Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 cited by

AI Meets the Classroom: When Do Large Language Models Harm Learning?

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 2409.09047 v2 pith:HUUOKDQM submitted 2024-08-29 cs.CY cs.AIcs.HCcs.LG

classification cs.CYcs.AIcs.HCcs.LG
keywords llmslearningstudentseffectincreaseactivitieslanguagelarge
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

The effect of large language models (LLMs) in education is debated: Previous research shows that LLMs can help as well as hurt learning. In two pre-registered and incentivized laboratory experiments, we find no effect of LLMs on overall learning outcomes. In exploratory analyses and a field study, we provide evidence that the effect of LLMs on learning outcomes depends on usage behavior. Students who substitute some of their learning activities with LLMs (e.g., by generating solutions to exercises) increase the volume of topics they can learn about but decrease their understanding of each topic. Students who complement their learning activities with LLMs (e.g., by asking for explanations) do not increase topic volume but do increase their understanding. We also observe that LLMs widen the gap between students with low and high prior knowledge. While LLMs show great potential to improve learning, their use must be tailored to the educational context and students' needs.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. OpenAlex reports about 9 citations worldwide. Full citation record

  1. Generative AI Availability, Grades, and Student Satisfaction at a Large University

    cs.CY 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    In a large-U.S.-university panel, courses with more GenAI-susceptible assessment weight show no significant post-ChatGPT rise in grades, withdrawal, or failure once pandemic effects are modeled; satisfaction effects a...

  2. Artificial or Human Intelligence?

    econ.TH 2025-09 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A theoretical model shows that AI's sharp capability cutoff and hallucination rate create a discontinuous gap in student ability around the AI frontier, and that AI-free assignments can correct students' overestimatio...

  3. Structured Prompts, Better Outcomes? Exploring the Effects of a Structured Interface with ChatGPT in a Graduate Robotics Course

    cs.CY 2025-07 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    A structured prompting interface temporarily increased clear code-focused prompts and self-written input, but behaviors did not transfer to free ChatGPT use, and learning and performance did not improve.

Pith tools