Adaptive Course Content Delivery via Real-Time Comprehension Feedback

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing educational software tools lack the ability to adapt to a student's comprehension of a subject, leading to suboptimal learning outcomes and inefficient use of educational resources.

Innovation Solution

A system utilizing Large Language Models (LLMs) and Machine Learning (ML) systems for real-time comprehension evaluation and adaptive learning, dynamically adjusting content, pace, and style based on individual student performance and engagement, with automated assessment and feedback.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Adaptability or versatility

If software education tools provide fixed content without adaptation, then the system structure is simple and easy to implement, but the learning effectiveness decreases because content does not match student comprehension levels

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveadaptability to student comprehensionVSAvoidsystem complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent implements dynamic adaptation by continuously adjusting course content based on real-time student response evaluation. The system transitions from static fixed content to dynamic adaptive content delivery, where the second portion of the course is modified based on comprehension assessment of the first portion, enabling the system to adapt to individual student needs

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

The patent incorporates feedback mechanisms by evaluating student responses to the first portion of the course and using this evaluation to modify the second portion. This closed-loop feedback system allows the education tool to learn from student performance and adjust subsequent content accordingly, improving adaptability while managing complexity through automated evaluation

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

2Manufacturing precision

If education content is too advanced for the student, then comprehensive material coverage is achieved, but the student cannot grasp and learn the material effectively

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecontent difficulty matchingVSAvoidlearning efficiency
Core Design Contradiction:
Manufacturing precisionVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies local quality by tailoring the difficulty and complexity of course content to match the specific comprehension level of each student. Instead of uniform content delivery, the system modifies the second portion of the course based on individual student performance on the first portion, ensuring content is appropriately challenging for each learner

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

Solution Approach 2:

The patent changes key parameters of the course content based on student evaluation results. The system adjusts content parameters such as difficulty level, pacing, and complexity by modifying the second portion of the course based on comprehension assessment, thereby optimizing learning effectiveness for each student

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

3Ease of operation

If education content is too rudimentary for the student, then the student can easily understand the material, but the student learns less than they could in the same amount of time

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecontent accessibilityVSAvoidlearning output
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of operationVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent implements dynamic content adjustment that allows the system to transition betweenrudimentary and advanced content based on real-time student comprehension evaluation. The course content is not fixed but dynamically adapted to match student ability levels, preventing both boredom from overly simple content and frustration from overly difficult content

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

The patent creates a universal education system that can serve students at various comprehension levels with a single adaptive platform. The system handles multiple student ability levels by modifying course content based on individual evaluation, making the same education tool effective for diverse learners without requiring separate specialized tools

Inventive Principle:
Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

4Productivity

If the education tool does not adjust to student comprehension, then the system is simple to implement, but educational resources are used inefficiently

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveresource utilization efficiencyVSAvoidsystem complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent uses feedback from student responses to optimize resource utilization. By evaluating student comprehension of the first course portion and automatically modifying the second portion accordingly, the system eliminates waste from presenting inappropriate content, maximizing the educational value of each resource投入

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Solution Approach 2:

The patent implements self-service through automated evaluation and content modification systems. The education tool autonomously assesses student comprehension and adjusts course content without requiring manual intervention from instructors, thereby improving resource efficiency while managing complexity through automation

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

Data Source

PatentUS20250342545A1System and method for modifying a course
Publication Date: 2025.11.06 GUIDED LEARNING LLC
  • US20250342545A1 patent drawing
  • US20250342545A1 patent drawing
  • US20250342545A1 patent drawing

AI summary

Systems, methods, and non-transitory computer-readable storage media which provide a technical solution to the technical problem described. A method for performing the concepts disclosed herein may include: identifying, via at least one processor of a computer system, a course to be presented to a user, the course having at least a first portion and a second portion; presenting, via the computer system, the first portion to the user; receiving, at the computer system from the user, at least one user response based on the presenting of the first portion; evaluating, via the at least one processor of the computer system, the at least one user response, resulting in a user evaluation; modifying, via the at least one processor, the second portion, resulting in a modified second portion; and presenting, via the computer system, the modified second portion to the user.