# Thinking Like a Student: AI-Supported Reflective Planning in a Theory-Intensive Computer Science Course

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2511.01906 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2511.01906/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Reasoning benchmarks and evaluation, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning.
- Builds on 5 of its 17 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 31 Oct 2025.

## Placed in

- LLM reasoning / [Reasoning benchmarks and evaluation](https://mlsanity.com/lr/reasoning-benchmarks-and-evaluation/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 5 of 5)

- [Large Language Models for Education: A Survey and Outlook](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.18105/) (2024)
- [Using Large Language Models to Enhance Programming Error Messages](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.11630/) (2022)
- [Large Language Models in Education: Vision and Opportunities](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.13160/) (2023)
- [Assessing Student Errors in Experimentation Using Artificial Intelligence and Large Language Models: A Comparative Study with Human Raters](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.06088/) (2023)
- [Exploring the Role of AI Assistants in Computer Science Education: Methods, Implications, and Instructor Perspectives](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.03289/) (2023)

## Abstract (arXiv)

In the aftermath of COVID-19, many universities implemented supplementary "reinforcement" roles to support students in demanding courses. Although the name for such roles may differ between institutions, the underlying idea of providing structured supplementary support is common. However, these roles were often poorly defined, lacking structured materials, pedagogical oversight, and integration with the core teaching team. This paper reports on the redesign of reinforcement sessions in a challenging undergraduate course on formal methods and computational models, using a large language model (LLM) as a reflective planning tool. The LLM was prompted to simulate the perspective of a second-year student, enabling the identification of conceptual bottlenecks, gaps in intuition, and likely reasoning breakdowns before classroom delivery. These insights informed a structured, repeatable session format combining targeted review, collaborative examples, independent student work, and guided walkthroughs. Conducted over a single semester, the intervention received positive student feedback, indicating increased confidence, reduced anxiety, and improved clarity, particularly in abstract topics such as the pumping lemma and formal language expressive power comparisons. The findings suggest that reflective, instructor-facing use of LLMs can enhance pedagogical design in theoretically dense domains and may be adaptable to other cognitively demanding computer science courses.