Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
The Agency Gap: How Generative AI Literacy Shapes Independent Writing after AI Support
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
The Agency Gap: How Generative AI Literacy Shapes Independent Writing after AI Support
Do you wish to request the book?
The Agency Gap: How Generative AI Literacy Shapes Independent Writing after AI Support
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Paper
The Agency Gap: How Generative AI Literacy Shapes Independent Writing after AI Support
2025
Overview
Generative AI (GenAI) tools are rapidly transforming higher education, yet little is known about how students' GenAI literacy shapes their ability to perform independently once such support is removed. This study investigates what we term the agency gap, introduced as the extent to which GenAI literacy predicts student writing performance in contexts that require self-initiation and regulation. Seventy-nine medical and nursing students completed multimodal academic writing tasks based on visual data, supported either by a reactive or proactive GenAI chatbot, followed by a parallel task without AI support. Writing was evaluated across insightfulness, visual data integration, organisation, linguistic quality, and critical thinking. Results showed that GenAI literacy predicted independent writing performance only in the reactive condition, where students had to actively mobilise their own strategies. Mediation analyses revealed no indirect effect via in-task performance, indicating that GenAI literacy acts as a direct, task-general competence rather than a proxy for domain knowledge or other literacies. By contrast, proactive scaffolding equalised outcomes across literacy levels, reducing reliance on learners' GenAI literacy. The agency gap highlights when GenAI literacy matters most, with implications for designing equitable AI-supported learning environments that both leverage and mitigate differences in students' GenAI literacy.
Publisher
Cornell University Library, arXiv.org
Subject
