AI-supported examination and construction practices (explanation, creation) qualify only as expanded or transformed epistemic practices because they can be performed without AI¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · qualitative r3 · q2
Currency · newest study 2026 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? In explanation and creation processes, AI merely supplements or substitutes other tools, so these practices are termed expanded or transformed rather than novel. → Dalsgaard 2026

Evidence¶

Dalsgaard 2026¶

Dalsgaard, C., & Prilop, C. N. (2026). AI as a cognitive partner in learning: Emerging epistemic practices of reflective thought. Journal of Research on Technology in Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2026.2695013

q2 · i? · qualitative · r3

Authors' interpretive distinction in the discussion: explaining concepts or methods is also possible by searching online or consulting literature, so AI-supported examination and construction are "expanded or transformed practices". Qualitative, no effect size.

"These epistemic practices can be performed without AI support and therefore only partially qualify as novel epistemic practices but can rather be termed expanded or transformed practices."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Students' generative AI use in upper secondary schoolwork clusters into four practices — explanation, creation, inspiration, and improvement — comprising eleven sub-processes — related
• Human guidance remains essential for ethical grounding when integrating AI with situated learning, including resisting complacency toward generative AI outputs — related
• A hybrid human-AI workflow using GPT-4o with retrieval-augmented generation supported efficient inductive thematic analysis while preserving researcher judgment — related
• Prompting learners to self-explain, one generative strategy, improves learning by a moderate average amount; other generative activities are not tested by the evidence recorded here — related