学习洞察LEARNING INSIGHTS

See how students think. Know where to support them.

Use learning interactions and tool records to describe depth of thinking and autonomy, giving students and educators evidence to discuss.

Try the product demo Explore Research Studio

Report coverage varies by learning context

Illustrative view

HOW LEARNING HAPPENS

Guidance, with room for independent judgment.

Each step involves a concrete action. Students’ choices, responses and revisions are part of the learning process.

01
Record interactions and tool use
A traceable account of the learning process
02
Examine the process with evidence
Depth and autonomy presented separately
03
Use the report to discuss next steps
Evidence for educators to interpret

Process assessment product interface example — An existing product view. Content and available features vary by task, edition and account.

ASSESSMENT GROUNDED IN THE PROCESS

How deeply did they think? How independently did they judge?

The same source check can reveal how a student handles evidence and who initiated the check. Process assessment considers cognitive depth and intellectual autonomy separately, grounded in learning records.

Examine the quality of thinking

Cognitive depth

D1Framing the question: Stating it clearly, bounding scope, splitting out answerable sub-questions
D2Evidence & sources: Tracing to primary sources, separating paraphrase from original, checking numbers
D3Argument structure: Claim–evidence–warrant integrity, spotting the missing warrant, building the concession
D4Perspective & bias: Comparing perspectives, reading a source's stake, handling counter-evidence
D5Feedback & revision: Understanding critique, revising with reasons, changing the argument not just the wording
D6Reflection & metacognition: From recounting what happened to interrogating her own method and frame

Examine agency in judgments and actions

Intellectual autonomy

A1Direction: Who sets the target and route — writing or rewriting the plan, digging deeper unprompted
A2Initiation: Questions, checks and revisions nobody asked for
A3Boundary: Setting limits on the AI, refusing a suggestion with a reason, holding her own route
A4Challenge: Summoning the counter-case, challenging the AI with evidence, resisting its urge to agree
A5Signature: Making the call herself, writing her own reflection, giving reasons for the conclusion
A6Truth first: Willing to follow the evidence somewhere inconvenient — accepting it, moving her position

ONE EVENT. TWO QUESTIONS.

A student finds evidence that challenges their position.

Depth: did they understand the counter-evidence, check its source and revise their argument? Autonomy: did they initiate the check or respond to a prompt? Interpret both through the records of this task.

INSIDE THE RESEARCH REPORT

Nine sections connect the process with feedback.

The research report brings together activity records, materials, the two assessment axes and suggestions. Examine the evidence and discuss the next steps.

Basics

Title, dates, milestones, and counted numbers: AI turns, materials, words, comments, revisions.

Abstract

A paragraph on the route she actually took, plus one line each on materials, writing and AI use.

Timeline

Chat, reading room, map, writing, retrospective — laid out in order.

Materials

Every source: when it arrived, where from, and what job it does in the argument.

Depth D1–D6

Per dimension: a level, a verdict, clickable evidence, one suggestion.

Autonomy A1–A6

Same structure — plus whether each move was self-initiated or prompted.

Prompt lens

3–10 of her actual prompts, with what worked and what to change.

Cards & sub-agents

Which card, at which station, why it was offered, and what changed downstream.

Risk signals

Ghost-writing, missing sources, broken warrants, shifting denominators, tangents — each with advice.

Read the evidence in a complete report.

The report describes the observed learning process for discussion alongside classroom context. It is not a fixed label of ability or a prediction of examination results.

Full report · PDF ↗

A walkthrough of the process reportPRODUCT RECORDING

Recorded product experience; interface language and appearance may differ from the current release.

DEPTH OF THINKING

How deeply did the student think?

Consider sources, evidence, reasoning and reflection to describe how the student approached this task.

LEARNER AUTONOMY

Who made the judgments?

Distinguish the student’s contribution from AI support, considering guidance, reliance and independent judgment.

The two dimensions are presented separately, never merged into a total score. Reports describe a process; they do not replace professional judgment or predict examination results.

View a complete sample report · PDF

THE NEXT CHAPTER OF LEARNING

Bring AI into learning. Keep students thinking.

Start with a reading, a piece of writing or a project. See how the Mark of Thinking can support your teaching.

For schools & educators Try the product