Rene Kizilcec

Kirk Vanacore, Danielle R Thomas, Digory Smith et al.

This paper introduces a scalable causal inference framework for estimating the immediate, session-level effects of on-demand human tutoring embedded within adaptive learning systems. Because students seek assistance at moments of difficulty, conventional evaluation is confounded by self-selection and time-varying knowledge states. We address these challenges by integrating principled analytic sample construction with Deep Knowledge Tracing (DKT) to estimate latent mastery, followed by doubly robust estimation using Causal Forests. Applying this framework to over 5,000 middle-school mathematics tutoring sessions, we find that requesting human tutoring increases next-problem correctness by approximately 4 percentage points and accuracy on the subsequent skill encountered by approximately 3 percentage points, suggesting that the effects of tutoring have proximal transfer across knowledge components. This effect is robust to various forms of model specification and potential unmeasured confounders. Notably, these effects exhibit significant heterogeneity across sessions and students, with session-level effect estimates ranging from $-20.25pp$ to $+19.91pp$. Our follow-up analyses suggest that typical behavioral indicators, such as student talk time, do not consistently correlate with high-impact sessions. Furthermore, treatment effects are larger for students with lower prior mastery and slightly smaller for low-SES students. This framework offers a rigorous, practical template for the evaluation and continuous improvement of on-demand human tutoring, with direct applications for emerging AI tutoring systems.

Jinsook Lee, Chris Brooks, Renzhe Yu et al.

To measure bias, we encourage teams to consider using AUC Gap: the absolute difference between the highest and lowest test AUC for subgroups (e.g., gender, race, SES, prior knowledge). It is agnostic to the AI/ML algorithm used and it captures the disparity in model performance for any number of subgroups, which enables non-binary fairness assessments such as for intersectional identity groups. The teams use a wide range of AI/ML models in pursuit of a common goal of doubling math achievement in low-income middle schools. Ensuring that the models, which are trained on datasets collected in many different contexts, do not introduce or amplify biases is important for achieving the goal. We offer here a versatile and easy-to-compute measure of model bias for all the teams in order to create a common benchmark and an analytical basis for sharing what strategies have worked for different teams.

Zhuqian Zhou, Kirk Vanacore, Tamisha Thompson et al.

Understanding what makes tutoring effective requires methods for systematically analyzing tutors' instructional actions during learning interactions. This paper presents a tutor move taxonomy designed to support large-scale analysis of tutoring dialogue within the National Tutoring Observatory. The taxonomy provides a structured annotation framework for labeling tutors' instructional moves during one-on-one tutoring sessions. We developed the taxonomy through a hybrid deductive-inductive process. First, we synthesized research from cognitive science, the learning sciences, classroom discourse analysis, and intelligent tutoring systems to construct a preliminary framework of tutoring moves. We then refined the taxonomy through iterative coding of authentic tutoring transcripts conducted by expert annotators with extensive instructional and qualitative research experience. The resulting taxonomy organizes tutoring behaviors into four categories: tutoring support, learning support, social-emotional and motivational support, and logistical support. Learning support moves are further organized along a spectrum of student engagement, distinguishing between moves that elicit student reasoning and those that provide direct explanation or answers. By defining tutoring dialogue in terms of discrete instructional actions, the taxonomy enables scalable annotation using AI, computational modeling of tutoring strategies, and empirical analysis of how tutoring behaviors relate to learning outcomes.

Yann Hicke, Jadon Geathers, Niroop Rajashekar et al.

Medical education faces challenges in scalability, accessibility, and consistency, particularly in clinical skills training for physician-patient communication. Traditional simulation-based learning, while effective, is resource-intensive, difficult to schedule, and often highly variable in feedback quality. Through a collaboration between AI, learning science, and medical education experts, we co-developed MedSimAI, an AI-powered simulation platform that enables deliberate practice, self-regulated learning (SRL), and automated assessment through interactive patient encounters. Leveraging large language models (LLMs), MedSimAI generates realistic clinical interactions and provides immediate, structured feedback using established medical evaluation frameworks such as the Master Interview Rating Scale (MIRS). In a pilot study with 104 first-year medical students, we examined engagement, conversation patterns, and user perceptions. Students found MedSimAI beneficial for repeated, realistic patient-history practice. Conversation analysis revealed that certain higher-order skills were often overlooked, though students generally performed systematic histories and empathic listening. By integrating unlimited practice opportunities, real-time AI assessment, and SRL principles, MedSimAI addresses key limitations of traditional simulation-based training, making high-quality clinical education more accessible and scalable.

Nicolas Acevedo, Carmen Cortez, Chris Brooks et al.

Distribution shift is a common situation in machine learning tasks, where the data used for training a model is different from the data the model is applied to in the real world. This issue arises across multiple technical settings: from standard prediction tasks, to time-series forecasting, and to more recent applications of large language models (LLMs). This mismatch can lead to performance reductions, and can be related to a multiplicity of factors: sampling issues and non-representative data, changes in the environment or policies, or the emergence of previously unseen scenarios. This brief focuses on the definition and detection of distribution shifts in educational settings. We focus on standard prediction problems, where the task is to learn a model that takes in a series of input (predictors) $X=(x_1,x_2,...,x_m)$ and produces an output $Y=f(X)$.

Josh Gardner, Renzhe Yu, Quan Nguyen et al.

Modern machine learning increasingly supports paradigms that are multi-institutional (using data from multiple institutions during training) or cross-institutional (using models from multiple institutions for inference), but the empirical effects of these paradigms are not well understood. This study investigates cross-institutional learning via an empirical case study in higher education. We propose a framework and metrics for assessing the utility and fairness of student dropout prediction models that are transferred across institutions. We examine the feasibility of cross-institutional transfer under real-world data- and model-sharing constraints, quantifying model biases for intersectional student identities, characterizing potential disparate impact due to these biases, and investigating the impact of various cross-institutional ensembling approaches on fairness and overall model performance. We perform this analysis on data representing over 200,000 enrolled students annually from four universities without sharing training data between institutions. We find that a simple zero-shot cross-institutional transfer procedure can achieve similar performance to locally-trained models for all institutions in our study, without sacrificing model fairness. We also find that stacked ensembling provides no additional benefits to overall performance or fairness compared to either a local model or the zero-shot transfer procedure we tested. We find no evidence of a fairness-accuracy tradeoff across dozens of models and transfer schemes evaluated. Our auditing procedure also highlights the importance of intersectional fairness analysis, revealing performance disparities at the intersection of sensitive identity groups that are concealed under one-dimensional analysis.