Date
Publisher
arXiv
With the rapid adoption of AI tools in learning contexts, it is vital to understand how these systems shape users' reading processes and cognitive engagement. We collected and analyzed text from 124 sessions with AI tools, in which students used these tools to support them as they read assigned readings for an undergraduate course. We categorized participants' prompts to AI according to Bloom's Taxonomy of educational objectives -- Remembering, Understanding, Applying, Analyzing, Evaluating. Our results show that ``Analyzing'' and ``Evaluating'' are more prevalent in users' second and third prompts within a single usage session, suggesting a shift toward higher-order thinking. However, in reviewing users' engagement with AI tools over several weeks, we found that users converge toward passive reading engagement over time. Based on these results, we propose design implications for future AI reading-support systems, including structured scaffolds for lower-level cognitive tasks (e.g., recalling terms) and proactive prompts that encourage higher-order thinking (e.g., analyzing, applying, evaluating). Additionally, we advocate for adaptive, human-in-the-loop features that allow students and instructors to tailor their reading experiences with AI, balancing efficiency with enriched cognitive engagement. Our paper expands the dialogue on integrating AI into academic reading, highlighting both its potential benefits and challenges.
Study at a glance
- Question: How do AI tools affect students' reading and thinking as they complete course readings?
- Setting and data: Undergraduate course; 124 AI tool sessions of students doing assigned readings over several weeks.
- Method: Categorization and analysis of student prompts to AI using Bloom's Taxonomy.
Why it matters
With the rapid adoption of AI tools in learning contexts, it is vital to understand how these systems shape users' reading processes and cognitive engagement.
Key findings
- In an undergraduate course across 124 sessions, students' second and third prompts to AI more frequently involved analyzing and evaluating course readings.
- Students' later prompts within a single reading session suggest a shift toward higher-order thinking.
- Over several weeks of use, students converged toward passive reading engagement with AI tools.
Summary drafted with AI from the paper’s abstract and may contain errors. See the full paper for details.
What is the application?
Who is the user?
Who age?
Why use AI?
Study design

