Education news October 2026
Mathematics
Slow math: Kids may learn more when AI makes them review mistakes - A new study of more than 6,000 middle schoolers in Tennessee found that students learned slightly more math when an AI tutor guided them through mistakes and required them to show mastery by answering correctly three times in a row. The improvement was modest and mostly limited to easier questions, suggesting AI may be most helpful when it slows students down and encourages careful review rather than rushing to answers.
Artificial intelligence makes many tasks faster and easier. But a new study suggests that students may learn more when AI makes them slow down.
In an experiment involving more than 6,000 middle schoolers in Tennessee, students learned slightly more math when an AI tutor walked them through their mistakes and then required them to demonstrate the same skill correctly three times in a row before moving on.
Academic researchers tested four approaches to practicing fractions. Students were randomly assigned to receive either conventional computer-based instruction or the same software with an AI tutor.
Within each of those groups, half the students had to correctly answer practice questions covering the same skill three times in a row if they made a mistake.
Students used software built by researchers, which was similar to Khan Academy’s videos and exercises, once for 50 minutes during math class.
A week later, they took a 15-minute test to measure how much they retained.
The winning combination wasn’t the addition of AI tutoring alone, but AI tutoring plus repetition, with the idea that students needed to stick with the skill to demonstrate some level of mastery.
The students who practiced math with this AI-enhanced “mastery learning” approach scored about 3 percentage points higher than students receiving conventional computerized instruction.
The advantage was small.
“I don’t want to jump out and say we’ve demonstrated that AI is going to be the game changer that we hope it is,” said Philip Oreopoulos, lead author of the study and an economist at the University of Toronto.
“But it might be the first kind of evidence that shows there’s at least some hints that it has some positive value against no AI at all.”
Students didn’t get answers from Khanmigo. They didn’t want its questions, either - A new study of Khanmigo, Khan Academy’s AI tutor, found that while students in Tennessee middle schools who used Khan Academy did somewhat better in math, the AI assistant itself did not appear to add extra benefit. Researchers said many students tried the chatbot at first but stopped using it when it would not simply give them answers, showing that student engagement remains a major challenge for AI tutoring.
Soon after the introduction of ChatGPT in November 2022, students figured out how to use the chatbot as an answer machine, getting it to do their school work for them. Not surprisingly, that shortcut harmed student learning and led to lower test scores.
AI enthusiasts sought a solution. The chatbots could easily be instructed to act more like a human tutor, withholding answers, providing hints and guiding students with questions.
Khan Academy created one of these “Socratic-method” chatbots, christened it “Khanmigo,” and released it in 2023.
But a new study that came out last month suggests that creating an AI tutor is only one hurdle among many in helping children improve their math skills.
Students have to actually want to use it.
Researchers from the University of Toronto followed students in 18 Tennessee middle schools for two years, from 2024 to 2026.
Almost all the students tried Khanmigo at first.
And many tried to get the AI assistant to spit out the answer.
But when Khanmigo refused and instead asked questions or offered hints, students largely stopped using it.
“We observe how students actually used the AI tutor, and the answer is: not much,” Philip Oreopoulos and Nina Low, the researchers, wrote in their draft paper, circulated by the National Bureau of Economic Research in August.
“Seeking help with one’s own confusion remained a choice, and most students declined it most of the time.”