Papers for
training program designers
Papers whose findings have a practical use for this group, as judged from the abstract. Open a paper to read what it means in practice.
Diagnostic method improves predicting student learning and skills over time
DIKT: A Diagnostic and Interpretable Knowledge Tracing Framework for Prediction and Model-based Learning Analysis
Abstract: Knowledge tracing is a key component of intelligent educational systems. However, most existing methods mainly focus on response prediction, providing limited support for explaining predicted outcomes and improving students'learning states. This paper proposes Diagnostic and Interpretable Knowledge Tracing (DIKT), which integrates response prediction, skill-level diagnosis, and model-based learning analysis. DIKT generates bounded cognitive-state trajectories and decomposes the final response probability into skill-wise probabilities. The trajectories reveal students'evolving strengths and weaknesses, while the skill-wise probabilities identify the skills that most strongly constrain the prediction. Based on these diagnostic results, DIKT supports direct cognitive-state intervention and effective-learning-duration-based what-if analysis to examine how hypothetical adjustments affect current predictions and subsequent state evolution. DIKT combines Bayesian multi-head attention, conditional variational recurrent inference, a logistic-growth decoder, and multiplicative skill-wise prediction. Experiments on three benchmark datasets show that DIKT outperforms all evaluated baselines, with an average absolute AUC gain of 2.04 percentage points. Other experiments further demonstrate that DIKT supports educationally meaningful diagnostic analysis and provides informative diagnostic indicators for downstream applications, extending knowledge tracing from response prediction to interpretable diagnosis and model-based learning analysis.
LLM tutors can improve learning but require careful setup
Do LLM Tutors Actually Teach? A Process-Centered Synthesis of the Tutoring Loop
Abstract: Large language models can produce fluent tu- toring dialogue, but whether they actually help students learn remains unclear. We present a process-centered synthesis of LLM tutoring that follows the path from learner-state infer- ence to pedagogical action, tutor training, eval- uation, and student simulation. This view ex- poses a central gap: implementing a tutoring component does not establish that it works or that its outputs meaningfully affect later stages. A structured study-level audit shows that peda- gogical evaluation is common, while evidence becomes much thinner for learner-conditioned intervention, human learning gains, and espe- cially transfer or delayed retention. Human studies nevertheless provide a conditional posi- tive result: LLM tutors can improve learning, but benefits depend on pedagogical structure, learner engagement, and how learning is mea- sured. We argue that progress requires validat- ing the interfaces between tutoring stages, not only improving individual components.