Study on AI usage by first-year Health Sciences students

Fenne and Luke met while working as student tutors during the Health Sciences bachelor’s programme. Fenne is currently pursuing a Master in Legal Psychology and plans to follow up with a Master in Mental Health. Luke is nearing graduation in Mental Health and plans to study Philosophy of Cognition in Nijmegen in the future. Both work as student assistants for Herma Roebertsen.

Why this study? Luke: “At the end of their first year, Health Sciences students write a final project that they have been building towards through various assignments throughout the year. For each written piece, they reflect on whether, and for what purpose, they used AI, which outputs they adopted and how critically they evaluated them.” “Our study aims to provide insight into whether students are actually doing what is required of them,” Fenne adds. “Ultimately, the goal is for AI to remain a tool, while students continue to develop academic skills such as critical thinking, independent writing and methodical work. The results can help further refine the curriculum, assignments and assessment methods.”

The researchers analysed a sample of assignments from all first-year study groups. They examined both final products and earlier assignments, to determine whether the way students reflect evolves over the course of the academic year. In total, they scrutinised an estimated several hundred assignments.

Although the final results are not yet available (the statistical comparison had yet to take place at the time of the interview), both researchers can already comment on what they encountered in the reflections. Fenne: “Students use AI for tasks such as spelling, grammar, translation, text construction, search strategies, source analysis and simplifying complex material.” However, some students indicate that they largely delegate the writing process itself. “We came across reflections in which students openly stated that they had let AI write entire passages or paragraphs,” says Luke. “In some cases, even the reflection on AI usage appeared to have been drafted with the help of AI.” That openness came as a surprise. “This demonstrates that the educational programme encourages students to experiment with AI and reflect on that experience.”

Fenne and Luke are under the impression that students have started to reflect more consciously as the year progresses. “As the academic year advances, they explain their choices more frequently and effectively. For instance, they might write that they do not fully trust AI or that they want to develop their own writing style first.” They also observe differences in how the work is assessed. Luke: “The reflection is a mandatory part of the assignment, yet mentors do not always seem to factor it into the grading. Perhaps our research will contribute to establishing clear guidelines regarding exactly what is expected of students and assessors concerning the use of AI.”

How do the researchers themselves use AI? By his own account, Luke uses it sparingly. “I actually enjoy thinking critically and to figure it out myself. AI takes away some of that fun. I do occasionally ask for help with phrasing a sentence, but I prefer to handle the actual thinking myself.” Fenne uses AI in moderation. “Because I felt my thesis was too wordy and narrative-heavy, I had AI shorten a passage from about 600 words to 100. Although I wasn’t entirely happy with the result, it did help me to look at my own text more critically. I think it is essential to form your own thoughts and put them on paper first and only then bring in AI.”

Luke and Fenne see the value of AI in education primarily in terms of making information more accessible, automating routine tasks, and working more efficiently. “At the same time, students need to keep thinking for themselves. For instance, by being able to grasp the overall steps of a research project: What is my question? How do I collect data? Which analysis is appropriate? Where can AI add value? If you lack that insight, you no longer understand how certain results are reached and, consequently, you don’t learn anything.” Alongside critical thinking, working methodically is therefore becoming increasingly important.

Fenne’s opinion on AI shifted positively over the course of the research. “Seeing how students use it inspired me to take a more open-minded approach to AI. For example, I had study material converted into a podcast that I could listen to on my way to university. It was incredibly handy.”

“AI isn’t going anywhere, and its quality will only improve,” Luke predicts. “The most important thing, then, is to teach students how to use AI consciously, critically and responsibly. Hopefully, the insights from our research will help a little with that.”