Christian D. Schunn

Danielle S. Fox, Brenda L. Robles, Elizabeth DiPietro Brovey et al.

While recent research has explored AI tools' ability to classify the quality of mathematical tasks (arXiv:2603.03512), little is known about their capacity to increase the quality of existing tasks. This study investigated whether AI tools could successfully upgrade low-cognitive-demand mathematics tasks. Eleven tools were tested, including six broadly available, general-purpose AI tools (e.g., ChatGPT and Claude) and five tools specialized for mathematics teachers (e.g., Khanmigo, coteach.ai). Using the Task Analysis Guide framework (Stein & Smith, 1998), we prompted AI tools to modify two different types of low-demand mathematical tasks. The prompting strategy aimed to represent likely approaches taken by knowledgeable teachers, rather than extensive optimization to find a more effective prompt (i.e., an optimistic typical outcome). On average, AI tools were only moderately successful: tasks were accurately upgraded only 64% of the time, with different AI tool performance ranging from quite weak (33%) to broadly successful (88%). Specialized tools were only moderately more successful than general-purpose tools. Failure modes included both "undershooting" (maintaining low cognitive demand) and "overshooting" (elevating tasks to an overly ambitious target category that likely would be rejected by teachers). Interestingly, there was a small negative correlation (r = -.35) between whether a given AI tool was able to correctly classify the cognitive demand of tasks and whether the AI was able to upgrade tasks, showing that the ability to modify tasks (i.e., a generative task) represents a distinct capability from the ability to classify them (i.e., judgement using a rubric). These findings have important implications for understanding AI's potential role in curriculum adaptation and highlight the need for specialized approaches to support teachers in modifying instructional materials.

Raquel Coelho, Roy Pea, Christian Schunn et al.

As quantum information science advances and the need for pre-college engagement grows, a critical question remains: How can young learners be prepared to participate in a field so radically different from what they have encountered before? This paper argues that meeting this challenge will require strong interdisciplinary collaboration with the Learning Sciences (LS), a field dedicated to understanding how people learn and designing theory-guided environments to support learning. Drawing on lessons from previous STEM education efforts, we discuss two key contributions of the learning sciences to quantum information science (QIS) education. The first is design-based research, the signature methodology of learning sciences, which can inform the development, refinement, and scaling of effective QIS learning experiences. The second is a framework for reshaping how learners reason about, learn and participate in QIS practices through shifts in knowledge representations that provide new forms of engagement and associated learning. We call for a two-way partnership between quantum information science and the learning sciences, one that not only supports learning in quantum concepts and practices but also improves our understanding of how to teach and support learning in highly complex domains. We also consider potential questions involved in bridging these disciplinary communities and argue that the theoretical and practical benefits justify the effort.