GenAI tools are increasingly used in academic settings, yet little is known about how they affect higher-order thinking during critical reading and writing revision. A new study has found that postgraduate students selectively engage with GenAI when revising critical reading reports, focusing intensely on specific analytical dimensions. This strategic engagement is shaped by academic goals, supervisor demands, career aspirations, and misunderstandings of content.
Critical reading and writing are essential skills for academic success. Revising critical reading reports is crucial for developing these competencies, yet students often struggle. With the rise of GenAI tools, students now have new ways to engage with this complex, higher-order thinking process.
In a study published online on October 31, 2025, in ECNU Review of Education , a team of researchers from Macao Polytechnic University and Jiangxi Normal University investigated how 22 postgraduate students used GenAI tools to revise their critical reading reports. Using lag sequential analysis and thematic analysis, the team examined student engagement across ten dimensions of critical reading and writing based on Wallace and Wray's framework.
"Contrary to assumptions that artificial intelligence might uniformly guide learning, we see students making strategic choices," explained Lin et al.
The study found that students spent significantly more time revising four dimensions: research aims and investigation, research contributions, quality of evidence, and adaptation of theoretical frameworks. This selective engagement was primarily influenced by students' reading purposes, external demands from supervisors, their career plans as future teachers, and literal misunderstandings of the content.
The researchers found that engagement was lower in dimensions like moral or value preferences, generalization of findings, and consistency with personal experience, often due to a lack of external requirement or perceived personal relevance. "Our findings highlight that GenAI tools are assistants, not replacements, in developing critical thinking. The role of teacher guidance and student agency is important," concluded Lin et al.
