Teachers used the Purpose field primarily for instructional goals and content focus while Rules specified pedagogical behavior, guardrails, and learner-specific adaptations¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · qualitative r? · q2
Currency · newest study 2026 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Configuration log thematic analysis showed Purpose and Rules served complementary functions, with Task/Objective, Pedagogical Strategy, and Course Material as the most prevalent configuration themes. → Riahi 2026

Evidence¶

Riahi 2026¶

Riahi, B., Ozturk, D., Guth, A., Li, J., Singh, D. P., Tian, X., Chiu, J., Lytle, N., Barnes, T., & Cateté, V. (2026). Will It Teach as Intended? How Teachers Configure Educational AI Chatbots. https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.29993 doi:10.48550/arxiv.2609.29993

q2 · i? · qualitative · r?

Hybrid deductive-inductive qualitative analysis of Purpose and Rules and Guidelines fields in configuration logs from 27 teachers, using Hou et al.'s customization categories as initial codebook. Task/Objective appeared somewhat more often in Purpose (21 teachers) than in Rules (19 teachers).

"Purpose was used mainly to define the chatbot's instructional goals and content focus, whereas Rules were used more often to specify pedagogical behavior, guardrails, and learner-specific adaptations."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Log-based evaluation showed chatbot alignment was stronger for responsiveness (88.9%) and persona (81.5%) than for rules (70.4%) and purpose (59.3%) — related
• A hybrid human-AI workflow using GPT-4o with retrieval-augmented generation supported efficient inductive thematic analysis while preserving researcher judgment — related