aiqbench analysis
This study analyzes how reliance patterns, evaluation literacy, and specific course policies influence the perceived benefits and harms of generative AI in academic settings. Key findings indicate that early reliance can lead to negative outcomes, particularly when students lack the critical skills to assess AI reliability, suggesting a need for targeted institutional policies to mitigate inequities.
The Uneven Impact of Generative AI on Student Learning: Examining the Roles of Reliance, Evaluation Literacy, and Course Policy in AI-related Courses
arXiv:2609.18676v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) is changing how students learn, yet the roles of course context, cognitive reliance, evaluation literacy, and early reliance remain underexplored. Using survey responses from 118 students across 12 AI-related courses at our institution, we examined differences in GenAI use and perceived learning experiences. We identified four user clusters: high-use students reporting many benefits, light users reporting less reliance and fewer benefits, and two moderate-use groups reporting different levels of benefit. We also found significant differences between free- and premium-version users, single- and multiple-tool users, and students experiencing different instructor policies. In multivariable regression models, academic benefit was associated with early reliance and academic task support; positive impact was associated with cognitive reliance, academic task support, confidence in GenAI reliability, and instructor policy; and negative impact was associated with early reliance and attitudinal change. The association between early reliance and negative impact became stronger as evaluation literacy increased. Finally, perceptions of GenAI-enhanced learning appear to reflect cognitive, performance, and self-efficacy benefits, while concerns about stress and diminished critical thinking are associated with lower perceived learning benefits. These findings suggest that institutions need better policies to address such inequities so that institutions can enable students to benefit from increasingly capable AI systems.
Abstract:Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) is changing how students learn, yet the roles of course context, cognitive reliance, evaluation literacy, and early reliance remain underexplored. Using survey responses from 118 students across 12 AI-related courses at our institution, we examined differences in GenAI use and perceived learning experiences. We identified four user clusters: high-use students reporting many benefits, light users reporting less reliance and fewer benefits, and two moderate-use groups reporting different levels of benefit. We also found significant differences between free- and premium-version users, single- and multiple-tool users, and students experiencing different instructor policies. In multivariable regression models, academic benefit was associated with early reliance and academic task support; positive impact was associated with cognitive reliance, academic task support, confidence in GenAI reliability, and instructor policy; and negative impact was associated with early reliance and attitudinal change. The association between early reliance and negative impact became stronger as evaluation literacy increased. Finally, perceptions of GenAI-enhanced learning appear to reflect cognitive, performance, and self-efficacy benefits, while concerns about stress and diminished critical thinking are associated with lower perceived learning benefits. These findings suggest that institutions need better policies to address such inequities so that institutions can enable students to benefit from increasingly capable AI systems.
Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Emerging Technologies (cs.ET); Machine Learning (cs.LG)
arXiv:2609.18676 [cs.AI]
(or arXiv:2609.18676v1 [cs.AI] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.18676 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Full text under the publisher's open licence · 304 words
Related coverage

Digital States 2026: AI Moves From Experiment to Infrastructure
govtech.com · Sep 24, 2026

A Chinese Perspective on “On Social Reality in China”
LessWrong · Oct 15, 2026
Examining the Usage of Generative AI Models in Student Learning Activities for Software Programming
arXiv · Jun 12, 2026

Berkeley Law report finds AI use affects rights in law, media, schools
Quantum Zeitgeist · Sep 29, 2026