AI Misuse in Education Is a Measurement Problem: Toward a Learning Visibility Framework

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2603.07834v1
• Date: Sun, 08 Mar 2026 22:35:09 GMT
• Title: AI Misuse in Education Is a Measurement Problem: Toward a Learning Visibility Framework
• Abstract summary: This paper reframes AI misuse in education as a measurement problem rooted in the loss of visibility into the learning process.<n>Rather than promoting surveillance, the framework emphasizes transparency and shared evidence as foundations for ethical AI integration in classroom settings.
• Score: 2.3412211209700997
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: The rapid integration of conversational AI systems into educational settings has intensified ethical concerns about academic integrity, fairness, and students' cognitive development. Institutional responses have largely centered on AI detection tools and restrictive policies, yet such approaches have proven unreliable and ethically contentious. This paper reframes AI misuse in education not primarily as a detection problem, but as a measurement problem rooted in the loss of visibility into the learning process. When AI enters the assessment loop, educators often retain access to final outputs but lose valuable insight into how those outputs were produced. Drawing on research in cognitive offloading, learning analytics, and multimodal timeline reconstruction, we propose the Learning Visibility Framework, grounded in three principles: clear specification and modeling of acceptable AI use, recognition of learning processes as assessable evidence alongside outcomes, and the establishment of transparent timelines of student activity. Rather than promoting surveillance, the framework emphasizes transparency and shared evidence as foundations for ethical AI integration in classroom settings. By shifting focus from adversarial detection toward process visibility, this work offers a principled pathway for aligning AI use with educational values while preserving trust and transparency between students and educators

Related papers

• Evaluation in the Age of AI: Output as Evidence of Learning [0.0]
  The rapid adoption of artificial intelligence (AI) has disrupted how learning is demonstrated and evaluated in higher education.<n>This paper examines the ethical challenges of educational evaluation in the age of AI from a university-level perspective.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-23T23:40:30Z)
• Toward AI-Resilient Assessment in Computer Science Courses in an AI-Native World [29.886304642534743]
  AI-native course assessments should grade students by their ability to achieve outcomes beyond a strong AI baseline.<n>This paper proposes a minimal formal framework for this goal.<n>We describe an AI-resilient approximate-membership assignment centered on Bloom filters for COMP 480/580 at Rice University.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-16T04:54:15Z)
• The Pedagogy of AI Mistakes: Fostering Higher-Order Thinking [26.81026121718816]
  We argue that instructors can engage students in the fundamental processes of higher-order thinking by framing AI as a learning companion''<n>We examine how structured interaction with AI-generated errors supports metacognitive engagement, reinforces disciplinary rigor, and relates to students' perceived AI literacy and subject-matter competency.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-06T21:50:46Z)
• Mathematical Modelling of Ethical AI Use in Higher Education: A Coordination Game Framework for Future-Facing Learning [7.3864557762003615]
  This paper reframes student AI use in assessment as a coordination problem shaped by peer expectations and assessment design.<n>We use analytical results and finite-population simulations to reveal threshold-driven behavioural transitions in student AI use.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-23T21:21:14Z)
• Who Is Doing the Thinking? AI as a Dynamic Cognitive Partner: A Learner-Informed Framework [0.0]
  This study proposes a framework positioning AI as a dynamic cognitive partner whose function shifts across learning situations.<n>We identified nine interrelated dimensions through which learners described AI as partnering with their cognition.<n>Students distinguished between productive support that extends understanding and unproductive reliance that replaces cognitive effort, indicating situational awareness of when AI should and should not be used.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-17T15:07:06Z)
• Safeguarding Privacy: Privacy-Preserving Detection of Mind Wandering and Disengagement Using Federated Learning in Online Education [53.25191965774678]
  We propose a framework exploiting cross-device federated learning to address different manifestations of behavioral and cognitive disengagement during remote learning.<n>We fit video-based cognitive disengagement detection models using facial expressions and gaze features.<n>Our results show great promise for privacy-preserving educational technologies promoting learner engagement.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-10T15:40:01Z)
• Understanding AI Trustworthiness: A Scoping Review of AIES & FAccT Articles [41.419459280691605]
  Trustworthy AI serves as a foundational pillar for two major AI ethics conferences: AIES and FAccT.<n>This scoping review aims to examine how the AIES and FAccT communities conceptualize, measure, and validate AI trustworthiness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-24T09:40:38Z)
• AI-Educational Development Loop (AI-EDL): A Conceptual Framework to Bridge AI Capabilities with Classical Educational Theories [8.500617875591633]
  This study introduces the AI-Educational Development Loop (AI-EDL), a theory-driven framework that integrates classical learning theories with human-in-the-loop artificial intelligence (AI)<n>The framework emphasizes transparency, self-regulated learning, and pedagogical oversight.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-01T15:44:19Z)
• Evaluating AI-Powered Learning Assistants in Engineering Higher Education: Student Engagement, Ethical Challenges, and Policy Implications [0.2099922236065961]
  This study evaluates the Educational AI Hub, an AI-powered learning framework, implemented in undergraduate civil and environmental engineering courses at a large R1 public university.<n>Students valued the AI assistant for its accessibility and comfort, with nearly half reporting greater ease using it than seeking help from instructors or teaching assistants.<n>Ethical uncertainty, particularly around institutional policy and academic integrity, emerged as a key barrier to full engagement.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-06T03:02:49Z)
• Fairness in Reinforcement Learning with Bisimulation Metrics [45.674943127750595]
  By maximizing their reward without consideration of fairness, AI agents can introduce disparities in their treatment of groups or individuals.<n>We propose a novel approach that leverages bisimulation metrics to learn reward functions and observation dynamics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-22T18:23:06Z)
• Benchmarking Vision Language Model Unlearning via Fictitious Facial Identity Dataset [92.99416966226724]
  We introduce Facial Identity Unlearning Benchmark (FIUBench), a novel VLM unlearning benchmark designed to robustly evaluate the effectiveness of unlearning algorithms.<n>We apply a two-stage evaluation pipeline that is designed to precisely control the sources of information and their exposure levels.<n>Through the evaluation of four baseline VLM unlearning algorithms within FIUBench, we find that all methods remain limited in their unlearning performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-05T23:26:10Z)
• FairAIED: Navigating Fairness, Bias, and Ethics in Educational AI Applications [8.443431821420537]
  The integration of AI in education holds immense potential for personalizing learning experiences and transforming instructional practices.<n>As researchers have sought to understand and mitigate these biases, a growing body of work has emerged examining fairness in educational AI.<n>This survey provides a comprehensive systematic review of algorithmic fairness within educational AI.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-26T13:59:20Z)
• The Rise of Artificial Intelligence in Educational Measurement: Opportunities and Ethical Challenges [2.569083526579529]
  AI in education raises ethical concerns regarding validity, reliability, transparency, fairness, and equity. Various stakeholders, including educators, policymakers, and organizations, have developed guidelines to ensure ethical AI use in education. In this paper, a diverse group of AIME members examines the ethical implications of AI-powered tools in educational measurement.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-27T05:28:40Z)
• Learning to Prompt in the Classroom to Understand AI Limits: A pilot study [35.06607166918901]
  Large Language Models (LLM) and the derived chatbots, like ChatGPT, have highly improved the natural language processing capabilities of AI systems. However, excitement has led to negative sentiments, even as AI methods demonstrate remarkable contributions. A pilot educational intervention was performed in a high school with 21 students.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-04T07:51:37Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.