Quasi-experimental method showed that Gen-AI-assisted reading improved language creativity in students, suggesting integration of technology enhances learning.
This study aims to investigate the impact of the integration of guided discovery inquiry strategy in digital literature reading activity assisted by Gen-AI on students' language creativity level. This study used a quasi-experimental method involving 270 high school students. Data analysis used in this study was t-test and one-way ANCOVA test to investigate the impact of intervention on students' language creativity in short stories and reading tabloids they produced. The research findings show that the integration of guided discovery methods in Gen-AI-assisted digital literature reading activities significantly improved students' language creativity better than traditional reading methods. The increase in students' language creativity is seen in their ability to produce new short stories and create reading tabloids after reading digital fiction stories. The increase in students' language creativity is seen in the dimensions of fluency, flexibility, originality, and elaboration. The use of complex language, plot, characters, and events in short stories produced from the intervention results is a benchmark for language creativity. The increase in students' language creativity occurs because the use of Gen-AI technology and the stages of the guided discovery inquiry strategy in reading activities (preliminary reading, personal, group, and reflective) facilitate students in exploring creativity and accessing resources. This study implies that the guided discovery inquiry strategy in reading fiction stories must be integrated with the use of technology in order to be more optimal in increasing language creativity. In addition, creative development must be accommodated in the curriculum design and learning practices to increase student creativity. Received: 24 April 2025 / Accepted: 7 August 2025 / Published: 05 September 2025
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Meliyawati et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: