Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This study conducts a large-scale analysis of over 15,000 authentic interactions between college students and generative AI tools across various courses and academic domains. By examining the cognitive intent and interaction context of student requests, the research reveals that student-AI interactions are not only structured but also exhibit distinct patterns that vary significantly by course type. These findings highlight the importance of context in shaping how students leverage AI in their academic work, offering insights into the evolving role of generative AI in education.
Student interactions with generative AI are surprisingly structured, revealing distinct patterns that vary significantly across different academic contexts.
Generative AI tools (GenAI) are increasingly used by students during coursework, yet empirical understanding of how students engage with these systems in authentic learning contexts remains limited. Existing studies have largely relied on controlled settings, single-domain analyses, or small-scale qualitative data, leaving open how student-AI interaction unfolds across courses and forms of academic work. We present a large-scale analysis of naturally occurring student-AI interactions collected from undergraduate students across multiple university courses and academic domains. The dataset comprises over 15,000 student-AI interaction units drawn from voluntary use of generative AI during real coursework. To characterize these interactions, we analyze each student turn along two complementary dimensions, cognitive intent and interaction context, capturing whether requests are directed toward the task or domain, the student's own work, or prior AI output. Using instruction-guided annotation applied at scale, we examine how these interaction patterns are distributed overall and how they vary across courses. Our analysis reveals that student-AI interaction is highly structured. Across courses, interactions concentrate in a small number of recurring patterns rather than exhibiting highly idiosyncratic use. At the same time, systematic differences emerge across courses, giving rise to distinct interaction profiles associated with different forms of academic work.
