Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Examines AI's role in enhancing epistemic engagement in undergraduates, suggesting a need for structured learning designs.
This study examined how a design-based learning environment supported first-year undergraduates’ ( N = 31) epistemic engagement with generative AI in a science argumentation course. A two-year design-based research (DBR) study was conducted across two cycles (2024: n = 11; 2025: n = 20). Within a Toulmin-structured argumentation framework, learners interacted with ChatGPT, and their prompts were analysed as epistemic indicators across four stages of the Four-Stage Dialogic Partnership Model (4S-DPM): Epistemic Retrieval, Epistemic Scaffolding, Epistemic Critique, and Epistemic Agency. Comparative analysis revealed a significant shift toward higher-order epistemic engagement (Fisher’s exact test, p < .001): Stage 3–4 prompts increased from 12.5% to 47.0%, with Epistemic Agency prompts rising 3.6-fold (8.3% to 30.0%). Qualitative analysis identified dialogic restructuring, an iterative process in which learners examine and reconstruct their arguments through AI dialogue, as characteristic of Stage 4. Three design elements supported this trajectory: externalisation of argumentative structure, peer dialogue, and understanding of AI’s epistemic characteristics. These findings suggest that generative AI does not automatically function as an epistemic partner; rather, its role depends on the design of the learning environment. The 4S-DPM provides an analytical and pedagogical framework for designing science learning environments in which AI supports epistemic engagement.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Deguchi et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: