LCS 2026 · Afternoon session

From Prompts to Possibilities:

AI-Assisted Learning That Gets Students Thinking

Timothy M. Stafford, PhD

Full Professor
Program Director
Director of Graduate Online Academic Affairs
Lead Researcher and Creator,
RU Institute AI Learning Lab

November 19, 2026 · Ocean Center, Daytona Beach

2:00–3:00 p.m. Eastern · Room 203A

Your turn

A student hands you a flawless paragraph. What do you ask first?

1.5minutes

1Write one question you would ask that student.
2Compare with a neighbor: does your question invite thinking or suspicion?
3Rewrite yours, if it helps, so the student has to explain a decision.

2:00–3:00 p.m. Eastern · Room 203A

Our hour together

2:00–2:06Opening and theory recap

2:06–2:20Four practical routines

2:20–2:33Practice, adaptation, and debrief

2:33–2:38Current research: CourseSpark™

2:38–2:45Three-year vision and commitment

2:45–3:00Q&A (15 minutes)

Core message

AI should expand what students can think through, create, and explain.

Pedagogy + heutagogy

Central theory: pedagogy and heutagogy as partners

Pedagogy

Teacher designs structure, models thinking, explains, and keeps learners safe.

Growing learner agency

Heutagogy

Learners form questions, choose paths, reflect, evaluate, and transfer.

Pedagogy gives structure. Heutagogy grows choice, reflection, and learning how to learn.

Supporting theory, tied to design

Three ideas every routine uses

1

Dialogue and scaffolding

Thinking grows through talk, with support that fades. So students explain and compare before accepting. (Vygotsky; Wood, Bruner, & Ross; Alexander)

2

Metacognition

Students can learn to monitor their own thinking. So routines end with: what changed, and why? (Flavell; Zimmerman)

3

Transfer

Learning rarely travels by itself. So each routine ends with a new case, no AI. (Perkins & Salomon)

Being clear

Established foundations and developing work

Established foundations

Heutagogy and pedagogy
Dialogue, scaffolding, metacognition, transfer

Developing work

Human Capacity/Capability Framework™: a design lens
CourseSpark™: an application under study

Practical guardrails

Simple habits that travel with every routine

Young learners

Teacher runs AI. Children think, ask, and check.

Approved tools only

Age-appropriate, per school guidance.

No private data

Never put student details in a prompt.

Verify

AI can be wrong. Check trusted sources. Printed samples work too.

Four reusable routines

Each one keeps the thinking with students

1

Question before answer

Inquiry

2

Compare, challenge, justify

Writing

3

Find and repair a flaw

Problem solving

4

Discuss, decide, reflect

Classroom conversation

Routine 1

Question before answer

Before

Students observe and write three questions about the problem.

During

Teacher shares AI questions or ideas. Students sort: which can we test?

After

Students choose one question, plan a test, and explain why.

Independent transfer checkLater, given a new problem, students write testable questions on their own.

Routine 1 in action

Students sort AI questions

Teacher prompt

“Our class wants to know why the playground is so hot. Suggest questions students could test at school with simple tools.”

Sample AI response · fictional, printed

1. Is the blacktop hotter than the grass? 2. How much cooler is it under the tree? 3. Does the shade move during the day? 4. Why is the climate changing?

StudentsSort into testable here and not testable here. Explain why question 4 is a different kind of question.

Routine 2

Compare, challenge, justify

Before

Student drafts a paragraph and names their goal for the reader.

During

Teacher or student gets three AI suggestions. Student marks accept, reject, or adapt.

After

Student revises in their own words and justifies each decision.

Independent transfer checkOn the next piece, student revises using peer feedback alone, with reasons.

Student decision sheet

Accept, reject, or adapt, with a reason

Sample AI suggestions (fictional)

Start with a question to hook readers.
Replace “very scary” with a vivid detail.
Add a statistic about storms.

Student decisions

Reject: a question feels fake for my story.
Accept: “The windows hummed” shows fear.
Adapt: no statistic, but I'll add the time it hit.

The reasoning column is the evidence of learning. The revised paragraph is the student's own.

Routine 3

Find and repair a flaw

Before

Students solve the problem on their own first.

During

Students study a worked solution with a hidden flaw and find it.

After

Students repair it, check by substitution, and explain the rule.

Independent transfer checkGiven a new equation, students solve it and check their own answer.

Find the flaw

Fictional worked solution

Something went wrong here. Where?

Given3(x + 2) = 18The original equation.

✗ Flawx + 2 = 18The 3 disappeared. Both sides were not divided by 3.

✗ Flawx = 16Follows from the flawed step.

Repair and check

Distribute, solve, and check

✓ Valid3x + 6 = 18Distribute the 3.

✓ Valid3x = 12Subtract 6 from both sides.

✓ Validx = 4Divide both sides by 3.

✓ Check3(4 + 2) = 18 ✓3 × 6 = 18. The answer checks.

Routine 4

Discuss, decide, reflect

Before

Students read each group's needs and rank priorities alone.

During

Groups hear one AI plan, compare reasoning, and agree on their own plan.

After

Each student reflects: what changed, why, and what remains uncertain?

Independent transfer checkNew dilemma, no AI: students propose a fair plan and name the tradeoff.

Routine 4 in action

React to a plan, then build a better one

Teacher prompt

“Six garden beds, four groups, limited water. Propose a fair plan and explain the tradeoffs.”

Sample AI plan · fictional, printed

Give each group one bed, and the extra two beds to the salad program because it feeds the most students. Water the vegetable beds first.

StudentsWho benefits? Who loses? What did the plan ignore? Agree on your own plan and give two reasons.

Adapt any routine by age

Same routines, growing independence

K–2Teacher-mediated and oral. Teacher reads AI ideas; children think, talk, vote, and check. No accounts.

3–5Printed AI samples, sentence frames, and pairs who compare reasoning.

6–12Approved tools within school guidance. Students critique AI quality and justify choices.

Transfer checkEvery routine ends with a new case students handle without AI.

Your turn

Practice Routine 3 as students would

5minutes

1Use the printed sample: a fictional AI explanation with one flaw.
2Alone, 1.5 min: find the flaw and mark it.
3Pairs, 2.5 min: compare reasoning, repair it, and say how you would check.
430 sec: write what changed in your thinking.

Practice sample

Find the flaw in this explanation

Student question

“Why is it warmer in summer than in winter?”

Sample AI explanation · fictional, contains a flaw

It is warmer in summer because Earth is closer to the sun then. In winter, Earth moves farther away, so we get less heat. The sun's rays are also more direct in summer.

StudentsWhich sentence is the flaw? How could you check with a trusted source? Rewrite the explanation.

Your turn

Adapt one routine to your grade and subject

4minutes

1Pick one routine card that fits a lesson you teach soon.
2Write your own teacher prompt with fictional details only.
3Name the student action and the reasoning evidence you will collect.
4Write one independent transfer check, no AI.

Administrator path

Coach and support one routine

Choose a routine

Pick one for a team to try for three weeks.

Agree on look-fors

Students questioning, justifying, checking, transferring.

Protect time

Planning time and approved tools or printed samples.

Look at work together

Review reasoning samples in PLCs, not usage counts.

Collaboration that counts

Compare reasoning. Don't divide and paste.

Divided work

Each student does one part
Parts pasted together
No one compares thinking

Compared reasoning

Each student thinks first
Partners compare and challenge
Group decides, and says why

Reflection that matters

Three questions worth asking every time

1

What changed?

In my answer, my plan, or my thinking.

2

Why?

What evidence or argument moved me?

3

What is still uncertain?

What would I need to find out next?

Research aims · in progress

Questions we are investigating

Visible reasoning

Does AI-assisted dialogue make student thinking easier to see?

Agency and judgment

Do students make and defend more decisions?

Transfer

Do routines carry into work without the tool?

Teacher support

How much guidance is needed, and when?

Current design work · CourseSpark™

How the design tries to put these ideas to work

Socratic dialogue

Asks questions instead of giving answers. Draws on dialogic learning.

Justify prompts

“Why do you think that?” makes reasoning visible.

Reconsider prompts

“What might change your mind?” invites metacognition.

Transcript

Lets a teacher review thinking and decide on support.

Reflection

Asks what changed and what is still uncertain.

Illustrative application · CourseSpark™

Illustrative · not real student data

One illustrative walkthrough

AI

You split the garden beds evenly. What makes that fair?

Student

Everyone gets the same amount.

AI

The salad program feeds more students. Does equal mean fair here?

Student

Maybe not. Fair could mean what each group needs. I'd still keep one bed for pollinators.

Framing honestly

Asking, not claiming

Not claiming

Established results
K–12 approval
A live integration in your school

Asking

What reasoning becomes visible?
Where are teachers most needed?
What would show transfer?

A proposed three-year vision

Building capability over time

1

Year 1

Establish

Try routines safely and small. Gather baselines.

2

Year 2

Refine and share

Teams refine routines and look at student reasoning together.

3

Year 3

Sustain

Look for students questioning, judging, and transferring independently.

An aspiration, not a forecast. Observations, reasoning samples, independent work, reflections, and workload notes help us see; alone, they do not prove cause.

Proposed vision · who grows how

What we hope each group can do by Year 3

Students

Ask better questions, evaluate AI suggestions, justify choices, transfer learning, and work more independently.

Teachers

Design responsive challenges and interpret student thinking, with manageable workload.

Administrators

Support teacher capacity, equitable access, and approved age-appropriate tools; judge quality beyond usage counts.

Evidence, modestly

What we would look at, and what it cannot prove alone

Evidence examples

Classroom observations
Student reasoning samples and independent work
Student reflections and teacher workload notes

Honest limits

Shows patterns worth discussing
Does not, by itself, prove AI caused a change
Needs comparison with baselines from Year 1

Next-week commitment

Next week, I will run one routine with one class and collect one piece of reasoning.

Write your routine, class, and evidence on your card.

Remember

Teachers design the conditions; students increasingly shape the learning.

AI should expand what students can think through, create, and explain.

Keep learning together

Join the RU Institute AI Learning Lab

Try the community free for seven days: take a course, connect with colleagues, and keep building your professional practice.

lcs2026dbfl.lovable.app/join · Seven-day free trial

QR code for https://lcs2026dbfl.lovable.app/join

Questions and conversation

What are you wondering?

Which routine fits your students first?

What would get in the way?

What support would help?

Thank you

AI should expand what students can think through, create, and explain.

Visit the STU vendor space • Booth number coming soon

Timothy M. Stafford, PhD

Full Professor
Program Director
Director of Graduate Online Academic Affairs
Lead Researcher and Creator,
RU Institute AI Learning Lab

tstafford@stu.edu

Miami Gardens, Florida