Publisher-Built Generative AI Assistants in U.S. Higher Education: A Critical Review and a Reproducible TRIAD–JTBD Evaluation Framework

Artificial intelligence (AI) has reshaped higher education over six decades, evolving from drill-and-practice programs to adaptive cognitive tutors and, most recently, transformer-based generative models. This article presents a critical review of publisher-built generative AI assistants, adopting an explicitly socio-technical perspective that combines a technological lens with a pedagogical one. It makes three contributions. First, it synthesizes the technical and algorithmic evolution of educational AI, from rule-based and expert systems through knowledge tracing and learning analytics to large language models and retrieval-augmented generation, and organizes these mechanisms into a taxonomy. Second, it introduces a reproducible evaluation framework that couples the TRIAD rubric (Trust, Relevance, Impact, Adoption, and Design) with a Jobs-to-Be-Done (JTBD) lens, complete with anchored scoring criteria, an evidence-and-confidence grading scheme, and reported inter-rater reliability. Third, it applies the framework to eleven assistants released by U.S. publishers, distinguishing peer-reviewed evidence from institutional reports and commercial claims. The analysis reflects a mid-2025 snapshot and is presented as a reusable template rather than a static ranking. Findings reveal substantial variation in privacy safeguards, curricular alignment, documented impact, adoption, and usability. The review identifies application scenarios and recommendations for researchers and institutional leaders seeking to guide the responsible integration of AI in higher education.