Searcharxiv⌕ Search

arXiv subjects

Conrad Borchers

Publications and source records attributed to Conrad Borchers.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
arXiv2026

Multimodal Analytics of Cybersecurity Crisis Preparation Exercises: What Predicts Success?

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.

cs.HC↗
arXiv2026

Framing the 5% Problem: Teachers' Perspectives on Persistence in Educational Technology

Adaptive K-12 mathematics platforms often show low sustained student use, a pattern termed the 5% problem. Although prior work has developed analytics and interventions to identify disengagement, less is known about how teachers make sense of persistence challenges in individualized learning classrooms. This study reports on a 90-minute participatory design workshop with 12 U.S. middle school mathematics teachers who use i-Ready Math weekly. Teachers generated needs through open-ended prompts, card sorting, and collective voting. Thematic analysis identified four recurring dimensions of low persistence spanning motivation and buy-in, cognitive roadblocks, resilience under challenge, and contextual barriers. Teachers emphasized the need to identify where students become stuck and recognize silent disengagement, prioritizing support for diagnosis and timely instructional response over aggregate usage metrics. These findings reframe the 5% problem as a situated instructional challenge and suggest a need for teacher-facing systems that support interpretation of student persistence through both cognitive and contextual evidence.

cs.CY↗
arXiv2026

AI-Driven Assessment of Human Tutors: Linking Training Performance to Real-Life Practice

There exist numerous tutor training platforms. However, few provide AI-driven training and evaluation for human tutors based on real-life performance. We present an AI-driven system that assesses both open responses during training and authentic real-life tutoring. Unlike platforms that only assess learning through online training or simulations, our system utilizes Generative AI (Gemini-2.5-pro) to analyze transcriptions of authentic tutoring, measuring the transfer of tutor skills to real-life application. Human tutors instructing students remotely in math (N=86) completed six scenario-based lessons, averaging a significant 7.4% learning gain. Using mixed-effects models across 405 session-to-lesson pairs, we found that training performance significantly predicted real-life transcript scores with an effect size of 0.25 SD. Model comparison (AIC/BIC) indicated averaging open response and multiple choice performance during training predicted real-life tutor performance best, although open responses were comparatively more predictive. Exploratory analysis showed that after training, tutors were significantly more likely to encounter pedagogical opportunities to apply their skills (61.1% to 68.9%) and demonstrated higher execution quality within those opportunities (65.5% to 68.1%). Interrupted time series analysis suggested that these tutor improvements were part of a gradual trend over time rather than an immediate intervention effect of training. We illustrate an AI-driven method to link tutor training with real-life assessment. In doing so, we contribute open datasets, AI prompts, and scoring rubrics to support transparency and reproducibility.

cs.CY↗
arXiv2026

Self-Efficacy and Favorability Shape Learning from Tutoring Systems and Paper Practice

Motivational factors such as self-efficacy and how favorably students feel toward practice play a crucial role in shaping learning, particularly in technology-supported environments. Yet, educational interventions often overlook how these factors interact with practice format. This paper examines the influence of self-efficacy and favorability on learning outcomes across two common practice formats: paper-based and system-based tutoring practice. Using a counterbalanced within-subject design with matched problem sets, we isolate the effect of practice format while modeling motivational differences. Results indicate that students with lower baseline self-efficacy achieved greater learning gains regardless of practice format. Among students with lower baseline self-efficacy, greater favorability toward the tutor was associated with greater learning gains during tutor practice, whereas the pattern differed in paper-based practice. Intelligent Tutoring System (ITS)-based practice did not significantly improve post-training self-efficacy relative to paper-based methods. These findings underscore the potential value of tailoring practice format to students' motivational profiles, as the benefits of tutor- and paper-based practice varied with baseline self-efficacy and favorability. They lay the groundwork for future research on how instructional formats can be aligned more effectively with learners' motivational needs.

cs.CY↗
arXiv2026

Simulating Learners' Task-Selection Strategies and System Constraints in Mastery Learning

Intelligent Tutoring Systems often grant learners shared control over skill and problem selection. This choice brings motivational and metacognitive benefits. At the same time, past literature suggests that learners exhibit diverse preferences and strategies in selecting tasks, for instance, by avoiding challenge. Although underexplored, differences in learner task-selection strategies may interact with mastery learning systems that optimize task-selection based on estimated knowledge, potentially leading to undesirable student-level differences in learning outcomes. Algorithmic constraints on problem selection may help mitigate this issue. However, this possibility has not been comprehensively explored in prior work, in part because testing such constraints in real-world classrooms is costly. We propose a simulation-based framework to observe how varying learner task-selection strategies combined with system constraints shape mastery learning efficiency. Using interaction data from 261 students across two mathematical domains with different problem structures (equation solving, graph interpretation), we simulate common task-selection strategies such as Weakness Targeting and Interleaving, grounded in prior literature. We then evaluate how these strategies affect overpractice as a common measure of mastery learning efficiency. Results show substantial variability in efficiency across strategies, with risk-averse strategies producing higher levels of overpractice, especially for more complex multi-step problems. Targeted system constraints significantly reduce these inefficiencies for maladaptive strategies while having minimal impact on already efficient strategies. Together, these findings demonstrate how simulation grounded in real student data can support data-driven redesign of shared-control tutoring systems prior to classroom deployment.

cs.HC↗
arXiv2026

Push and Pull in Community College Cross-Enrollment: Remoteness, Articulation, and Student Mobility

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.

cs.CY↗
arXiv2026

From Heuristics to Analytics: Forecasting Effort and Progress in Online Learning

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.

cs.LG↗
arXiv2026

Temperature and Persona Shape LLM Agent Consensus With Minimal Accuracy Gains in Qualitative Coding

Large Language Models (LLMs) enable new possibilities for qualitative research at scale, including annotation and qualitative coding of educational data. While LLM-based multi-agent systems (MAS) can emulate human coding workflows, their benefits over single LLM agents for coding remain poorly understood. To that end, we conducted an experimental study of how persona and temperature of component agents of a MAS shapes consensus-building and coding accuracy for dialog segments. LLMs were prompted to code these segments deductively using a mature codebook with 8 codes and high inter-rater reliability derived from prior research. 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 facilitated by educational software. 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 led to robust improvements in coding accuracy. Single agents matched or outperformed MAS consensus in most conditions. Qualitative analysis of MAS collaboration and coding disagreement may, however, improve codebook design and human-AI coding.

cs.CL↗
arXiv2026

Large Language Models as Students Who Think Aloud: Overly Coherent, Verbose, and Confident

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.

cs.CL↗
arXiv2026

Who Decides in AI-Mediated Learning? The Agency Allocation Framework

As AI-mediated learning systems increasingly shape how learners plan, make decisions, 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 at 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.

cs.CY↗
arXiv2026

Understanding Student Effort Using Response-Time Propensities During Problem Solving

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.

cs.CY↗
arXiv2026

Benchmarking Educational LLMs with Analytics: A Case Study on Gender Bias in Feedback

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.

cs.CL↗
arXiv2026

Evaluating a Data-Driven Redesign Process for Intelligent Tutoring Systems

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.

cs.HC↗
arXiv2026

Modernizing Ground Truth: Four Shifts Toward Improving Reliability and Validity in AI in Education

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.

cs.CY↗
arXiv2026

Physiological and Semantic Patterns in Medical Teams Using an Intelligent Tutoring System

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.

cs.AI↗
arXiv2026

Understanding Teacher Revisions of Large Language Model-Generated Feedback

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.

cs.CL↗
arXiv2026

Representation Learning to Study Temporal Dynamics in Tutorial Scaffolding

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.

cs.CL↗
arXiv2026

The Digital Divide in Generative AI: Evidence from Large Language Model Use in College Admissions Essays

Large language models (LLMs) have become popular writing tools among students and may expand access to high-quality feedback for students with less access to traditional writing support. At the same time, LLMs may standardize student voice or invite overreliance. This study examines how adoption of LLM-assisted writing varies across socioeconomic groups and how it relates to outcomes in a high-stakes context: U.S. college admissions. We analyze a de-identified longitudinal dataset of applications to a selective university from 2020 to 2024 (N = 81,663). Estimating LLM use using a distribution-based detector trained on synthetic and historical essays, we tracked how student writing changed as LLM use proliferated, how adoption differed by socioeconomic status (SES), and whether potential benefits translated equitably into admissions outcomes. Using fee-waiver status as a proxy for SES, we observe post-2023 convergence in surface-level linguistic features, with the largest changes in fee-waived and rejected applicants. Estimated LLM use rose sharply in 2024 across all groups, with disproportionately larger increases among lower SES applicants, consistent with an access hypothesis in which LLMs substitute for scarce writing support. However, increased estimated LLM use was more strongly associated with declines in predicted admission probability for lower SES applicants than for higher SES applicants, even after controlling for academic credentials and stylometric features. These findings raise concerns about equity and the validity of essay-based evaluation in an era of AI-assisted writing and provide the first large-scale longitudinal evidence linking LLM adoption, linguistic change, and evaluative outcomes in college admissions.

cs.CY↗