analiza aiqbench
This retrospective survey of 313 students and interviews with 18 finds that perceived GenAI skill growth follows varied trajectories and is uneven across skills, with evaluating model outputs the hardest to improve. The link to academic gains runs mainly through assignment practices, not exams, and the trajectory-group differences did not hold after multiplicity correction. Readers should treat these as self-reported, exploratory findings from one university context, not evidence of measured learning outcomes.
Impacts of generative AI skill development on academic adaptation and learning outcomes among university students
arXiv:2610.30599v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Understanding how university students perceive the development of their generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) skills over time can clarify how GenAI use relates to learning and academic outcomes. This study examined perceived skill-development trajectories, changes in learning practices, and associated academic gains using a retrospective questionnaire with 313 analyzed responses and interviews with 18 students across subject areas. Descriptive and comparative analyses and exploratory structural equation modeling (SEM) were integrated with thematic analysis. Perceived developmental trajectories were heterogeneous: 34.2% of students reported rapid early improvement followed by a plateau, 28.4% steady improvement, and 21.1% delayed acceleration. Development was also uneven across skills, with improvement in evaluating GenAI outputs perceived as more challenging; assignments were the most frequently selected driver of skill growth. Interviews further indicated increasingly specific prompting, tailored verification, and selective delegation, although some students reported stable routines, dependence, skipped reasoning, or improvements attributable partly to better GenAI tools. Academic gains were reported more often for assignments than for examinations. The SEM indicated a positive indirect association between perceived skill growth and academic gains through adaptation of assignment processes, whereas academic gains did not clearly differ across developmental trajectory groups after multiplicity correction. The findings suggest that perceived GenAI skill development varies in both trajectory and skill domain and is associated with changes in learning practices and differentiated academic benefits.
Abstract:Understanding how university students perceive the development of their generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) skills over time can clarify how GenAI use relates to learning and academic outcomes. This study examined perceived skill-development trajectories, changes in learning practices, and associated academic gains using a retrospective questionnaire with 313 analyzed responses and interviews with 18 students across subject areas. Descriptive and comparative analyses and exploratory structural equation modeling (SEM) were integrated with thematic analysis. Perceived developmental trajectories were heterogeneous: 34.2% of students reported rapid early improvement followed by a plateau, 28.4% steady improvement, and 21.1% delayed acceleration. Development was also uneven across skills, with improvement in evaluating GenAI outputs perceived as more challenging; assignments were the most frequently selected driver of skill growth. Interviews further indicated increasingly specific prompting, tailored verification, and selective delegation, although some students reported stable routines, dependence, skipped reasoning, or improvements attributable partly to better GenAI tools. Academic gains were reported more often for assignments than for examinations. The SEM indicated a positive indirect association between perceived skill growth and academic gains through adaptation of assignment processes, whereas academic gains did not clearly differ across developmental trajectory groups after multiplicity correction. The findings suggest that perceived GenAI skill development varies in both trajectory and skill domain and is associated with changes in learning practices and differentiated academic benefits.
Human-Computer Interaction (cs.HC); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)
arXiv:2610.30599 [cs.HC]
(or arXiv:2610.30599v1 [cs.HC] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2610.30599 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.
Text integral sub licența deschisă a publicației · 317 cuvinte
Subiecte conexe

What 434 AI-Generated Vulnerabilities Reveal About Secure Software Development
Cybersecurity News · 22 iul. 2026
When Stories Evolve: Benchmarking LLM Storytelling Across Agent Architectures in Open-Ended World Simulations
arXiv · 18 aug. 2026
Learning from 53.6K Real-World Developer Edits of AI-Generated Code
arXiv · 29 iul. 2026

The major labels propose rules to keep AI slop off the charts
The Verge · 31 iul. 2026