caregivers supporting their child's math practice via chat. Few-shot prompting and combining real-time problem-solving context from tutoring systems with examples of tutoring practices yielded desirable message recommendations. These recommendations were evaluated with ten middle school caregivers, who valued recommendations facilitating content-level support and student metacognition through self-explanation. We contribute insights into how tutoring systems can best be merged with LLMs to support hybrid tutoring settings through conversational assistance, facilitating effective caregiver involvement in tutoring systems.

Danielle R. Thomas, Conrad Borchers, Kirk P. Vanacore et al.

Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) is now widespread in education, yet the efficacy of GenAI systems remains constrained by the quality and interpretation of the labeled data used to train and evaluate them. Studies commonly report inter-rater reliability (IRR), often summarized by a single coefficient such as Cohen's kappa (k), as a gatekeeper to ``ground truth.'' We argue that many educational assessment and practice support settings include challenges, such as high-inference constructs, skewed label distributions, and temporally segmented multimodal data, which yield potential misapplication or misinterpretation of threshold-based heuristics for IRR. The growing use of large language models as annotators and judges introduces risks such as automation bias and circular validation. We propose four practical shifts for establishing ground truth: (1) treat IRR as a diagnostic signal to localize disagreement and refine constructs rather than a mechanical acceptance threshold (e.g., k > 0.8); (2) require transparent reporting of rater expertise, codebook development, reconciliation procedures, and segmentation rules; (3) mitigate risks in LLM annotation through bias audits and verification workflows; and (4) complement agreement statistics with validity and effectiveness evidence for the intended use, including uncertainty-aware labeling (e.g., assigning different labels to the same item to capture nuance), criterion-related checks (e.g., predictive tests to check if labels forecast the intended outcome), and close-the-loop evaluations of whether systems trained on these labels improve learning beyond a reasonable control. We illustrate these shifts through case studies of multimodal tutoring data and provide actionable recommendations toward strengthening the evidence base of labeled AIED datasets.

Conrad Borchers, Tianze Shou

Large Language Models (LLMs) hold promise as dynamic instructional aids. Yet, it remains unclear whether LLMs can replicate the adaptivity of intelligent tutoring systems (ITS)--where student knowledge and pedagogical strategies are explicitly modeled. We propose a prompt variation framework to assess LLM-generated instructional moves' adaptivity and pedagogical soundness across 75 real-world tutoring scenarios from an ITS. We systematically remove key context components (e.g., student errors and knowledge components) from prompts to create variations of each scenario. Three representative LLMs (Llama3-8B, Llama3-70B, and GPT-4o) generate 1,350 instructional moves. We use text embeddings and randomization tests to measure how the omission of each context feature impacts the LLMs' outputs (adaptivity) and a validated tutor-training classifier to evaluate response quality (pedagogical soundness). Surprisingly, even the best-performing model only marginally mimics the adaptivity of ITS. Specifically, Llama3-70B demonstrates statistically significant adaptivity to student errors. Although Llama3-8B's recommendations receive higher pedagogical soundness scores than the other models, it struggles with instruction-following behaviors, including output formatting. By contrast, GPT-4o reliably adheres to instructions but tends to provide overly direct feedback that diverges from effective tutoring, prompting learners with open-ended questions to gauge knowledge. Given these results, we discuss how current LLM-based tutoring is unlikely to produce learning benefits rivaling known-to-be-effective ITS tutoring. Through our open-source benchmarking code, we contribute a reproducible method for evaluating LLMs' instructional adaptivity and fidelity.

Conrad Borchers, Robin Schmucker, Ashutosh Tiwari et al.

Cross-enrollment across institutions can expand access to courses and support student progression. Still, little is known about how geographic constraints and institutional policies jointly shape cross-enrollment within community college (CC) systems. We adopt a push-pull framework: geographic remoteness constrains feasible cross-institution mobility, while credit mobility may attract enrollment expressed as articulation (CC-to-university: credit toward a four-year partner) and course equivalencies (CC-to-CC: equivalencies across the system). Using de-identified administrative records from a 12-institution community college system (100,547 students; 1,290,311 course enrollments), we quantify outgoing and incoming cross-enrollment and relate these patterns to institutional remoteness and credit mobility. We find that less remote colleges exhibit higher outgoing and incoming cross-enrollment than more remote colleges. Further, cross-enrolled students are more likely to take articulated courses, and institutions with higher equivalency ratios receive higher incoming cross-enrollment (8.62% vs. 6.70%). This association was slightly stronger at more remote colleges. This study demonstrates how analysis of complex college systems can surface factors shaping student mobility and inform the design of cross-enrollment and articulation policies in CC systems.

Qianru Lyu, Conrad Borchers, Meng Xia et al.

Past research has defined a general process for the data-driven redesign of educational technologies and has shown that in carefully-selected instances, this process can help make systems more effective. In the current work, we test the generality of the approach by applying it to four units of a middle-school mathematics intelligent tutoring system that were selected not based on suitability for redesign, as in previous work, but on topic. We tested whether the redesigned system was more effective than the original in a classroom study with 123 students. Although the learning gains did not differ between the conditions, students who used the Redesigned Tutor had more productive time-on-task, a larger number of skills practiced, and greater total knowledge mastery. The findings highlight the promise of data-driven redesign even when applied to instructional units *not* selected as likely to yield improvement, as evidence of the generality and wide applicability of the method.

Jiayi Zhang, Conrad Borchers, Clayton Cohn et al.

The field of learning analytics has made notable strides in automating the detection of complex learning processes in multimodal data. However, most advancements have focused on individualized problem-solving instead of collaborative, open-ended problem-solving, which may offer both affordances (richer data) and challenges (low cohesion) to behavioral prediction. Here, we extend predictive models to automatically detect socially shared regulation of learning (SSRL) behaviors in collaborative computational modeling environments using embedding-based approaches. We leverage large language models (LLMs) as summarization tools to generate task-aware representations of student dialogue aligned with system logs. These summaries, combined with text-only embeddings, context-enriched embeddings, and log-derived features, were used to train predictive models. Results show that text-only embeddings often achieve stronger performance in detecting SSRL behaviors related to enactment or group dynamics (e.g., off-task behavior or requesting assistance). In contrast, contextual and multimodal features provide complementary benefits for constructs such as planning and reflection. Overall, our findings highlight the promise of embedding-based models for extending learning analytics by enabling scalable detection of SSRL behaviors, ultimately supporting real-time feedback and adaptive scaffolding in collaborative learning environments that teachers value.

Conrad Borchers, Bahar Shahrokhian, Francesco Balzan et al.

Large Language Models (LLMs) enable new possibilities for qualitative research at scale, including coding and data annotation. While multi-agent systems (MAS) can emulate human coding workflows, their benefits over single-agent coding remain poorly understood. We conducted an experimental study of how agent persona and temperature shape consensus-building and coding accuracy of dialog segments based on a codebook with 8 codes. Our open-source MAS mirrors deductive human coding through structured agent discussion and consensus arbitration. Using six open-source LLMs (with 3 to 32 billion parameters) and 18 experimental configurations, we analyze over 77,000 coding decisions against a gold-standard dataset of human-annotated transcripts from online math tutoring sessions. Temperature significantly impacted whether and when consensus was reached across all six LLMs. MAS with multiple personas (including neutral, assertive, or empathetic), significantly delayed consensus in four out of six LLMs compared to uniform personas. In three of those LLMs, higher temperatures significantly diminished the effects of multiple personas on consensus. However, neither temperature nor persona pairing lead to robust improvements in coding accuracy. Single agents matched or outperformed MAS consensus in most conditions. Only one model (OpenHermesV2:7B) and code category showed above-chance gains from MAS deliberation when temperature was 0.5 or lower and especially when the agents included at least one assertive persona. Qualitative analysis of MAS collaboration for these configurations suggests that MAS may nonetheless aid in narrowing ambiguous code applications that could improve codebooks and human-AI coding. We contribute new insight into the limits of LLM-based qualitative methods, challenging the notion that diverse MAS personas lead to better outcomes. We open-source our MAS and experimentation code.

Eric S. Qiu, Danielle R. Thomas, Boyuan Guo et al.

Sustained effort is essential for realizing the benefits of intelligent tutoring systems (ITS), yet many learners disengage or underuse available practice time. We introduce engagement forecasting as a supervised prediction task based on ITS logs, targeting two outcomes central to effort and learning progress: minutes practiced per week and new skills mastered per week. Using interaction log data from 425 middle-school students over a school year, we benchmark fifteen predictors including regressions, decision trees, and neural networks. We show that these feature-based models reduce mean absolute error (MAE) by 22-33% relative to heuristic baselines, including fixed-percentile rules adapted from prior work in other behavioral domains. We find that percentile heuristics systematically overpredict, whereas feature-based models better track student practice trajectories across weeks. To support explainability, we analyze feature importance and ablations, revealing target-specific patterns: effort forecasting is driven mainly by recent activity features, while progress forecasting depends more on learner-state and content difficulty signals. Finally, in a semi-structured user interview case study with eight college tutors, we examine how tutors reasoned about system-generated predictive features when setting goals with students. We find that tutors reasoned differently about effort versus progress goals in ways that mirror our pattern analysis. Together, these results establish a reproducible benchmark for forecasting weekly effort and learning progress in ITS. By making patterns of sustained effort and progress visible at a weekly timescale, engagement forecasting offers a foundation for supporting tutor-learner goal setting and timely instructional decisions.

Conrad Borchers, Luiz Rodrigues, Newarney Torrezão da Costa et al.

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

Algorithmic bias is a pressing concern in educational data mining (EDM), as it risks amplifying inequities in learning outcomes. The Area Between ROC Curves (ABROCA) metric is frequently used to measure discrepancies in model performance across demographic groups to quantify overall model fairness. However, its skewed distribution--especially when class or group imbalances exist--makes significance testing challenging. This study investigates ABROCA's distributional properties and contributes robust methods for its significance testing. Specifically, we address (1) whether ABROCA follows any known distribution, (2) how to reliably test for algorithmic bias using ABROCA, and (3) the statistical power achievable with ABROCA-based bias assessments under typical EDM sample specifications. Simulation results confirm that ABROCA does not match standard distributions, including those suited to accommodate skewness. We propose nonparametric randomization tests for ABROCA and demonstrate that reliably detecting bias with ABROCA requires large sample sizes or substantial effect sizes, particularly in imbalanced settings. Findings suggest that ABROCA-based bias evaluations based on sample sizes common in EDM tend to be underpowered, undermining the reliability of conclusions about model fairness. By offering open-source code to simulate power and statistically test ABROCA, this paper aims to foster more reliable statistical testing in EDM research. It supports broader efforts toward replicability and equity in educational modeling.

Conrad Borchers, Lijin Zhang, Kexin Yang et al.

Adaptive learning systems can produce substantial learning gains, yet many students engage for too brief or too superficial a period to benefit. A central obstacle is measuring effort. Effort during multi-step problem solving is rarely directly observed, and common log-based proxies, such as time on task, cannot distinguish between a student working carefully and a student encountering a harder problem. We examine step-to-step response time as a scalable effort signal by modeling trait-like differences in students' typical response timing during tutoring (while adjusting for skill difficulty). Using step-level logs from eight classroom deployments of algebra tutoring systems (2020 to 2023) across six U.S. schools (794 students), we estimate student- and knowledge-component-level propensities using hierarchical models and relate them to learning efficiency, defined as performance improvement per completed solution step. Response-time propensities show moderate to strong stability within students, supporting their use as an individual differences measure beyond correctness. At the same time, their relationship to learning is not uniform but conditional on the learner and context. Slower propensities predict greater learning efficiency for higher-proficiency students, consistent with constructive processing, whereas for lower-proficiency students, slower propensities are weakly related or even negative, consistent with unproductive struggle or idling. These associations are strongest early in practice sequences and attenuate later in the class period, highlighting an actionable window for detecting emerging disengagement and low persistence. Overall, response-time propensities provide a practical way to incorporate temporal process data into learner models and to target adaptive supports when effort is most diagnostic.

Conrad Borchers, Jiayi Zhang, Ashish Gurung

Adaptive scaffolding enhances learning, yet the field lacks robust methods for measuring it within authentic tutoring dialogue. This gap has become more pressing with the rise of remote human tutoring and large language model-based systems. We introduce an embedding-based approach that analyzes scaffolding dynamics by aligning the semantics of dialogue turns, problem statements, and correct solutions. Specifically, we operationalize alignment by computing cosine similarity between tutor and student contributions and task-relevant content. We apply this framework to 1,576 real-world mathematics tutoring dialogues from the Eedi Question Anchored Tutoring Dialogues dataset. The analysis reveals systematic differences in task alignment and distinct temporal patterns in how participants ground their contributions in problem and solution content. Further, mixed-effects models show that role-specific semantic alignment predicts tutorial progression beyond baseline features such as message order and length. Tutor contributions exhibited stronger grounding in problem content early in interactions. In contrast, student solution alignment was modestly positively associated with progression. These findings support scaffolding as a continuous, role-sensitive process grounded in task semantics. By capturing role-specific alignment over time, this approach provides a principled method for analyzing instructional dialogue and evaluating conversational tutoring systems.

Conrad Borchers, Manit Patel, Seiyon M. Lee et al.

Open-ended responses are central to learning, yet automated scoring often conflates what students wrote with how teachers grade. We present an analytics-first framework that separates content signals from rater tendencies, making judgments visible and auditable via analytics. Using de-identified ASSISTments mathematics responses, we model teacher histories as dynamic priors and represent text with sentence embeddings. We apply centroid normalization and response-problem embedding differences, and explicitly model teacher effects with priors to reduce problem- and teacher-related confounds. Temporally-validated linear models quantify the contributions of each signal, and model disagreements surface observations for qualitative inspection. Results show that teacher priors heavily influence grade predictions; the strongest results arise when priors are combined with content embeddings (AUC~0.815), while content-only models remain above chance but substantially weaker (AUC~0.626). Adjusting for rater effects sharpens the selection of features derived from content representations, retaining more informative embedding dimensions and revealing cases where semantic evidence supports understanding as opposed to surface-level differences in how students respond. The contribution presents a practical pipeline that transforms embeddings from mere features into learning analytics for reflection, enabling teachers and researchers to examine where grading practices align (or conflict) with evidence of student reasoning and learning.

Conrad Borchers, Valdemar Švábenský, Sandesh K. Kafle et al.

Instructional alignment, the match between intended cognition and enacted activity, is central to effective instruction but hard to operationalize at scale. We examine alignment in cybersecurity simulations using multimodal traces from 23 teams (76 students) across five exercise sessions. Study 1 codes objectives and team emails with Bloom's taxonomy and models the completion of key exercise tasks with generalized linear mixed models. Alignment, defined as the discrepancy between required and enacted Bloom levels, predicts success, whereas the Bloom category alone does not predict success once discrepancy is considered. Study 2 compares predictive feature families using grouped cross-validation and l1-regularized logistic regression. Text embeddings and log features outperform Bloom-only models (AUC~0.74 and 0.71 vs. 0.55), and their combination performs best (Test AUC~0.80), with Bloom frequencies adding little. Overall, the work offers a measure of alignment for simulations and shows that multimodal traces best forecast performance, while alignment provides interpretable diagnostic insight.

Zifei FeiFei Han, Jionghao Lin, Ashish Gurung et al. · cmu

One-on-one tutoring is an effective instructional method for enhancing learning, yet its efficacy hinges on tutor competencies. Novice math tutors often prioritize content-specific guidance, neglecting aspects such as social-emotional learning. Social-emotional learning promotes equity and inclusion and nurturing relationships with students, which is crucial for holistic student development. Assessing the competencies of tutors accurately and efficiently can drive the development of tailored tutor training programs. However, evaluating novice tutor ability during real-time tutoring remains challenging as it typically requires experts-in-the-loop. To address this challenge, this preliminary study aims to harness Generative Pre-trained Transformers (GPT), such as GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 models, to automatically assess tutors' ability of using social-emotional tutoring strategies. Moreover, this study also reports on the financial dimensions and considerations of employing these models in real-time and at scale for automated assessment. The current study examined four prompting strategies: two basic Zero-shot prompt strategies, Tree of Thought prompt, and Retrieval-Augmented Generator (RAG) based prompt. The results indicate that the RAG prompt demonstrated more accurate performance (assessed by the level of hallucination and correctness in the generated assessment texts) and lower financial costs than the other strategies evaluated. These findings inform the development of personalized tutor training interventions to enhance the the educational effectiveness of tutored learning.

Conrad Borchers, Jiayi Zhang, Ryan S. Baker et al.

Numerous studies demonstrate the importance of self-regulation during learning by problem-solving. Recent work in learning analytics has largely examined students' use of SRL concerning overall learning gains. Limited research has related SRL to in-the-moment performance differences among learners. The present study investigates SRL behaviors in relationship to learners' moment-by-moment performance while working with intelligent tutoring systems for stoichiometry chemistry. We demonstrate the feasibility of labeling SRL behaviors based on AI-generated think-aloud transcripts, identifying the presence or absence of four SRL categories (processing information, planning, enacting, and realizing errors) in each utterance. Using the SRL codes, we conducted regression analyses to examine how the use of SRL in terms of presence, frequency, cyclical characteristics, and recency relate to student performance on subsequent steps in multi-step problems. A model considering students' SRL cycle characteristics outperformed a model only using in-the-moment SRL assessment. In line with theoretical predictions, students' actions during earlier, process-heavy stages of SRL cycles exhibited lower moment-by-moment correctness during problem-solving than later SRL cycle stages. We discuss system re-design opportunities to add SRL support during stages of processing and paths forward for using machine learning to speed research depending on the assessment of SRL based on transcription of think-aloud data.

Liang Zhang, Jionghao Lin, Conrad Borchers et al. · cmu

Intelligent Tutoring Systems (ITSs) have significantly enhanced adult literacy training, a key factor for societal participation, employment opportunities, and lifelong learning. Our study investigates the application of advanced AI models, including Large Language Models (LLMs) like GPT-4, for predicting learning performance in adult literacy programs in ITSs. This research is motivated by the potential of LLMs to predict learning performance based on its inherent reasoning and computational capabilities. By using reading comprehension datasets from the ITS, AutoTutor, we evaluate the predictive capabilities of GPT-4 versus traditional machine learning methods in predicting learning performance through five-fold cross-validation techniques. Our findings show that the GPT-4 presents the competitive predictive abilities with traditional machine learning methods such as Bayesian Knowledge Tracing, Performance Factor Analysis, Sparse Factor Analysis Lite (SPARFA-Lite), tensor factorization and eXtreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost). While XGBoost (trained on local machine) outperforms GPT-4 in predictive accuracy, GPT-4-selected XGBoost and its subsequent tuning on the GPT-4 platform demonstrates superior performance compared to local machine execution. Moreover, our investigation into hyper-parameter tuning by GPT-4 versus grid-search suggests comparable performance, albeit with less stability in the automated approach, using XGBoost as the case study. Our study contributes to the field by highlighting the potential of integrating LLMs with traditional machine learning models to enhance predictive accuracy and personalize adult literacy education, setting a foundation for future research in applying LLMs within ITSs.

Liang Zhang, Jionghao Lin, Conrad Borchers et al. · cmu

Learning performance data (e.g., quiz scores and attempts) is significant for understanding learner engagement and knowledge mastery level. However, the learning performance data collected from Intelligent Tutoring Systems (ITSs) often suffers from sparsity, impacting the accuracy of learner modeling and knowledge assessments. To address this, we introduce the 3DG framework (3-Dimensional tensor for Densification and Generation), a novel approach combining tensor factorization with advanced generative models, including Generative Adversarial Network (GAN) and Generative Pre-trained Transformer (GPT), for enhanced data imputation and augmentation. The framework operates by first representing the data as a three-dimensional tensor, capturing dimensions of learners, questions, and attempts. It then densifies the data through tensor factorization and augments it using Generative AI models, tailored to individual learning patterns identified via clustering. Applied to data from an AutoTutor lesson by the Center for the Study of Adult Literacy (CSAL), the 3DG framework effectively generated scalable, personalized simulations of learning performance. Comparative analysis revealed GAN's superior reliability over GPT-4 in this context, underscoring its potential in addressing data sparsity challenges in ITSs and contributing to the advancement of personalized educational technology.

Danielle R. Thomas, Conrad Borchers, Sanjit Kakarla et al. · cmu

The role of multiple-choice questions (MCQs) as effective learning tools has been debated in past research. While MCQs are widely used due to their ease in grading, open response questions are increasingly used for instruction, given advances in large language models (LLMs) for automated grading. This study evaluates MCQs effectiveness relative to open-response questions, both individually and in combination, on learning. These activities are embedded within six tutor lessons on advocacy. Using a posttest-only randomized control design, we compare the performance of 234 tutors (790 lesson completions) across three conditions: MCQ only, open response only, and a combination of both. We find no significant learning differences across conditions at posttest, but tutors in the MCQ condition took significantly less time to complete instruction. These findings suggest that MCQs are as effective, and more efficient, than open response tasks for learning when practice time is limited. To further enhance efficiency, we autograded open responses using GPT-4o and GPT-4-turbo. GPT models demonstrate proficiency for purposes of low-stakes assessment, though further research is needed for broader use. This study contributes a dataset of lesson log data, human annotation rubrics, and LLM prompts to promote transparency and reproducibility.

Conrad Borchers, Yeyu Wang, Shamya Karumbaiah et al.

Learning analytics research increasingly studies classroom learning with AI-based systems through rich contextual data from outside these systems, especially student-teacher interactions. One key challenge in leveraging such data is generating meaningful insights into effective teacher practices. Quantitative ethnography bears the potential to close this gap by combining multimodal data streams into networks of co-occurring behavior that drive insight into favorable learning conditions. The present study uses transmodal ordered network analysis to understand effective teacher practices in relationship to traditional metrics of in-system learning in a mathematics classroom working with AI tutors. Incorporating teacher practices captured by position tracking and human observation codes into modeling significantly improved the inference of how efficiently students improved in the AI tutor beyond a model with tutor log data features only. Comparing teacher practices by student learning rates, we find that students with low learning rates exhibited more hint use after monitoring. However, after an extended visit, students with low learning rates showed learning behavior similar to their high learning rate peers, achieving repeated correct attempts in the tutor. Observation notes suggest conceptual and procedural support differences can help explain visit effectiveness. Taken together, offering early conceptual support to students with low learning rates could make classroom practice with AI tutors more effective. This study advances the scientific understanding of effective teacher practice in classrooms learning with AI tutors and methodologies to make such practices visible.

Danielle R. Thomas, Conrad Borchers, Sanjit Kakarla et al. · cmu

Equity is a core concern of learning analytics. However, applications that teach and assess equity skills, particularly at scale are lacking, often due to barriers in evaluating language. Advances in generative AI via large language models (LLMs) are being used in a wide range of applications, with this present work assessing its use in the equity domain. We evaluate tutor performance within an online lesson on enhancing tutors' skills when responding to students in potentially inequitable situations. We apply a mixed-method approach to analyze the performance of 81 undergraduate remote tutors. We find marginally significant learning gains with increases in tutors' self-reported confidence in their knowledge in responding to middle school students experiencing possible inequities from pretest to posttest. Both GPT-4o and GPT-4-turbo demonstrate proficiency in assessing tutors ability to predict and explain the best approach. Balancing performance, efficiency, and cost, we determine that few-shot learning using GPT-4o is the preferred model. This work makes available a dataset of lesson log data, tutor responses, rubrics for human annotation, and generative AI prompts. Future work involves leveling the difficulty among scenarios and enhancing LLM prompts for large-scale grading and assessment.

Valdemar Švábenský, Conrad Borchers, Elizabeth B. Cloude et al.

In supervised machine learning (SML) research, large training datasets are essential for valid results. However, obtaining primary data in learning analytics (LA) is challenging. Data augmentation can address this by expanding and diversifying data, though its use in LA remains underexplored. This paper systematically compares data augmentation techniques and their impact on prediction performance in a typical LA task: prediction of academic outcomes. Augmentation is demonstrated on four SML models, which we successfully replicated from a previous LAK study based on AUC values. Among 21 augmentation techniques, SMOTE-ENN sampling performed the best, improving the average AUC by 0.01 and approximately halving the training time compared to the baseline models. In addition, we compared 99 combinations of chaining 21 techniques, and found minor, although statistically significant, improvements across models when adding noise to SMOTE-ENN (+0.014). Notably, some augmentation techniques significantly lowered predictive performance or increased performance fluctuation related to random chance. This paper's contribution is twofold. Primarily, our empirical findings show that sampling techniques provide the most statistically reliable performance improvements for LA applications of SML, and are computationally more efficient than deep generation methods with complex hyperparameter settings. Second, the LA community may benefit from validating a recent study through independent replication.

Conrad Borchers, Danielle R. Thomas, Jionghao Lin et al. · cmu

Large Language Models (LLMs) like GPT-4o can help automate text classification tasks at low cost and scale. However, there are major concerns about the validity and reliability of LLM outputs. By contrast, human coding is generally more reliable but expensive to procure at scale. In this study, we propose a hybrid solution to leverage the strengths of both. We combine human-coded data and synthetic LLM-produced data to fine-tune a classical machine learning classifier, distilling both into a smaller BERT model. We evaluate our method on a human-coded test set as a validity measure for LLM output quality. In three experiments, we systematically vary LLM-generated samples' size, variety, and consistency, informed by best practices in LLM tuning. Our findings indicate that augmenting datasets with synthetic samples improves classifier performance, with optimal results achieved at an 80% synthetic to 20% human-coded data ratio. Lower temperature settings of 0.3, corresponding to less variability in LLM generations, produced more stable improvements but also limited model learning from augmented samples. In contrast, higher temperature settings (0.7 and above) introduced greater variability in performance estimates and, at times, lower performance. Hence, LLMs may produce more uniform output that classifiers overfit to earlier or produce more diverse output that runs the risk of deteriorating model performance through information irrelevant to the prediction task. Filtering out inconsistent synthetic samples did not enhance performance. We conclude that integrating human and LLM-generated data to improve text classification models in assessment offers a scalable solution that leverages both the accuracy of human coding and the variety of LLM outputs.

Conrad Borchers, Ryan S. Baker

Algorithmic bias continues to be a key concern of learning analytics. We study the statistical properties of the Absolute Between-ROC Area (ABROCA) metric. This fairness measure quantifies group-level differences in classifier performance through the absolute difference in ROC curves. ABROCA is particularly useful for detecting nuanced performance differences even when overall Area Under the ROC Curve (AUC) values are similar. We sample ABROCA under various conditions, including varying AUC differences and class distributions. We find that ABROCA distributions exhibit high skewness dependent on sample sizes, AUC differences, and class imbalance. When assessing whether a classifier is biased, this skewness inflates ABROCA values by chance, even when data is drawn (by simulation) from populations with equivalent ROC curves. These findings suggest that ABROCA requires careful interpretation given its distributional properties, especially when used to assess the degree of bias and when classes are imbalanced.

Frederik Baucks, Robin Schmucker, Conrad Borchers et al.

Curriculum Analytics (CA) studies curriculum structure and student data to ensure the quality of educational programs. One desirable property of courses within curricula is that they are not unexpectedly more difficult for students of different backgrounds. While prior work points to likely variations in course difficulty across student groups, robust methodologies for capturing such variations are scarce, and existing approaches do not adequately decouple course-specific difficulty from students' general performance levels. The present study introduces Differential Course Functioning (DCF) as an Item Response Theory (IRT)-based CA methodology. DCF controls for student performance levels and examines whether significant differences exist in how distinct student groups succeed in a given course. Leveraging data from over 20,000 students at a large public university, we demonstrate DCF's ability to detect inequities in undergraduate course difficulty across student groups described by grade achievement. We compare major pairs with high co-enrollment and transfer students to their non-transfer peers. For the former, our findings suggest a link between DCF effect sizes and the alignment of course content to student home department motivating interventions targeted towards improving course preparedness. For the latter, results suggest minor variations in course-specific difficulty between transfer and non-transfer students. While this is desirable, it also suggests that interventions targeted toward mitigating grade achievement gaps in transfer students should encompass comprehensive support beyond enhancing preparedness for individual courses. By providing more nuanced and equitable assessments of academic performance and difficulties experienced by diverse student populations, DCF could support policymakers, course articulation officers, and student advisors.

Conrad Borchers, Jill-Jênn Vie, Roger Azevedo

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly embedded in AI-based tutoring systems. Can they faithfully model novice reasoning and metacognitive judgments? Existing evaluations emphasize problem-solving accuracy, overlooking the fragmented and imperfect reasoning that characterizes human learning. We evaluate LLMs as novices using 630 think-aloud utterances from multi-step chemistry tutoring problems with problem-solving logs of student hint use, attempts, and problem context. We compare LLM-generated reasoning to human learner utterances under minimal and extended contextual prompting, and assess the models' ability to predict step-level learner success. Although GPT-4.1 generates fluent and contextually appropriate continuations, its reasoning is systematically over-coherent, verbose, and less variable than human think-alouds. These effects intensify with a richer problem-solving context during prompting. Learner performance was consistently overestimated. These findings highlight epistemic limitations of simulating learning with LLMs. We attribute these limitations to LLM training data, including expert-like solutions devoid of expressions of affect and working memory constraints during problem solving. Our evaluation framework can guide future design of adaptive systems that more faithfully support novice learning and self-regulation using generative artificial intelligence.

Danielle R. Thomas, Conrad Borchers, Jionghao Lin et al. · cmu

Tutoring improves student achievement, but identifying and studying what tutoring actions are most associated with student learning at scale based on audio transcriptions is an open research problem. This present study investigates the feasibility and scalability of using generative AI to identify and evaluate specific tutor moves in real-life math tutoring. We analyze 50 randomly selected transcripts of college-student remote tutors assisting middle school students in mathematics. Using GPT-4, GPT-4o, GPT-4-turbo, Gemini-1.5-pro, and LearnLM, we assess tutors' application of two tutor skills: delivering effective praise and responding to student math errors. All models reliably detected relevant situations, for example, tutors providing praise to students (94-98% accuracy) and a student making a math error (82-88% accuracy) and effectively evaluated the tutors' adherence to tutoring best practices, aligning closely with human judgments (83-89% and 73-77%, respectively). We propose a cost-effective prompting strategy and discuss practical implications for using large language models to support scalable assessment in authentic settings. This work further contributes LLM prompts to support reproducibility and research in AI-supported learning.

Danielle R. Thomas, Conrad Borchers, Shambhavi Bhushan et al.

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used to generate feedback, yet their impact on learning remains underexplored, especially compared to existing feedback methods. This study investigates how on-demand LLM-generated explanatory feedback influences learning in seven scenario-based tutor training lessons. Analyzing over 2,600 lesson completions from 885 tutor learners, we compare posttest performance among learners across three groups: learners who received feedback generated by gpt-3.5-turbo, those who declined it, and those without access. All groups received non-LLM corrective feedback. To address potential selection bias-where higher-performing learners may be more inclined to use LLM feedback-we applied propensity scoring. Learners with a higher predicted likelihood of engaging with LLM feedback scored significantly higher at posttest than those with lower propensity. After adjusting for this effect, two out of seven lessons showed statistically significant learning benefits from LLM feedback with standardized effect sizes of 0.28 and 0.33. These moderate effects suggest that the effectiveness of LLM feedback depends on the learners' tendency to seek support. Importantly, LLM feedback did not significantly increase completion time, and learners overwhelmingly rated it as helpful. These findings highlight LLM feedback's potential as a low-cost and scalable way to improve learning on open-ended tasks, particularly in existing systems already providing feedback without LLMs. This work contributes open datasets, LLM prompts, and rubrics to support reproducibility.

Vincent Aleven, Conrad Borchers, Yun Huang et al.

Intelligent tutoring systems (ITSs) are effective in helping students learn; further research could make them even more effective. Particularly desirable is research into how students learn with these systems, how these systems best support student learning, and what learning sciences principles are key in ITSs. CTAT+Tutorshop provides a full stack integrated platform that facilitates a complete research lifecycle with ITSs, which includes using ITS data to discover learner challenges, to identify opportunities for system improvements, and to conduct experimental studies. The platform includes authoring tools to support and accelerate development of ITS, which provide automatic data logging in a format compatible with DataShop, an independent site that supports the analysis of ed tech log data to study student learnings. Among the many technology platforms that exist to support learning sciences research, CTAT+Tutorshop may be the only one that offers researchers the possibility to author elements of ITSs, or whole ITSs, as part of designing studies. This platform has been used to develop and conduct an estimated 147 research studies which have run in a wide variety of laboratory and real-world educational settings, including K-12 and higher education, and have addressed a wide range of research questions. This paper presents five case studies of research conducted on the CTAT+Tutorshop platform, and summarizes what has been accomplished and what is possible for future researchers. We reflect on the distinctive elements of this platform that have made it so effective in facilitating a wide range of ITS research.

Xiaoshan Huang, Conrad Borchers, Jiayi Zhang et al.

Effective collaboration requires teams to manage complex cognitive and emotional states through Socially Shared Regulation of Learning (SSRL). Physiological synchrony (i.e., longitudinal alignment in physiological signals) can indicate these states, but is hard to interpret on its own. We investigate the physiological and conversational dynamics of four medical dyads diagnosing a virtual patient case using an intelligent tutoring system. Semantic shifts in dialogue were correlated with transient physiological synchrony peaks. We also coded utterance segments for SSRL and derived cosine similarity using sentence embeddings. The results showed that activating prior knowledge featured significantly lower semantic similarity than simpler task execution. High physiological synchrony was associated with lower semantic similarity, suggesting that such moments involve exploratory and varied language use. Qualitative analysis triangulated these synchrony peaks as ``pivotal moments'': successful teams synchronized during shared discovery, while unsuccessful teams peaked during shared uncertainty. This research advances human-centered AI by demonstrating how biological signals can be fused with dialogues to understand critical moments in problem solving.

Danielle R. Thomas, Conrad Borchers, Kenneth R. Koedinger

Humans can be notoriously imperfect evaluators. They are often biased, unreliable, and unfit to define "ground truth." Yet, given the surging need to produce large amounts of training data in educational applications using AI, traditional inter-rater reliability (IRR) metrics like Cohen's kappa remain central to validating labeled data. IRR remains a cornerstone of many machine learning pipelines for educational data. Take, for example, the classification of tutors' moves in dialogues or labeling open responses in machine-graded assessments. This position paper argues that overreliance on human IRR as a gatekeeper for annotation quality hampers progress in classifying data in ways that are valid and predictive in relation to improving learning. To address this issue, we highlight five examples of complementary evaluation methods, such as multi-label annotation schemes, expert-based approaches, and close-the-loop validity. We argue that these approaches are in a better position to produce training data and subsequent models that produce improved student learning and more actionable insights than IRR approaches alone. We also emphasize the importance of external validity, for example, by establishing a procedure of validating tutor moves and demonstrating that it works across many categories of tutor actions (e.g., providing hints). We call on the field to rethink annotation quality and ground truth--prioritizing validity and educational impact over consensus alone.

Meng Xia, Robin Schmucker, Conrad Borchers et al.

Mastery learning improves learning proficiency and efficiency. However, the overpractice of skills--students spending time on skills they have already mastered--remains a fundamental challenge for tutoring systems. Previous research has reduced overpractice through the development of better problem selection algorithms and the authoring of focused practice tasks. However, few efforts have concentrated on reducing overpractice through step-level adaptivity, which can avoid resource-intensive curriculum redesign. We propose and evaluate Fast-Forwarding as a technique that enhances existing problem selection algorithms. Based on simulation studies informed by learner models and problem-solving pathways derived from real student data, Fast-Forwarding can reduce overpractice by up to one-third, as it does not require students to complete problem-solving steps if all remaining pathways are fully mastered. Fast-Forwarding is a flexible method that enhances any problem selection algorithm, though its effectiveness is highest for algorithms that preferentially select difficult problems. Therefore, our findings suggest that while Fast-Forwarding may improve student practice efficiency, the size of its practical impact may also depend on students' ability to stay motivated and engaged at higher levels of difficulty.