arXiv:2606. 28749v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Although most undergraduates now use large language models (LLMs), a form of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) for academic writing, no validated method distinguishes the qualitatively different ways students rely on them.
arXiv:2607. 14301v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: As generative AI (GenAI) becomes increasingly embedded in undergraduate academic writing, how students rely on these tools, rather than simply whether they use them, has become a central question for learning, academic integrity, and educational equity.
The study investigates how generative AI (GenAI) affects student learning in AI-related courses, using survey data from 118 students across 12 courses. Four distinct user clusters were identified—high-use, light-use, and two moderate-use groups—each showing varying benefits and reliance patterns. The research highlights that early reliance, evaluation literacy, and instructor policies significantly influence perceived academic benefits and negative impacts, underscoring the need for institutional policies to address inequities in AI use.
arXiv:2606. 00250v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Investigating the degree to which large language models (LLMs) affect teaching and learning in universities can help identify strategies for integrating LLMs in a way that supports, rather than undermines, student learning outcomes.
The study explores how undergraduate computing students in Saudi Arabia perceive AI‑generated writing feedback when they are explicitly told that ChatGPT, not a human instructor, produced the score and comments. Through qualitative reflections, four themes emerged: students found the feedback useful for surface‑level revisions, recognized AI’s contextual and pedagogical limits, trusted the feedback conditionally—separating its utility from its authority—and reaffirmed the human instructor’s role as the ultimate grading authority. The findings highlight a clear distinction students make between feedback usefulness and evaluative authority, treating them as separate judgments rather than opposing ends of a single approval scale.
arXiv:2606. 13734v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Recent evidence reported by Tully, Longoni, and Appel (2025) suggests that lower artificial intelligence (AI) literacy predicts greater receptivity toward AI.
arXiv:2606. 00038v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Artificial intelligence (AI) literacy is increasingly recognized as a foundational competency for all university graduates.
arXiv:2603. 04982v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Can targeted user training unlock the productive potential of generative artificial intelligence in professional settings?
arXiv:2605. 21629v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: How much have students' ordinary learning processes shifted in response to generative AI, and how does that affect their durable learning outcomes?
arXiv:2606. 24104v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Generative artificial intelligence(GenAI) is reshaping learning in higher education, with particularly pronounced implications for the humanities and social sciences(HSS), where learning outcomes are commonly expressed through written and interpretive forms that align closely with GenAI's capabilities.
arXiv:2608.21391v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: In this research-to-practice paper we present a survey that can be used to assess students' AI knowledge. As the use of artificial intelligence (AI),...
arXiv:2505. 00100v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Background and Context.
arXiv:2607. 05411v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Higher education institutions are increasingly expected to ensure that both students and staff develop Generative AI (GenAI) literacies.