Research analytics layer · educators and researchers
Tool ecology and familiarity
Contribution is not a property of one session. This layer records which tools a student chose, rejected, switched between and returned to, and how accumulated interaction history changes what the AI can infer from very little explicit input. Nothing here is a score, and external-tool use is never treated as misuse.
Subject to privacy, consent, institutional policy and applicable research ethics. Students see only the lightweight prompts, never this layer.
Tool events
4
Unaided steps recorded
1
Returns to Con-Met
3
Outputs evaluated
4/4
Observed tool trajectory
The sequence is observed, not prescribed. There is no correct path.
Tool-choice provenance events
No tool
Purpose
Decide the final line of argument alone
Stated reason
It performs this particular function better — “I wanted to know what I thought before anything answered me.”
What came back
A decision, plus a reordering of the argument
What the student did with it
accepted · evaluated · did not return
Relation to the final contribution
Non-use recorded as contribution evidence, not as a gap.
General-purpose chat assistant
Purpose
Generate counterexamples faster
Stated reason
I wanted more divergent ideas — “I wanted breadth before deciding, not a challenge.”
What came back
Ten, of which three were factually wrong
What the student did with it
modified · evaluated · returned to Con-Met
Relation to the final contribution
Two counterexamples survived after verification.
Library database
Purpose
Verify the three claims that looked wrong
Stated reason
I wanted to verify a fact — “The other tool sounded confident and was not.”
What came back
Two disconfirmed, one unverifiable
What the student did with it
rejected · evaluated · returned to Con-Met
Relation to the final contribution
Removed a claim that would have carried the essay in a false direction.
Con-Met learning partner
Purpose
Find the assumption underneath my thesis
Stated reason
It performs this particular function better — “It refuses to write, so it forces me to answer.”
What came back
Named two assumptions I had not seen
What the student did with it
accepted · evaluated · returned to Con-Met
Relation to the final contribution
Became the framing of paragraph one.
Compliance versus understanding
Conceptual understandingReflections articulate why provenance is recorded and what it is intended to reveal.
Con-Met usage is not Con-Met understanding. The two are recorded separately and neither is inferred from the other.
What do you understand the difference to be between Con-Met AI and a general-purpose AI tool?
The other tool gives me answers. This one keeps a record of what I actually did with them. I think that record is the point, not the answers.
Why do you think your contribution is being recorded?
So the teacher can see where the ideas came from rather than guessing whether I used AI.
Familiarity trajectory
Input length is not a proxy for contribution. As familiarity accumulates, contribution may be compressed into shared context rather than reduced.
Explicit contribution
Full statement of the topic, the claim and the three approaches under consideration.
Contextual contribution
None available. The system knows nothing about this student yet.
References prior work · no · AI reconstruction · none
Explicit contribution
Direction to develop the second approach, with the constraint restated.
Contextual contribution
The definition of the claim, established two turns earlier.
References prior work · yes · AI reconstruction · correct
Explicit contribution
A cue: apply the earlier mechanism to the new case.
Contextual contribution
The mechanism, its limits and the rejected alternatives.
References prior work · yes · AI reconstruction · correct
Explicit contribution
“Take the mechanism we developed and apply it here.”
Contextual contribution
An entire shared vocabulary: the mechanism, the counterexamples that survived, the student's ordering preference.
References prior work · yes · AI reconstruction · corrected by student
AI decision literacy — observation only
A research dimension under observation. Deliberately not reduced to a score at this stage.
- Recognising that different tools serve different purposes
- Selecting a tool appropriate to the stage of work
- Explaining the choice in their own terms
- Recognising the limitations of the tool chosen
- Evaluating the output rather than absorbing it
- Comparing outputs across tools
- Making an independent judgement after consulting a tool
- Understanding what provenance records and why