Aug 2026· INFORMS Transactions on Education· 0 citations· 23 references
TL;DR
Analysis of student-AI interaction patterns, common sources of error in AI-generated solutions, and students’ perceptions of generative AI in the context of linear programming reveals that whereas AI-generated responses often correctly formulated decision variables, objective functions, and constraints, errors frequently arose during the solution stage.
Abstract
Generative artificial intelligence (AI) is rapidly reshaping the landscape of higher education. However, how students interact with these tools in quantitative learning contexts remains underexplored. This study examines student-AI interaction patterns, common sources of error in AI-generated solutions, and students’ perceptions of generative AI in the context of linear programming. In the assignment, students solved problems manually and then engaged with generative AI, critically reviewing AI-generated outputs through iterations. The results reveal that whereas AI-generated responses often correctly formulated decision variables, objective functions, and constraints, errors frequently arose during the solution stage, particularly in identifying feasible regions and corner points. Students frequently characterized generative AI as conditionally useful: generative AI was regarded as valuable when used appropriately, but insufficient for fostering deeper conceptual learning. Perceived learning benefits were strongly associated with students’ perceptions of reliability, overall experience, and intentions for future use. These findings highlight the importance of student-AI interaction in shaping outcomes and underscore the need to develop students’ ability to guide and critically evaluate AI-generated solutions. The study offers practical insights for instructors integrating AI into quantitative coursework and highlights directions for future research in AI literacy and instructional design.
The rapid evolution of artificial intelligence (AI), particularly generative AI, is reshaping engineering education. This study, part of a broader investigation into stakeholder perceptions of generative AI in engineering education, examines engineering students’ experiences with generative AI, focusing on their percep...
Examination of undergraduate students in an operations management course who first solved a linear programming problem manually and then used GenAI on the same task shows that students can position GenAI differently within the same technical task, from receiving answers to verifying existing reasoning or seeking concep...
A. Jaiswal, Gaurav Nanda· International Journal of STE...· 0 citations
The rapid adoption of artificial intelligence (AI) in higher education raises a critical challenge: how can student learning be assessed when AI systems are readily available to solve complex problems? Designing AI-proof problems that reliably assess student mastery is often infeasible. To address this challenge, thi...
Jarkko Hurme, Lassi Korhonen, Henry Lähteenmäki et al.· Technology, Knowledge and Le...· 0 citations
An assignment developed for a large-enrollment, 100-level, general-education, environmental science course at the University of Arizona that provides students with structured opportunities to experiment with and critically evaluate GenAI tools.
T. Crimmins, K. Prudic· Prompt A Journal of Academic...· 0 citations
It is argued that AI did not break teaching, it revealed aspects of teaching that have long required greater attention and intentionality and should be focused on clarifying the purposes of teaching and learning.
Michael G. Strawser· Journal of Communication Ped...· 0 citations