Date
Publisher
arXiv
The adoption of generative AI in education has accelerated dramatically in recent years, with Large Language Models (LLMs) increasingly integrated into learning environments in the hope of providing personalized support that enhances learner engagement and knowledge retention. However, truly personalized support requires access to meaningful Learning Context (LC) regarding who the learner is, what they are trying to understand, and how they are engaging with the material. In this paper, we present a framework for measuring and diagnosing how the LC influences instructional strategy selection in LLM-based tutoring systems. Using psychometrically grounded synthetic learning contexts and a pedagogically grounded decision space, we compare LLM instructional decisions in context-blind and context-aware conditions and quantify their alignment with the pedagogical judgments of subject matter experts. Our results show that, while providing the LC induces systematic, measurable changes in instructional decisions that move LLM policies closer to the subject matter expert policy, substantial misalignment remains. To diagnose this misalignment, we introduce a relevance-impact analysis that reveals which learner characteristics are attended to, ignored, or spuriously influential in LLM instructional decision-making. This analysis, conducted in collaboration with subject matter experts, demonstrates that LC materially shapes LLM instructional planning but does not reliably induce pedagogically appropriate personalization. Our results enable principled evaluation of context-aware LLM systems and provide a foundation for improving personalization through learner characteristic prioritization, pedagogical model tuning, and LC engineering.
Study at a glance
- Question: Does providing student learning context lead an AI model to choose more personalized, expert-aligned instructional strategies?
- Setting and data: 50 synthetic calculus learner profiles based on survey metrics, evaluated across instructional strategies against judgments from two expert calculus instructors.
- Method: Model evaluation using controlled diagnostic probes and leave-one-out feature analysis (Personalization Policy Probe).
Why it matters
Personalized support requires meaningful learning context about who learners are and how they engage. However, it is unclear whether providing context induces genuine pedagogical adaptation in AI instructional planning or merely introduces superficial variation.
Key findings
- Providing learning context consistently shifted the model toward more learner-centered instructional strategies, reducing deviation from expert choices across all 50 synthetic learners.
- Even with context provided, the model's instructional choices remained substantially less learner-centered than expert planning, showing persistent personalization gaps.
- The model showed no reliable relationship between an attribute's pedagogical relevance and its influence on planning, sometimes ignoring relevant traits or being swayed by irrelevant information.
Summary drafted with AI from the full paper and may contain errors. See the full paper for details.
What is the application?
Who is the user?
Who age?
Why use AI?
Study design
