Weekly engagement with course materials varied widely (mean 63.9 page views), and student feedback on the AI-supported format was largely positive¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · design r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2026 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Weekly page views averaged 63.9 (SD = 33.1; median = 63; range = 29–128), indicating variable engagement, and student feedback was largely positive. → Hosseini 2026

Evidence¶

Hosseini 2026¶

Hosseini, H. (2026). The Pedagogy of AI Mistakes: Fostering Higher-Order Thinking. https://arxiv.org/abs/2605.05472 doi:10.48550/arxiv.2605.05472

q2 · i? · design · r2

Descriptive engagement analysis of page-view logs in the 13-student asynchronous course. The authors report "Weekly interactions measured by page views averaged 63.9 (SD = 33.1; median = 63; range = 29–128)" and quote positive student comments about the course.

"Weekly interactions measured by page views averaged 63.9 (SD = 33.1; median = 63; range = 29–128), indicating variable engagement."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Voluntary StatBot use was highly uneven and deadline-driven, with about 27% of students never using the chatbot — related
• Graduate students rated AI-generated weekly readings as effective preparation, with 75% agreeing they learned more than in a comparable course without AI assistance — related
• Viewing of the personalized AI videos declined sharply across the quarter, with views of the first week-9 video set suggesting fewer than 10% of the course population was watching voluntarily by the end of the course — related