Graduate Students' Perceptions of Generative AI's Impact on Critical Thinking Development
Type of Presentation
Poster Session
Location
University Library
Start Date
4-10-2026 11:30 AM
End Date
4-10-2026 12:45 PM
Description of Program
This research investigates graduate students’ use of generative artificial intelligence and its perceived influence on critical thinking. Drawing on survey data from multiple universities, it examines usage patterns, ethical confidence, and identified benefits and risks, offering evidence‑informed guidance for integrating AI in ways that preserve rigorous, independent reasoning.
Abstract
Generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools are becoming increasingly common in graduate education, offering conveniences such as improved access to information, support with organization, and opportunities for personalized learning. At the same time, faculty and students continue to question whether frequent use of these tools may unintentionally weaken critical thinking, a skill central to advanced academic work. This study examined how graduate students perceive generative AI and how they believe it influences their development as critical thinkers. The project focused on students’ patterns of use, their confidence in applying AI ethically, and the benefits and risks they associate with these tools. An exploratory quantitative design was used with a sample of 58 graduate students representing 21 universities and a range of disciplines. The survey included both closed- and open‑ended questions addressing AI use, perceived effects on thinking, and ethical considerations. Quantitative data were summarized descriptively, and qualitative responses were coded thematically. Most students reported using AI sparingly, typically one to two hours per week, and mainly for tasks such as organizing ideas or proofreading. ChatGPT was the most frequently used tool. While a majority (62%) felt confident in their ability to use AI ethically, more than half (58%) believed that reliance on AI could reduce critical thinking or create dependency. Students acknowledged that AI can help clarify concepts and spark ideas but also expressed concerns about diminished creativity and overly passive learning. Reports of academic misconduct were uncommon. Overall, students viewed AI as a helpful supplement rather than a replacement for independent reasoning. The findings highlight the need for thoughtful instructional design that encourages students to critique and question AI outputs while maintaining active engagement in their own learning.
Graduate Students' Perceptions of Generative AI's Impact on Critical Thinking Development
University Library
Generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools are becoming increasingly common in graduate education, offering conveniences such as improved access to information, support with organization, and opportunities for personalized learning. At the same time, faculty and students continue to question whether frequent use of these tools may unintentionally weaken critical thinking, a skill central to advanced academic work. This study examined how graduate students perceive generative AI and how they believe it influences their development as critical thinkers. The project focused on students’ patterns of use, their confidence in applying AI ethically, and the benefits and risks they associate with these tools. An exploratory quantitative design was used with a sample of 58 graduate students representing 21 universities and a range of disciplines. The survey included both closed- and open‑ended questions addressing AI use, perceived effects on thinking, and ethical considerations. Quantitative data were summarized descriptively, and qualitative responses were coded thematically. Most students reported using AI sparingly, typically one to two hours per week, and mainly for tasks such as organizing ideas or proofreading. ChatGPT was the most frequently used tool. While a majority (62%) felt confident in their ability to use AI ethically, more than half (58%) believed that reliance on AI could reduce critical thinking or create dependency. Students acknowledged that AI can help clarify concepts and spark ideas but also expressed concerns about diminished creativity and overly passive learning. Reports of academic misconduct were uncommon. Overall, students viewed AI as a helpful supplement rather than a replacement for independent reasoning. The findings highlight the need for thoughtful instructional design that encourages students to critique and question AI outputs while maintaining active engagement in their own learning.