Generative AI Availability, Grades, and Student Satisfaction at a Large University

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2607.21534v2
• Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2026 18:36:14 GMT
• Title: Generative AI Availability, Grades, and Student Satisfaction at a Large University
• Abstract summary: The spread of generative AI (GenAI) in higher education has raised concerns that students offload cognitive effort to AI, earning high grades without learning.<n>If this "GenAI substitution hypothesis" is true, grades should rise disproportionately in GenAI-susceptible courses.<n>We find no significant differential effect of GenAI availability on grades overall or among previously lower-performing students.
• Score: 6.872059640265074
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: The spread of generative AI (GenAI) in higher education has raised concerns that students offload cognitive effort to AI, earning high grades without learning. If this "GenAI substitution hypothesis" is true, grades should rise disproportionately in GenAI-susceptible courses--those relying more on assessments like take-home problem sets and essays rather than in-class exams. Substitution could also affect student satisfaction, measured here as self-reported understanding and interest in the subject, which prior research links to assessments. We test the substitution hypothesis using syllabus and administrative data from a large U.S. university (2016-2025; 138,386 students; 72,730 course offerings). We measure courses' GenAI susceptibility using a human-validated LLM pipeline to extract assessment types from syllabi, and use a differences-in-differences design comparing outcomes across courses before and after ChatGPT's release, while modeling COVID-19 pandemic effects as either persistent or transient. We find no significant differential effect of GenAI availability on grades overall or among previously lower-performing students. Effects on self-reported understanding are likewise insignificant; effects on interest are significant only assuming transient pandemic effects. Our findings temper concerns that GenAI inflates grades and reduces students' satisfaction.

Related papers

• GenAIT: Development and Validation of an Objective Generative AI Literacy Test for High School Students [0.5735035463793009]
  There is growing international interest in generative AI (GenAI) literacy and its assessment among high school students, but objective assessment in this population remains underdeveloped.<n>This article reports the iterative development and validation of the GenAI Literacy Test (GenAIT), an 18-item multiple-choice test measuring high school students' conceptual knowledge about GenAI.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-26T13:58:56Z)
• Is Solving Better Than Evaluating GenAI Solutions? [45.714140455691485]
  This study compares evaluating GenAI-generated solutions with traditional problem solving in a junior-level algorithms course.<n>We found no statistically significant differences between groups in midterm scores, final exam scores, overall course grades, or exam problems structurally aligned with the homework interventions.<n>Students received significantly higher homework scores when evaluating GenAI-generated solutions, but this localized advantage did not translate into downstream gains.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-30T02:08:29Z)
• Faster Completion, Less Learning: Generative AI Reduced Study Time on Math Problems and the Knowledge They Build [0.6524460254566904]
  Self-report surveys show little change, while small-scale behavioral studies report widespread AI use without the scale or duration to measure learning consequences.<n>We use a ten-year panel of $3.2$ million ALEKS learning interactions for the time-on-task analysis.<n>These results are among the first large-scale behavioral and outcome evidence that generative AI has altered how students study and the knowledge they build.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-20T18:40:53Z)
• AI Literacy, Safety Awareness, and STEM Career Aspirations of Australian Secondary Students: Evaluating the Impact of Workshop Interventions [38.350232667249095]
  Deepfakes and other forms of synthetic media pose growing safety risks for adolescents.<n>This study evaluates the impact of Day of AI Australia's workshop-based intervention on Australian secondary students.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-30T02:55:53Z)
• Generative AI Practices, Literacy, and Divides: An Empirical Analysis in the Italian Context [32.495879271249414]
  This study presents the first comprehensive empirical mapping of GenAI adoption, usage patterns, and literacy in Italy.<n>Our findings reveal widespread adoption for both work and personal use, including sensitive tasks like emotional support and medical advice.<n>We identify a significant gender divide where women are half as likely to adopt GenAI and use it less frequently than men.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-03T11:01:28Z)
• Impact of AI Tools on Learning Outcomes: Decreasing Knowledge and Over-Reliance [0.0]
  Students at all levels of education are increasingly relying on generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools to complete assignments and achieve higher exam scores.<n>To investigate the impact of generative AI on learning outcomes, an experiment was conducted at Corvinus University of Budapest.<n>Despite the organizers' best efforts to explain the design and to create equal opportunities for all participants, many students perceived the experiment as a major disruption.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-15T13:48:14Z)
• Understanding Student Attitudes and Acceptability of GenAI Tools in Higher Ed: Scale Development and Evaluation [22.35484281040714]
  This study introduces a validated survey instrument designed to assess students' perceptions of generative AI (GenAI)<n>The instrument includes six thematic domains: institutional understanding, fairness and trust, academic and career influence, societal concerns, and GenAI use in writing and coursework.<n>Students from multilingual households perceived greater clarity in institutional policy, while first-generation students reported a stronger belief in GenAI's impact on future careers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-03T21:22:34Z)
• Evaluating the AI-Lab Intervention: Impact on Student Perception and Use of Generative AI in Early Undergraduate Computer Science Courses [0.0]
  Generative AI (GenAI) is rapidly entering computer science education.<n>Concerns about overreliance coexist with a gap in research on structured scaffolding to guide tool use in formal courses.<n>This study examines the impact of a dedicated "AI-Lab" intervention on undergraduate students.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-30T18:12:42Z)
• Evaluating and Mitigating Bias in AI-Based Medical Text Generation [35.24191727599811]
  AI systems may reflect and amplify human bias, and reduce the quality of their performance in historically under-served populations.<n>In this study, we investigate the fairness problem in text generation within the medical field.<n>We propose an algorithm that selectively optimize those underperformed groups to reduce bias.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-24T06:10:40Z)
• DASKT: A Dynamic Affect Simulation Method for Knowledge Tracing [51.665582274736785]
  Knowledge Tracing (KT) predicts future performance by students' historical computation, and understanding students' affective states can enhance the effectiveness of KT.<n>We propose Affect Dynamic Knowledge Tracing (DASKT) to explore the impact of various student affective states on their knowledge states.<n>Our research highlights a promising avenue for future studies, focusing on achieving high interpretability and accuracy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-18T10:02:10Z)
• Early Adoption of Generative Artificial Intelligence in Computing Education: Emergent Student Use Cases and Perspectives in 2023 [38.83649319653387]
  There is limited prior research on computing students' use and perceptions of GenAI. We surveyed all computer science majors in a small engineering-focused R1 university. We discuss the impact of our findings on the emerging conversation around GenAI and education.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-17T20:17:47Z)
• Hey GPT, Can You be More Racist? Analysis from Crowdsourced Attempts to Elicit Biased Content from Generative AI [41.96102438774773]
  This work presents the findings from a university-level competition, which challenged participants to design prompts for eliciting biased outputs from GenAI tools. We quantitatively and qualitatively analyze the competition submissions and identify a diverse set of biases in GenAI and strategies employed by participants to induce bias in GenAI.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-20T18:44:45Z)
• A Meta-analysis of College Students' Intention to Use Generative Artificial Intelligence [5.13644976086965]
  This study conducted a meta-analysis of 27 empirical studies under an integrated theoretical framework. Main variables are strongly correlated with students' behavioural intention to use GenAI. Gender, notably, only moderated attitudes on students' behavioural intention to use GenAI.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-25T15:46:57Z)
• Beyond human subjectivity and error: a novel AI grading system [67.410870290301]
  The grading of open-ended questions is a high-effort, high-impact task in education. Recent breakthroughs in AI technology might facilitate such automation, but this has not been demonstrated at scale. We introduce a novel automatic short answer grading (ASAG) system.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-07T13:49:59Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.