When AI becomes an intellectual intermediary: A situated correspondence framework linking epistemic responsibility, intellectual engagement, and independent capability in higher education

Mario Guadalupe López Ayala; Israel Osuna Flores

doi:10.32351/rca.v11.443

Authors

Mario Guadalupe López Ayala Autonomous University of the West https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5377-6257
Israel Osuna Flores Autonomous Indigenous University of Mexico https://orcid.org/0009-0001-0199-2983

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.32351/rca.v11.443

Política de Crossmark DOI: https://doi.org/10.32351/politica-crossmark

Keywords:

generative artificial intelligence, higher education, epistemic responsibility, intellectual engagement, assessment validity, human agency, cognitive offloading

Abstract

Generative artificial intelligence has unsettled a familiar educational inference: that the quality of an academic product is adequate evidence of the intellectual work performed by the student who submits it. This conceptual article develops the Situated Correspondence Framework, an analytical architecture that connects three moments often treated separately: the intellectual operations a task assigns to the learner, evidence that those operations were enacted during AI-mediated activity, and the capabilities that remain demonstrable when assistance conditions change. The framework distinguishes Assigned Epistemic Responsibility (AER) and Constitutive Intellectual Operations (CIO) from Enacted Intellectual Engagement (EIE), AI-Assisted Performance (AIP), and Demonstrated Independent Capability (DIC), while treating AI Assistance Configuration (AIC) and Situated Opportunity Conditions (SOC) as proximal interpretive conditions rather than learner attributes. Drawing on research on cognitive offloading, human–technology partnership, evaluative judgement, assessment validity, AI literacy, and educational capability, six propositions are formulated for empirical challenge. The contribution is not a new label for offloading, engagement, or independent performance. It lies in linking ex ante intellectual responsibility to observed enactment and later demonstrability without assuming that assisted performance and learner capability coincide. This evidentiary layer extends a broader human-centered learning agenda while leaving open a question that cannot be settled in the abstract: which operations should remain attributable to the learner across different disciplines and assessment purposes?

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Mario Guadalupe López Ayala, Autonomous University of the West

Mexican university professor and researcher. He holds doctoral degrees in Educational Innovation and Administration and in Psychopedagogy. He is affiliated with Universidad Autónoma de Occidente and Universidad Autónoma de Sinaloa, Mexico. His scholarly work integrates human-centered artificial intelligence, socio-technical systems, applied psychology, educational innovation, and AI governance. His research examines the intersections of technology, cognition, human behavior, and institutional transformation, with particular attention to their social and ethical implications. He is an author and co-author of scientific publications, leads the Human-Centered AI & Socio-Technical Systems Lab, and develops research and science communication initiatives through Phoenix24, fostering knowledge generation and its transfer to society.
Israel Osuna Flores, Autonomous Indigenous University of Mexico

Is currently a Professor-Researcher at the Autonomous Indigenous University of Mexico (UNAM), affiliated with the Biotechnology Engineering Program at both the Virtual Unit and the Mochicahui Unit. He recently received an honorary doctorate from the International Organization for Inclusion and Quality Education (OIICE). He has held various positions, including Administrative Analyst and Reviewer at the National Aquaculture and Fisheries Commission; advisor to the company Acuícola Gilberto, S.C. de C.V., R.L.; and columnist for the online newspaper Phoenix Medios. He is currently the Coordinator of the Biotechnology Engineering Program (Virtual Unit) at UNAM. He teaches courses in Biology, Social and Solidarity Economy, Introduction to Biotechnology, Community Engagement Awareness, and Information Management Tools. He was Coordinator of the Projects Department at the Technology Transfer Office of the Autonomous Indigenous University of Mexico and is a member of the Sinaloa System of Researchers and Technologists. He has also been a Professor-Researcher at the same institution, where he taught courses in the Bachelor's Degree in Forestry Engineering and Sustainable Development (Forest Entomology, Biodiversity, Thesis Seminar, Environmental Projection, and Project Formulation and Evaluation), as well as in the Graduate Program in Sciences in Sustainable Development of Natural Resources (Aquaculture Production, Environmental Pollution, and Ecotoxicology). He has directed and advised two undergraduate theses and monographs and three graduate theses and dissertations. He was a member of the Academic Group on Sustainable Development. His research experience focuses on adding value to agroforestry products, pollution, and environmental toxicology. He has published articles in JCR-indexed, peer-reviewed, and popular science journals. In addition, he participates in various scientific societies and has served as a project evaluator at events such as the Pacific Regional Science Fair and the National Science Fair. He was a member of the National System of Researchers (SNI) as a Candidate from July 2002 to December 2005 and received recognition from the CONACYT Repatriation Program in 1999. His professional experience includes leading several research and outreach projects funded by COSNET and SECIHTI, as well as holding various academic and administrative positions, including: Head of the Toxic Waste Laboratory at the Center for Research in Food and Development, A.C. (Delicias Unit), and Director of Research at the Autonomous Indigenous University of Mexico (UNAM). He has been a candidate for Rector of UNAM in Los Mochis, Sinaloa, Mexico, on three occasions (2017, 2021, and 2025). He has also worked at the National Technological Institute of Mexico (Los Mochis Campus), the University of the Sea, the Autonomous University of the West, the University of Guadalajara and the Center for Research in Food and Development, A.C. (Delicias Unit), where he has developed research projects and taught courses related to Fisheries Biology, Fisheries Technology, Ecology, Zoology, Aquaculture, Environmental Toxicology and Ecotoxicology.

References

Almazrou, S., Alanezi, F., Almutairi, S. A., AboAlsamh, H. M., Alsedrah, I. T., Arif, W. M., Alsadhan, A. A., AlSanad, D. S., Alqahtani, N. S., AlShammary, M. H., Bakhshwain, A. M., Almuhanna, A. F., Almulhem, M., Alnaim, N., Albelali, S., & Attar, R. W. (2025). Enhancing medical students critical thinking skills through ChatGPT: An empirical study with medical students. Nutrition and Health, 31(3), 1023–1033. https://doi.org/10.1177/02601060241273627

Bearman, M., Tai, J., Dawson, P., Boud, D., & Ajjawi, R. (2024). Developing evaluative judgement for a time of generative artificial intelligence. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 49(6), 893–905. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2024.2335321

Bencsik, A., Jenei, S., & Módos-Szalai, S. (2026). Who gets to use ChatGPT? A global study on digital access and inequality in higher education. Social Sciences & Humanities Open, 13, 102479. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2026.102479

de Carvalho, M. R., Greco, M. E., & de Souza, D. M. (2025). Use of ChatGPT as a study and teaching complementary tool in the medical course. Educação e Pesquisa, 51, e288875. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1678-4634202551288875en

Chen, X. (2026). Layer-sensitive cognitive offloading in generative AI-assisted writing: Supported performance and independent no-AI outcomes. Frontiers in Psychology, 17, 1906199. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2026.1906199

Chi, M. T. H., & Wylie, R. (2014). The ICAP framework: Linking cognitive engagement to active learning outcomes. Educational Psychologist, 49(4), 219–243. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2014.965823

Dawson, P., Bearman, M., Dollinger, M., & Boud, D. (2024). Validity matters more than cheating. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 49(7), 1005–1016. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2024.2386662

Du, Y., & Yuan, Y. (2026). Epistemic dependence in AI-mediated learning within higher education: A framework for student judgement and responsibility. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2026.2732250

Ebrahimzadeh, M., Shibani, A., & Buckingham Shum, S. (2026). Coauthorship integrity: Reconceptualising assessment validity for the age of generative artificial intelligence. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 10, 100609. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2026.100609

Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59–109. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543074001059

Gao, L., & Zhang, F. (2026). Cognitive offloading and metacognitive calibration in generative AI-mediated doctoral learning: A grounded theory study of accountable reconstruction. Frontiers in Psychology, 17, 1920947. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2026.1920947

Hornberger, M., Bewersdorff, A., Schiff, D. S., & Nerdel, C. (2025). A multinational assessment of AI literacy among university students in Germany, the UK, and the US. Computers in Human Behavior: Artificial Humans, 4, 100132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbah.2025.100132

Jaakkola, E. (2020). Designing conceptual articles: Four approaches. AMS Review, 10, 18–26. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13162-020-00161-0

Kawai, R., Ito, T., & Itabashi, S. (2025). Developing critical thinking attitudes in university students using ChatGPT. Journal of the Japan Society of Technology Education, 67(1), 51–58. https://doi.org/10.32309/jjste.67.1_51

Lan, M., & Zhou, X. (2025). A qualitative systematic review on AI empowered self-regulated learning in higher education. npj Science of Learning, 10, 21. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-025-00319-0

Long, D., & Magerko, B. (2020). What is AI literacy? Competencies and design considerations. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1–16). Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/3313831.3376727

López Ayala, M. G. (2026). Spectra Human-Centered Learning Framework: A Socio-Technical Architecture for AI-Supported Higher Education. MenteClara Foundation’s Peer-Reviewed Journal, 11, 441. https://doi.org/10.32351/rca.v11.441

Luo, J., & Yin, X. (2026). Tracing student engagement in dialogues with GenAI in assessment: A semester-long exploratory study. Innovations in Education and Teaching International. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2026.2663354

Masalimova, A. R., Zheltukhina, M. R., Demir, S., Molodozhnikova, N. M., Zvereva, E. V., Berechikidze, I. A., & Lazareva, Y. B. (2026). Mapping human–AI communication in a Russian higher education context: A psychometric network analysis of AI literacy and attitudinal dispositions. Frontiers in Communication, 11, 1888712. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2026.1888712

Oliveira, M., Zednik, C., Bombaerts, G., Sadowski, B., & Conijn, R. (2025). Assessing students' DRIVE: A framework to evaluate learning through interactions with generative AI. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 9, 100497. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2025.100497

Panadero, E. (2017). A review of self-regulated learning: Six models and four directions for research. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 422. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00422

Risko, E. F., & Gilbert, S. J. (2016). Cognitive offloading. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 20(9), 676–688. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2016.07.002

Saito, T. (2026). Redefining agency: A capability-driven research agenda for generative AI in education. Education Sciences, 16(1), 155. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci16010155

Salomon, G., Perkins, D. N., & Globerson, T. (1991). Partners in cognition: Extending human intelligence with intelligent technologies. Educational Researcher, 20(3), 2–9. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X020003002

Schraw, G., & Dennison, R. S. (1994). Assessing metacognitive awareness. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 19(4), 460–475. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1994.1033

Sharma, S. (2026). Educational integrity in GenAI-augmented assessment: Making judgement visible. International Journal for Educational Integrity, 22, 6. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40979-026-00216-y

Snyder, H. (2019). Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 104, 333–339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.07.039

Soderstrom, N. C., & Bjork, R. A. (2015). Learning versus performance: An integrative review. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 10(2), 176–199. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691615569000

Tai, J., Ajjawi, R., Boud, D., Dawson, P., & Panadero, E. (2018). Developing evaluative judgement: Enabling students to make decisions about the quality of work. Higher Education, 76, 467–481. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-017-0220-3

Velázquez-García, L., Cedillo-Hernández, A., Colón-Vallejo, A., & Longar-Blanco, M. del P. (2025). Examining the impact of ChatGPT on Mexican students' performance in higher education. International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 15(7), 1368–1376. https://doi.org/10.18178/ijiet.2025.15.7.2338

Walker, M. (2008). A human capabilities framework for evaluating student learning. Teaching in Higher Education, 13(4), 477–487. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562510802169764

Walton, J., Bearman, M., Crawford, N., Tai, J., & Boud, D. (2026). How university students work on assessment tasks with generative artificial intelligence: Matters of judgement. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 51(6), 1066–1082. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2025.2570328

Weidlich, J. (2026). Which inference is at risk? Assessment validity reasoning and generative AI. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2026.2734795

Wong, S. S. H., & Qiu, S. X. (2026). Think first, ChatGPT later: Guiding human–AI collaboration for learning gains in independent human creativity. Educational Psychology Review, 38, 45. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-026-10118-7

Zhu, Q., Li, X., Dong, Y., Chang, P., & Fan, M. (2026). Not all cognitive offloading is equal: Distinguishing dependent and autonomous offloading to generative AI. Frontiers in Psychology, 17, 1878629. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2026.1878629