arXiv preprint ·
Examining Variation in How Guided AI Tutors Resolve Student Impasses
- Published
- Source
- arXiv preprint, posted before peer review
- Original
- Read it at arXiv
- Topics
Abstract
When a student is stuck, a tutor faces the assistance dilemma: help given too early can hinder productive struggle, while help withheld too long leaves the student in a frustrating, persistent impasse (i.e., wheel spinning). Generative AI tutors increasingly use guardrails restricting answer-giving, yet little is known about how such tutors behave once an impasse persists. We analyze 20,462 student turns from 1,260 authentic sessions with a guided LLM chemistry tutor, identifying 6,630 impasse turns of three major types: conceptual errors, expressed uncertainty, or help-seeking. We then used these impasses to simulate three tutoring conditions to study variation in AI tutor guidance through impasses: baseline, no-direct-answer, and guided tutor. For a sample of 150 impasses, prompt specificity changed pedagogy: a baseline tutor provided the answer directly in 50.7% of responses, a no-direct-answer tutor asked a follow-up question every time, and the guided tutor responded in a wide variety of ways depending on the context. We then analyzed impasse trajectories in authentic interactions, finding that each additional impasse turn lowered the odds of next-turn recovery by 12.7% (AOR = 0.873, p < .001), and early dropouts were caught in recursive concept elicitation before reaching execution. The benefit of questioning decayed as impasses persisted (scripted question x depth AOR = 0.78; follow-up x depth AOR = 0.83), whereas addressing the student's error grew more beneficial (AOR = 1.14); after a failed scripted question, repeating it was followed by recovery in 28.1% of cases, compared with 39.8% when the tutor addressed the error instead. For learning analytics, these findings identify impasse depth and type as observable, turn-level dialogue signals that analytics can use to trigger graduated, state-sensitive assistance in real time.
The authors’ abstract, as arXiv lists it. arXiv’s listings, abstracts included, are free for anyone to reuse.
Read it on ReadSearch
Each opens after you create an account, and brings you back to this paper.
More in Artificial Intelligence
From Retrieval to Reasoning: Agentic Mechanism Prediction from Cell Painting Profiles
ReGain: Restoring Subject Fidelity in Personalization on Synthetic Images
Longer Records, Broader Invariance: The Hidden Scaling Problem in Longitudinal Contrastive Learning
Unveiling the Value of Motion for Cinematic Camera Trajectories
FineART: Fine-Grained Annotated Robotic Trajectory Dataset and Vision-Language-Action Model for Bimanual Manipulation
Get the few papers worth your time in Artificial Intelligence every morning.
ReadSearch reads the new papers in your field each day and brings you the few worth reading, each with its key finding in a sentence.