Your Students Don't Use LLMs Like You Wish They Did
Educational NLP systems are typically evaluated using engagement metrics and satisfaction surveys, which are at best a proxy for meeting pedagogical goals. We introduce six computational metrics for automated evaluation of pedagogical alignment in student-AI dialogue. We validate our metrics through analysis of 12,650 messages across 500 conversations from four courses. Using our metrics, we identify a fundamental misalignment: educators design conversational tutors for sustained learning dialog
Record details
Published: 26 April 2026
Source: arXiv
Category: Research
Topics: Safety & alignment · Children & education
Retrieved: 14 July 2026
Related evidence
These records share source-supplied organisations, an exact publisher byline, automatic topics or regions. The reason is shown on every link; related does not mean supporting, agreeing with or verifying this record.
Sustained Gradient Alignment Mediates Subliminal Learning in a Multi-Step Setting: Evidence from MNIST Auxiliary Logit Distillation Experiment
arXiv · 28 April 2026
Reasoning-targeted Jailbreak Attacks on Large Reasoning Models via Semantic Triggers and Psychological Framing
arXiv · 17 April 2026
Brainrot: Deskilling and Addiction are Overlooked AI Risks
arXiv · 5 May 2026
The Possibility of Artificial Intelligence Becoming a Subject and the Alignment Problem
arXiv · 16 April 2026
A Testable Certificate for Constant Collapse in Teacher-Guided VAEs
arXiv · 7 May 2026
Validity-Calibrated Reasoning Distillation
arXiv · 14 April 2026
How to cite this record
ethics.ai (26 April 2026), “Your Students Don't Use LLMs Like You Wish They Did,” evidence record 5357, https://ethics.ai/record/5357 (originally published by arXiv).
Use and limitations
This page is a stable index and citation surface for a source record. ethics.ai did not author the underlying report and has not independently verified every claim. Automatic topics may be imperfect. For consequential use, quote and cite the original publisher.