arXiv subjects

Lucile Favero

Publications and source records attributed to Lucile Favero.

7 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

From Substitution to Scaffolding: Breaking the Self-Reinforcing Harm Cycle of AI in Education (and Beyond)

Artificial intelligence is being adopted in educational settings faster than its consequences are understood. We argue that the central risk is misalignment: AI that eliminates human effort erodes the very capacities education is meant to build. We organize this risk into an integrative framework of four interrelated dimensions -cognition, agency, emotional well-being, and ethics- linked by a self-reinforcing cycle where cognitive offloading reduces effort, weakens agency, and compounds emotional and ethical harm. We ground the framework in the perspective of a small cohort of students: an exploratory analysis of 49 International Baccalaureate argumentative essays about the impact of AI reveals that learners perceive these risks, with $80\%$ of essays reporting that AI reliance reduces thinking. At the same time, the essays articulate a consistent vision of the AI the students want: systems that support rather than replace learning by withholding immediate answers, prompting recall, and encouraging reflection through questions instead of solutions. These desiderata closely align with established principles from the learning sciences. Building on these insights, we propose a single design principle, scaffold, do not substitute. We argue that this principle extends beyond education. It represents a broader challenge for the AI ecosystem: any system that mediates human thinking can either weaken human capabilities through substitution or strengthen them through scaffolding. We conclude by outlining a research agenda for developing AI systems that foster enduring human capacity, an imperative not only for learners but, ultimately, for democratic societies.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2026

AI in Education Beyond Learning Outcomes: Cognition, Agency, Emotion, and Ethics

Artificial intelligence (AI) is rapidly being integrated into educational contexts, promising personalized support and increased efficiency. However, growing evidence suggests that the uncritical adoption of AI may produce unintended harms that extend beyond individual learning outcomes to affect broader societal goals. This paper examines the societal implications of AI in education through an integrative framework with four interrelated dimensions: cognition, agency, emotional well-being, and ethics. Drawing on research from education, cognitive science, psychology, and ethics, we synthesize existing evidence to show how AI-driven cognitive offloading, diminished learner agency, emotional disengagement, and surveillance-oriented practices can mutually reinforce one another. We argue that these dynamics risk undermining critical thinking, intellectual autonomy, emotional resilience, and trust, capacities that are foundational both for effective learning and also for democratic participation and informed civic engagement. Moreover, AI's impact is contingent on design and governance: pedagogically aligned, ethically grounded, and human-centered AI systems can scaffold effortful reasoning, support learner agency, and preserve meaningful social interaction. By integrating fragmented strands of prior research into a unified framework, this paper advances the discourse on responsible AI in education and offers actionable implications for educators, designers, and institutions. Ultimately, the paper contends that the central challenge is not whether AI should be used in education, but how it can be designed and governed to support learning while safeguarding the social and civic purposes of education.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2026

Beyond Holistic Scores: Automatic Trait-Based Quality Scoring of Argumentative Essays

Automated Essay Scoring systems have traditionally focused on holistic scores, limiting their pedagogical usefulness, especially in the case of complex essay genres such as argumentative writing. In educational contexts, teachers and learners require interpretable, trait-level feedback that aligns with instructional goals and established rubrics. In this paper, we study trait-based Automatic Argumentative Essay Scoring using two complementary modeling paradigms designed for realistic educational deployment: (1) structured in-context learning with small open-source LLMs, and (2) a supervised, encoder-based BigBird model with a CORAL-style ordinal regression formulation, optimized for long-sequence understanding. We conduct a systematic evaluation on the ASAP++ dataset, which includes essay scores across five quality traits, offering strong coverage of core argumentation dimensions. LLMs are prompted with designed, rubric-aligned in-context examples, along with feedback and confidence requests, while we explicitly model ordinality in scores with the BigBird model via the rank-consistent CORAL framework. Our results show that explicitly modeling score ordinality substantially improves agreement with human raters across all traits, outperforming LLMs and nominal classification and regression-based baselines. This finding reinforces the importance of aligning model objectives with rubric semantics for educational assessment. At the same time, small open-source LLMs achieve a competitive performance without task-specific fine-tuning, particularly for reasoning-oriented traits, while enabling transparent, privacy-preserving, and locally deployable assessment scenarios. Our findings provide methodological, modeling, and practical insights for the design of AI-based educational systems that aim to deliver interpretable, rubric-aligned feedback for argumentative writing.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2025

Do AI tutors empower or enslave learners? Toward a critical use of AI in education

The increasing integration of AI tools in education presents both opportunities and challenges, particularly regarding the development of the students' critical thinking skills. This position paper argues that while AI can support learning, its unchecked use may lead to cognitive atrophy, loss of agency, emotional risks, and ethical concerns, ultimately undermining the core goals of education. Drawing on cognitive science and pedagogy, the paper explores how over-reliance on AI can disrupt meaningful learning, foster dependency and conformity, undermine the students' self-efficacy, academic integrity, and well-being, and raise concerns about questionable privacy practices. It also highlights the importance of considering the students' perspectives and proposes actionable strategies to ensure that AI serves as a meaningful support rather than a cognitive shortcut. The paper advocates for an intentional, transparent, and critically informed use of AI that empowers rather than diminishes the learner.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2025

ELLIS Alicante at CQs-Gen 2025: Winning the critical thinking questions shared task: LLM-based question generation and selection

The widespread adoption of chat interfaces based on Large Language Models (LLMs) raises concerns about promoting superficial learning and undermining the development of critical thinking skills. Instead of relying on LLMs purely for retrieving factual information, this work explores their potential to foster deeper reasoning by generating critical questions that challenge unsupported or vague claims in debate interventions. This study is part of a shared task of the 12th Workshop on Argument Mining, co-located with ACL 2025, focused on automatic critical question generation. We propose a two-step framework involving two small-scale open source language models: a Questioner that generates multiple candidate questions and a Judge that selects the most relevant ones. Our system ranked first in the shared task competition, demonstrating the potential of the proposed LLM-based approach to encourage critical engagement with argumentative texts.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2025

Leveraging Small LLMs for Argument Mining in Education: Argument Component Identification, Classification, and Assessment

Argument mining algorithms analyze the argumentative structure of essays, making them a valuable tool for enhancing education by providing targeted feedback on the students' argumentation skills. While current methods often use encoder or encoder-decoder deep learning architectures, decoder-only models remain largely unexplored, offering a promising research direction. This paper proposes leveraging open-source, small Large Language Models (LLMs) for argument mining through few-shot prompting and fine-tuning. These models' small size and open-source nature ensure accessibility, privacy, and computational efficiency, enabling schools and educators to adopt and deploy them locally. Specifically, we perform three tasks: segmentation of student essays into arguments, classification of the arguments by type, and assessment of their quality. We empirically evaluate the models on the Feedback Prize - Predicting Effective Arguments dataset of grade 6-12 students essays and demonstrate how fine-tuned small LLMs outperform baseline methods in segmenting the essays and determining the argument types while few-shot prompting yields comparable performance to that of the baselines in assessing quality. This work highlights the educational potential of small, open-source LLMs to provide real-time, personalized feedback, enhancing independent learning and writing skills while ensuring low computational cost and privacy.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2024

Enhancing Critical Thinking in Education by means of a Socratic Chatbot

While large language models (LLMs) are increasingly playing a pivotal role in education by providing instantaneous, adaptive responses, their potential to promote critical thinking remains understudied. In this paper, we fill such a gap and present an innovative educational chatbot designed to foster critical thinking through Socratic questioning. Unlike traditional intelligent tutoring systems, including educational chatbots, that tend to offer direct answers, the proposed Socratic tutor encourages students to explore various perspectives and engage in self-reflection by posing structured, thought-provoking questions. Our Socratic questioning is implemented by fine and prompt-tuning the open-source pretrained LLM with a specialized dataset that stimulates critical thinking and offers multiple viewpoints. In an effort to democratize access and to protect the students' privacy, the proposed tutor is based on small LLMs (Llama2 7B and 13B-parameter models) that are able to run locally on off-the-shelf hardware. We validate our approach in a battery of experiments consisting of interactions between a simulated student and the chatbot to evaluate its effectiveness in enhancing critical thinking skills. Results indicate that the Socratic tutor supports the development of reflection and critical thinking significantly better than standard chatbots. Our approach opens the door for improving educational outcomes by cultivating active learning and encouraging intellectual autonomy.

cs.HC↗