As Generative AI (GenAI) becomes integral to education, fostering GenAI literacy is critical. However, current assessments largely rely on self-reported scales, lacking insights into how literacy manifests in actual learning processes. This study leverages Learning Analytics (LA) to bridge this gap. We collected interaction logs from 162 university students engaged in a GenAI-assisted abstract writing task. Using Epistemic Network Analysis (ENA), we modeled and compared the questioning strategies of students with varying GenAI literacy levels. Preliminary results reveal distinct interaction signatures: high-literacy students engage in iterative refinement and strategic questioning, while low-literacy students rely on direct generation commands. This work contributes to the workshop by demonstrating how process data can characterize GenAI literacy, paving the way for data-driven literacy assessment and real-time interventions.
Epistemic thinking plays a central role in students' learning processes when applying generative artificial intelligence (GenAI), particularly in programming contexts where learners must construct queries, evaluate and validate AI-generated outputs, and regulate problem-solving strategies. This study introduces the conceptual framework of Epistemic AI Literacy (EAIL), reframing AI literacy as a process-oriented epistemic phenomenon that emerges through dynamic human-AI interactions across different domains. Drawing on the AIR (epistemic aims, ideals and reliable epistemic processes) framework, this study examines how epistemic aims and epistemic processes are enacted in GenAI-supported co-programming activities and explores scalable approaches for operationalizing these constructs in interaction data. Using a large dialogue dataset of human-AI co-programming, this study identifies observable dimensions of epistemic aims (i.e., mastery-oriented aims) and epistemic processes (i.e., outsourcing, explanation seeking, verification seeking, prompt monitoring, and epistemic justification). The results reveal a prevalent lack of EAIL, with 78.8% of student-GenAI interactions relying on non-mastery-oriented aims and less reliable epistemic strategies like outsourcing and verification-seeking. Conversely, only 11.1% of interactions showed high epistemic engagement, where mastery-oriented aims were coupled with advanced epistemic strategies like epistemic justification in a more reliable epistemic process.
Higher education institutions are increasingly expected to ensure that both students and staff develop Generative AI (GenAI) literacies. In response, they are introducing professional development programs and embedding GenAI skills within student curricula. However, current educational frameworks typically assume a linear progression of GenAI literacy, implying that foundational technical understanding must precede creative application. This paper challenges such an assumption through a psychometric analysis of a taxonomy-based self-assessment instrument (n = 158). We applied Rasch measurement theory and Guttman ordering to map the latent perceived order of difficulty of GenAI skills across students, academics, and professional staff. Results reveal a fundamental divergence in perceived competence profiles: while academics follow a more traditional linear path, students exhibit an "inverted" profile, frequently mastering high-level creation tasks before acquiring foundational conceptual understanding. Furthermore, the correlation of skill difficulty between students and academics was weak (r = 0.188). We argue that this "skill bypass" creates a fragile sense of fluency, where high self-efficacy in prompting masks low literacy in AI mechanics. These findings challenge the "one-size-fits-all" curricula and provide the empirical basis for diagnostic-driven, modular interventions that foster genuine human-AI synergy.
The integration of Generative AI (GenAI) into language learning offers second language (L2) writers powerful tools for text optimization. However, pursuing native-like fluency often sacrifices sociopragmatic diversity. Investigating "pragmatic flattening" - the systematic erasure of culturally preferred politeness and authorial stance - this study conducts a comparative analysis of argumentative essays by Chinese B2-level university students from the ICNALE corpus. The original texts were polished via the APIs of four leading Large Language Models at a zero-temperature setting for reproducibility. Findings reveal a nuanced "dimensional divergence" within the Semantic Preservation Paradox. While models corrected lexicogrammatical errors and retained propositional meaning, sociopragmatic interventions were bifurcated. In the interactive dimension, all models showed a drastic collapse of dialogic engagement markers, turning negotiated discourse into monologic assertions. Conversely, in the epistemic stance dimension, models showed architecture-based variability: some aggressively scrubbed epistemic markers, while others reinforced tentative hedging as decontextualized algorithmic caution. This confirms that while GenAI enhances accuracy, it systematically overwrites L2 writers' unique rhetorical identities into a homogenized Anglo-American paradigm. We argue that future instruction must move beyond error correction, advocating for Critical AI Literacy to empower multilingual writers to use GenAI for linguistic enhancement while safeguarding sociopragmatic diversity and rhetorical agency.