Pith. sign in

REVIEW 9 cited by

Generative AI for Education (GAIED): Advances, Opportunities, and Challenges

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2402.01580 v2 pith:BPQWAGTW submitted 2024-02-02 cs.CY cs.AI

classification cs.CYcs.AI
keywords gaiedworkshoparticleeducationgenerativeorganizedactivitiesadvances
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

This survey article has grown out of the GAIED (pronounced "guide") workshop organized by the authors at the NeurIPS 2023 conference. We organized the GAIED workshop as part of a community-building effort to bring together researchers, educators, and practitioners to explore the potential of generative AI for enhancing education. This article aims to provide an overview of the workshop activities and highlight several future research directions in the area of GAIED.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 9 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. When AI Is Wrong on Purpose: How Students Respond to Buggy GenAI Code

    cs.SE 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.5 of 10

    Injected near-miss GenAI bugs drive CS1 students to localized code edits and higher immediate success, while natural failures drive prompt refinement, jointly supporting specification and verification practice.

  2. Understanding Student Perceptions, Mistakes, and Debugging Approaches when Solving Natural Language Programming Tasks

    cs.CY 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Novices solving dialogue-based Prompt Problems omit key specification details and recover mainly by clarifying intent, not by tracing generated code or tests.

  3. Reflection-Satisfaction Tradeoff: Investigating Impact of Reflection on Student Engagement with AI-Generated Programming Hints

    cs.CY 2025-12 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Reflection prompts that produce deeper student reflection are associated with lower satisfaction with AI-generated hints, with no measurable gain in immediate problem-solving performance.

  4. MusicScaffold: Bridging Machine Efficiency and Human Growth in Adolescent Creative Education through Generative AI

    cs.HC 2025-09 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    MusicScaffold reports that scaffolding generative AI with symbolic explanations and reflective refinement improves 12-14 year olds' structured music expression, strategic adjustments, and self-efficacy compared with d...

  5. Plan More, Debug Less: Applying Metacognitive Theory to AI-Assisted Programming Education

    cs.CY 2025-09 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A classroom study of 102 students finds that requesting AI-generated planning hints is associated with better solving outcomes, while debugging hints are over-used and optimization hints under-used.

  6. A Comparative Study of Student Perspectives on Technical Writing Feedback Quality: Evaluating LLMs, SLMs, and Humans in Computer Science Topics

    cs.HC 2025-12 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Students rated locally-run Llama-3.1 feedback roughly on par with GPT-4 and often above human TAs in technical courses, but preferred human feedback for specialized writing.

  7. Humanizing Automated Programming Feedback: Fine-Tuning Generative Models with Student-Written Feedback

    cs.CY 2025-09 reject novelty 5.0 of 10

    Fine-tuning small open language models on student-written feedback produces shorter and more accurate feedback than prompt engineering on the same 30 programs, but the test set overlaps the training data.

  8. Partnering with AI: A Pedagogical Feedback System for LLM Integration into Programming Education

    cs.CY 2025-07 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    A multi-agent LLM feedback system for Python programming, built on pedagogical principles of mastery and progress, earned positive ratings from eight teachers though it cannot replace human context.

  9. Intent Matters: Enhancing AI Tutoring with Fine-Grained Pedagogical Intent Annotation

    cs.CL 2025-06 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Fine-tuning a math tutor model on 11 fine-grained pedagogical intents instead of 4 broad ones gave better automatic scores and a modest human preference in a small evaluation.

Pith tools