Build a Source-Grounded AI Study System From Your Own Notes

Start with one page and one question

Choose an objective from your course: explain a concept, recall a rule, solve a problem, compare two cases, or support an argument. Use the assigned objectives and assessment guidance to decide what matters. OpenAI's exam-study workflow likewise starts with course materials and objectives, then adjusts practice around gaps.

1. Find the passage that supports your chosen objective. Check it against the assigned source and retain its page or section.
2. Give that passage to the assistant and request one question at a time, with answers and hints withheld.
3. Write your first answer. For recall practice, keep your own notes closed; for source-location practice, record that you used them.
4. Ask for feedback supported by the passage. Keep your first answer and the correction in separate fields.
5. Try a changed question, then choose a later session to check the idea again without hints.

Use this instruction with your own passage:

My learning goal is: [specific course objective].
Use the notes below and no other factual sources.
Ask one question at a time and wait for my answer.
Do not show an answer, evidence quote, or hint before I try.
After my answer, retain it and identify what is correct,
missing, or mistaken. Show the supporting passage.
Accept wording that preserves the meaning and conditions.
If you cannot find support, say what you could not find.
Give a hint only when I request one and record that I used it.
Then ask a different question about the idea I missed.

The practice kit supplies course notes, questions, worked feedback, and review templates. You can also download the session prompts separately. Upload only the files you need for the current step; the complete kit also contains keys and worked answers.

Turn shorthand notes into checked source passages

Class notes often omit a condition or leave a question unresolved. Preserve those uncertainties while preparing the passage. A source ID helps you find evidence again, but it does not make a note accurate. Compare definitions, numbers, and exceptions with the assigned textbook or instructor's materials before using them to judge answers.

Here is a physics example based on OpenStax Physics, section 2.2, Speed and Velocity. The rough notes and worked answers below are teaching examples you can adapt to your course.

A rough reading note might look like this:

avg speed = distance / time
velocity uses displacement
units m/s
return trip: speed zero too?

The question at the end is unresolved. Verify it in the textbook instead of turning it into a statement that both quantities are zero. Then prepare the following source notes:

The downloadable course notes retain these IDs, headings, and the textbook link. For a PDF, record both its printed page number and its viewer page when they differ. For lecture slides, keep the slide number and date. Use the version assigned to your course.

Include the full condition around a rule. Keep a definition with its assumptions, a table with its headers, and an exception with the rule it modifies. If your personal notes and the assigned source disagree, retain both and resolve the disagreement before making a question depend on it. Use only material you are permitted to upload, and remove classmates' personal information and irrelevant private feedback.

Keep answers out of your first attempt

For personal study, you can let the assistant ask from the checked passage and inspect its answer after you respond. You do not need to read a separate answer key first. Save the question and your original response, then ask for the supporting passage and the reasoning behind the correction.

For teacher preparation, shared quizzes, or a reusable question bank, create the key separately. Review each question's wording, acceptable answers, conditions, evidence, and scoring criteria before learners receive it. Factual questions need a defensible scoring decision. Essays may permit several well-supported arguments; their criteria should describe what a response must establish.

If you are preparing and practising alone, reviewing the key will expose the answers. Record that exposure and use changed application questions later. If the tutor shows an answer or a leading hint before you attempt a question, mark that item as exposed and replace it. It is still useful to learn from the explanation, but that response does not show independent recall.

Keep closed-book recall, open-book source finding, and hinted practice distinguishable. An answer you found by searching the notes can be a successful source-location exercise without being an unaided memory result.

Diagnose the first error, then change the problem

Using P-01, ask: "A trip covers 120 metres in 10 seconds. What is its average speed? Show your calculation and units." The answer follows from the supplied definition even though the number 12 never appears in the notes. Source-based work can include reasoning from supplied formulas and assumptions.

Consider the response 10 / 120 = 0.083 m/s. The first mistake is the reversed ratio. The arithmetic approximately matches that ratio, so simply requesting more careful calculation would miss the problem. Time divided by distance also produces s/m, not m/s.

Keep the incorrect response in the record and put 120 / 10 = 12 m/s in the correction field. If the assistant supplies that correction, label it as reviewed work. Repeating it immediately is not a new independent attempt.

Now change the problem: "The same 120 metres takes 20 seconds. Find the average speed and explain what changed." A complete answer is 120 m / 20 s = 6 m/s; the longer time for the same distance reduces the average speed. Ask the question before showing that answer. This checks whether you can choose and use the ratio beyond the original numbers.

For a concept question, combine P-01 and P-02: "Travel 120 metres out and 120 metres back in 20 seconds. Compare average speed and average velocity." Total distance is 240 metres, so average speed is 12 m/s. Displacement is zero, so average velocity is 0 m/s. If an answer gives zero for both, review the difference between distance and displacement before adding harder calculations.

For other mathematical subjects, ask the assistant to name the supplied formula or definition, retain each step, and identify the first unsupported or incorrect step. If the problem needs a formula or assumption absent from your materials, obtain that prerequisite before grading. A correct final value with an invalid method needs the course's scoring rules, not an automatic pass.

Grade an extended answer against its argument and evidence

An essay needs criteria for its ideas and support, rather than one paragraph to copy. Before answering, specify the required concepts, relationships, source passages, qualifications, and any opposing interpretation the assignment asks you to address.

For a learning-science example, use two passages from Dunlosky and colleagues' review: E-01, section 8, concerns practice testing; E-02, section 9, concerns distributed practice. The review rates both highly. Use this question: "Explain how you would combine retrieval and practice across sessions in a study plan, and state what that evidence does not establish about an AI tutor."

Set these criteria before grading:

Consider this answer: "I will answer questions before looking at the notes, then do more questions immediately. This proves that ChatGPT will improve my exam grade." It addresses retrieval, but gives no separate-session plan. Its final claim exceeds the evidence. Preserve the first criterion as met, mark the timing and connection criteria incomplete, and reject the unsupported claim.

A stronger response could be: "I will try questions before opening their answers and revisit the topic in later sessions. I will use those attempts to choose what to review. The review supports these learning techniques; it does not test my AI tutor. I still need to check its feedback against the assigned material."

Accept another organization or different wording when it meets the same criteria. For historical or literary essays, separate a source's statement from an interpretation built from it. Several interpretations may be defensible. Check each claim's evidence and the assignment's requirements rather than matching an exact answer string. If a response combines passages, retain all relevant source IDs.

Apply these criteria to my saved first answer.
For each one, show the part of my answer being judged,
its supporting passage, and what is met, missing, or wrong.
Keep the criteria unchanged after reading my response.
Flag unsupported claims separately.
Save the original judgment before suggesting a revision.

Choose questions that test the required kind of knowledge

Match practice to the assessment. Definition recall, calculations, application, and argument require different questions. Include the conditions that make a factual question scorable, and use criteria suited to open answers.

The operations-training notes in the kit provide another kind of material:

When grading the day-30 comparison, require the standard request to be identified as outside 21 calendar days, the damaged-item claim as inside 45 calendar days, and the photo requirement to be retained. With one point per criterion, an answer containing both windows but omitting the photo earns two out of three. Meeting submission conditions does not establish approval.

Judge meaning and conditions. "A photograph" satisfies the photo requirement. "45 days" is incorrect for the standard rule. "21 days" needs clarification if calendar versus business days matters to the assessment. "All accounts need MFA" contradicts the member exception.

For multiple-choice practice, check that the chosen format has the intended number of defensible options. After choosing, explain why your option fits and why each alternative fails. Read the source-based correction before moving on; a guessed option does not show that you understand its reasoning. If two options are defensible under the notes, repair the question instead of forcing one to be wrong.

For procedure questions, assess the stated sequence without inventing consequences. For revision questions, specify the governing version. Remove questions that depend on missing, unreadable, ambiguous, or out-of-scope material. Keep a brief reason so you can repair them later.

Investigate an answer the assistant cannot find

"I could not find it" does not establish that the original material lacks the answer. The assistant may have missed a file, passage, table, or scan. Before treating a question as unsupported, check the following sequence:

1. Confirm that the required file and relevant chapter were supplied. Ask the assistant to identify the file and section it is using.
2. Search the original document for the concept, synonyms, and the likely heading. Inspect the relevant pages yourself, including diagrams and table footnotes.
3. Compare the extracted text with those pages. Check whether a missing line, column, sign, or unreadable image explains the failure.
4. Supply the exact passage or a clearer page crop and ask the same question again. Confirm that the cited text supports the answer.
5. If the selected material still provides no basis for an answer, identify the missing information and obtain the assigned source or clarification.

The operations notes do not give export retention or refund approval rate. Those questions can check whether the assistant guesses, but they do not test a learner's knowledge of this pack. If your tracker needs a label, use NOT_SCORABLE for an item that cannot be judged from the materials. Report those items separately from correct, partial, and incorrect answers.

For conflicting versions, use the instructor's precedence, an explicit replacement notice, or another assigned authority. The newest file may be a draft or outside the version assigned for the course. The kit's revision-2 access note requires member MFA; revision 3 explicitly replaces it and makes member use optional. A current-rule question uses revision 3, while a question about the change needs both. If neither source has priority, suspend the question and request clarification.

Work with longer PDFs, scans, tables, and other languages

Start with one objective or chapter and keep the original available. Ask the assistant to list the passages it will use for that objective, then compare that list with the assigned reading. A confident claim to have covered an entire course is not a coverage check.

Keep a table of each assigned objective, its source locations, reviewed question types, and unresolved gaps. For the physics example, calculating average speed has P-01 and numerical questions; distinguishing speed from velocity needs P-01, P-02, and the return-trip explanation. A bank containing only calculation questions leaves the second objective uncovered.

For scans or handwritten pages, request the extracted text before questions. Compare negation, decimal points, units, subscripts, dates, and headers against the image. Mark an unreadable condition as unresolved and exclude dependent questions. Use a clearer crop or a corrected transcription when you can verify it.

Preserve a table's row labels, column headers, units, and footnotes. When a table continues onto another page, retain both parts and check which headers apply. For a diagram, keep its figure number and verify the relationship the assistant describes. If the assistant cannot identify that relationship, use the original figure during practice or obtain an accessible description.

When answering in a different language, keep the course's technical terms and qualifications in the key. Grade the concept unless exact terminology or translation is being assessed. A shortened or translated excerpt still needs to preserve its conditions. Request one question per message, shorter feedback, or a text version of a diagram when that helps you use the session.

If the conversation becomes difficult to follow, start a fresh session with the checked excerpts, the current objective, unresolved questions, and a short review record. Keep the original responses outside the chat so you can continue without reconstructing your mistakes from memory.

Use each error to choose the next activity

An answer can be correct, partly correct, wrong, or impossible to judge from the material. A partial answer may know the main rule but miss the condition that determines a case. Review the cause before requesting another batch of questions.

Use hints gradually: first ask which concept or passage is relevant, then ask for the first step if needed. Request a full worked answer when you need instruction, and mark the item as assisted. After studying it, use another question to check your understanding.

If the same misconception persists after an explanation and a changed example, stop generating similar questions. Return to the prerequisite concept or ask a teacher or tutor about the exact step you cannot justify. In the speed example, a repeated zero-speed answer on return trips calls for work on distance and displacement before more division practice.

For disputed grading, show your response, the criterion, and the relevant passage. Ask for a criterion-level explanation; seek instructor clarification when the assignment's rules are unclear. If a score changes, retain the original judgment and the reason.

Plan delayed review and decide when to stop

Choose the next review date around your assessment deadline and the material's difficulty. Tomorrow and another session several days later can be starting slots when your timetable permits. Adjust after seeing whether you can answer independently. The learning-technique evidence supports practice across sessions; it does not prescribe one interval for every course or establish this AI workflow's effectiveness.

For a small objective, a practical stopping rule is to explain the underlying idea and solve a changed case without notes or hints, then schedule a later check. Treat that as the end of today's work, with delayed review still pending. Use your course's standard when it sets a different requirement.

Keep a short record: question, first answer, supporting location, error or assistance, and next action/date. The review log includes a simple version and an expanded version for teachers or longer courses.

For the speed example, a useful record starts with the reversed fraction, stores the correction separately, and records whether the 20-second question was answered without help. Its delayed-result field remains blank until a later attempt. If that later answer is correct but the return-trip explanation still confuses distance with displacement, keep the concept in the review queue.

With limited time, prioritize prerequisites and mistakes relevant to the upcoming assessment. One misunderstood distinction can affect several application questions. End with a specific action, such as practising a return-trip explanation without notes in the next planned session.

Use ChatGPT Study Mode for the tutoring conversation

OpenAI's Study Mode instructions describe working with course materials and feedback. On the web, start a regular conversation, type @study or search for Study in the + menu, and select Study. You can also open Study Mode directly. The Study option is unavailable in Temporary Chats, GPTs, and Projects.

Supply your level, objective, deadline, and checked notes. Use the one-question instruction above. If the tutor reveals an answer early, replace that item for independent practice. If it overlooks a passage, give its location or excerpt and check the next correction against it. Study Mode can make mistakes and sometimes gives direct answers; your instructions do not guarantee either source accuracy or an answer-free attempt.

Optional: check a small set of AI answers with Python

This separate exercise checks the assistant's fixed answers, not your learning. The four-section test pack contains a key, so give the assistant only the input without answers. Ask it for a plain JSON array with id, answer, source_id, and supported for every question. The exact response format and missing-answer convention are in the kit's assistant-check-readme.md.

Save its output as my-study-answers.json. Put that file, the pack, and the checker in one folder, then run:

python3 problem-first-workflows-check.py study \
  source-grounded-study-pack.json my-study-answers.json

The reference answers produce passed: 8 with two required missing-fact responses. They are edited reference answers. The checker compares exact text and labels: it rejects "A photograph" where the key says "A photo," and it accepts incorrect explanations or missing source text when the compared fields still match. Use the source-based grading above for understanding and open answers. If JSON parsing fails, save a plain array without chat prose or Markdown fences.

Keep practice aligned when materials change

For a growing question bank, retain the source version, key, and scoring criteria. When a passage changes, identify its questions and check their wording, scope, and answers. Keep earlier attempts with the material that governed them. If you rescore one, preserve both judgments and explain the change.

Before the next session, check the objective's unresolved source issues, close the worked answers, and attempt a changed question from your review queue without hints.