What Students Ask, How a Generative AI Assistant Responds: Exploring Higher Education Students' Dialogues on Learning Analytics Feedback

Learning analytics dashboards (LADs) aim to support students' regulation of learning by translating complex data into feedback. Yet students, especially those with lower self-regulated learning (SRL) competence, often struggle to engage with and interpret analytics feedback. Conversational generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) assistants have shown potential to scaffold this process through real-time, personalised, dialogue-based support. Further advancing this potential, we explored authentic dialogues between students and GenAI assistant integrated into LAD during a 10-week semester. The analysis focused on questions students with different SRL levels posed, the relevance and quality of the assistant's answers, and how students perceived the assistant's role in their learning. Findings revealed distinct query patterns. While low SRL students sought clarification and reassurance, high SRL students queried technical aspects and requested personalised strategies. The assistant provided clear and reliable explanations but limited in personalisation, handling emotionally charged queries, and integrating multiple data points for tailored responses. Findings further extend that GenAI interventions can be especially valuable for low SRL students, offering scaffolding that supports engagement with feedback and narrows gaps with their higher SRL peers. At the same time, students' reflections underscored the importance of trust, need for greater adaptivity, context-awareness, and technical refinement in future systems.

Examining Student Interactions with a Pedagogical AI-Assistant for Essay Writing and their Impact on Students Writing Quality

The dynamic nature of interactions between students and GenAI, as well as their relationship to writing quality, remains underexplored. While most research has examined how general-purpose GenAI can support writing, fewer studies have investigated how students interact with pedagogically designed systems across different phases of the writing process. To address this gap, we evaluated a GenAI-driven essay-writing assistant (EWA) designed to support higher education students in argumentative writing. Drawing on 1,282 interaction logs from 32 undergraduates during a two-hour writing session, Sequential Pattern Mining and K-Means clustering were used to identify behavioral patterns. Two clusters emerged: Cluster 1 emphasized outline planning and essay structure, while Cluster 2 focused on content development. A Mann-Whitney U test revealed a moderate effect size (r = 0.36) in the essay Organization dimension, with Cluster 1 showing higher scores. Qualitative analysis indicated that students with better performance actively wrote and shared essay sections with EWA for feedback, rather than interacted passively by asking questions. These findings suggest implications for teaching and system design. Teachers can encourage active engagement, while future EWAs may integrate automatic labeling and monitoring to prompt students to move from questioning to writing, enabling fuller benefits from GenAI-supported learning.