The pursuit of personalized education has led to the integration of Large Language Models (LLMs) in developing intelligent tutoring systems. To better understand and adapt to individual student needs, including their misconceptions, LLMs need to be trained on extensive datasets of student-tutor dialogues. Our research uncovers a fundamental challenge in this approach: the “Student Data Paradox”. This paradox emerges when LLMs, trained on student data to understand learner behavior, inadvertently compromise their own factual knowledge and reasoning abilities. We investigate this paradox by training state-of-the-art language models on student-tutor dialogue datasets and evaluating their performance across multiple benchmarks. These benchmarks assess various aspects of language model capabilities, including reasoning, truthfulness, and common sense understanding. Our findings reveal significant declines in the models’ performance across these diverse benchmarks, indicating a broad impact on their capabilities when trained to model student behavior. Our research makes two primary contributions: (1) empirical demonstration of the Student Data Paradox through quantitative analysis of model performance, and (2) introduction of “hallucination tokens” as a mitigation strategy. These tokens, while improving performance, highlight the persistent challenge of balancing accurate student behavior modeling with maintaining the LLM’s integrity as an educational tool.This study emphasizes the need for innovative solutions to reconcile the conflicting goals of faithfully understanding diverse student cognition while preserving the model’s ability to provide accurate information and guidance.

This paper introduces MalAlgoQA, a novel dataset designed to evaluate the counterfactual reasoning capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs) through a pedagogical approach. The dataset comprises mathematics and reading comprehension questions, each accompanied by four answer choices and their corresponding rationales. At the heart of MalAlgoQA are “malgorithms” - rationales behind incorrect answer choices that represent flawed yet logically coherent reasoning paths. These malgorithms serve as counterfactual scenarios, allowing us to assess an LLM’s ability to identify and analyze flawed reasoning patterns. We propose the Malgorithm Identification task, where LLMs are assessed based on their ability to identify corresponding malgorithm given an incorrect answer choice. To evaluate the model performance, we introduce two metrics: Algorithm Identification Accuracy (AIA) for correct answer rationale identification, and Malgorithm Identification Accuracy (MIA) for incorrect answer rationale identification. Our experiments reveal that state-of-the-art LLMs exhibit significant performance drops in MIA compared to AIA, highlighting the challenges in counterfactual reasoning.Surprisingly, we find that the chain-of-thought prompting technique not only fails to consistently enhance MIA but can sometimes lead to underperformance compared to simple prompting. These findings have important implications for developing LLMs with improved counterfactual reasoning, particularly relevant for AI-powered tutoring systems, where identifying and addressing student misconceptions is essential. MalAlgoQA dataset is available here.

We present a design framework called Conversational Learning with Analytical Step-by-Step Strategies (CLASS) for building advanced Intelligent Tutoring Systems (ITS) powered by high-performance Large Language Models (LLMs). The CLASS framework empowers ITS with two key capabilities. First, through a carefully curated scaffolding dataset, CLASS equips ITS with essential problem-solving strategies, enabling it to provide tutor-like, step-by-step guidance to students. Second, by using a dynamic conversational dataset, CLASS assists ITS in facilitating natural language interactions, fostering engaging student-tutor conversations. The CLASS framework also provides valuable insights into ITS’s internal decision-making process which allows seamless integration of user feedback, thus enabling continuous refinement and improvement. We also present a proof-of-concept ITS, referred to as SPOCK, which is trained using the CLASS framework with a focus on introductory college level biology content. A carefully constructed protocol was developed for SPOCK’s preliminary evaluation, examining aspects such as the factual accuracy and relevance of its responses. Experts in the field of biology offered favorable remarks, particularly highlighting SPOCK’s capability to break down questions into manageable subproblems and provide encouraging responses to students.

In educational applications, knowledge tracing refers to the problem of estimating students’ time-varying concept/skill mastery level from their past responses to questions and predicting their future performance.One key limitation of most existing knowledge tracing methods is that they treat student responses to questions as binary-valued, i.e., whether they are correct or incorrect. Response correctness analysis/prediction is straightforward, but it ignores important information regarding mastery, especially for open-ended questions.In contrast, exact student responses can provide much more information.In this paper, we conduct the first exploration int open-ended knowledge tracing (OKT) by studying the new task of predicting students’ exact open-ended responses to questions.Our work is grounded in the domain of computer science education with programming questions. We develop an initial solution to the OKT problem, a student knowledge-guided code generation approach, that combines program synthesis methods using language models with student knowledge tracing methods. We also conduct a series of quantitative and qualitative experiments on a real-world student code dataset to validate and demonstrate the promise of OKT.