Improving AI prompt literacy: experimental evidence on the effect of an online tutorial among university students

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.47408/jldhe.vi41.2005

Keywords:

artificial intelligence, generative artificial intelligence, higher education, ChatGPT, academic skills, prompt literacy, GAI tools

Abstract

This study investigated university students’ use of generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools, focusing on prompt literacy, user behaviour, and satisfaction with AI‑generated outputs. 90 students completed a range of tasks using a generative AI tool of their choice, with half completing a tutorial on effective prompting and output evaluation. ChatGPT was used by most participants, with limited use of alternative tools and a reluctance to engage with additional features. Overall, students reported high levels of satisfaction with AI outputs, particularly for fixing codes, while satisfaction was lower for image creation and data organisation. Students who completed the tutorial were significantly more likely to produce well‑structured prompts aligned with the CLEAR framework and to critically evaluate outputs. However, self-reported confidence did not always align with observed behaviours. The findings suggest that prompt literacy is a learnable skill and that tutorials can support more effective and reflective use of generative AI.

Author Biographies

Bryony N Parsons, University of Liverpool

Bryony Parsons is a Learning Developer in Libraries, Museums and Galleries at the University of Liverpool. Her work focuses on developing students’ academic and digital skills, with a particular emphasis on statistics education across disciplines. She has a strong interest in academic integrity and the use of generative AI in higher education, contributing to institutional projects exploring its opportunities and challenges. Her practice centres on helping students build confidence, critical thinking and independence in their learning.

Kate Murray, University of Liverpool

Kate Murray is the Liaison Librarian for the School of Law and Social Justice at the University of Liverpool. She is a Fellow of the Higher Education Academy. Her role contributes to the Liverpool Curriculum Design Framework and Educational Strategy through embedded academic skills teaching. She is interested in facilitating access to teaching resources, cultivating inclusive learning opportunities for students and visual learning.

Gina Gundersen, University of Liverpool

Gina Gundersen is a final-year Mathematics master’s student at the University of Liverpool with a particular interest in mathematics education, research and data analysis. She enjoys finding clear and approachable ways to explain mathematical and computational ideas. Alongside her studies, Gina is actively involved in supporting students through Peer Assisted Learning and outreach, with a particular focus on inclusive, student-centred approaches to education and making mathematics more accessible and welcoming to a wider range of learners.

Athiene Maslin, University of Liverpool

Athiene Maslin is an English Literature graduate from the University of Liverpool and the University of Edinburgh. She has a particular interest in eighteenth century Romantic poetry and the relationship between language and the political context of the time. Most of her work concerns the natural world within Romantic and early Victorian poetry and prose. She recently completed her Master’s dissertation on the use of political terminology within landscape poetry of three eighteenth and nineteenth century authors. Alongside her studies, Athiene is involved in supporting her peers as a Course Representative. 

Heather Johnston, University of Liverpool

Heather Johnston is a Learning Developer in Libraries, Museums and Galleries at the University of Liverpool where she develops sessions and learning materials on a range of academic skills topics to help students from all subjects and levels of study to improve their confidence. She has co-led a number of research projects around the use of AI in higher education, gathering student perspectives on usage to help inform university policy and academic skills teaching practices.

References

Al Abri, M., Al Mamari, A., & Al Marzouqi, Z. (2025). Exploring the implications of generative-AI tools in teaching and learning practices. Journal of Education and E-Learning Research, 12(1), 31–41. https://doi.org/10.20448/jeelr.v12i1.6355

Alkaras, T. M. W. (2026). From prompts to proficiency: The role of pedagogical prompt engineering in enhancing EFL university students’ academic writing competencies. TANWIR: A Journal of Arts and Humanities, 3(4), 83–106. https://doi.org/10.21608/TANWIR.2026.501930

Bozkurt, A. (2024). Tell me your prompts and I will make them true: The alchemy of prompt engineering and generative AI. Open Praxis, 16(2), 111–118. https://doi.org/10.55982/openpraxis.16.2.661

Davies, M., & Barnett, R. (Eds.). (2015). The Palgrave handbook of critical thinking in higher education. Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137378057

Ellison, C., Coulby, C., Saunders, S., Lindsay, R., & Hands, C. (2025). What’s really going on out there? Exploration of staff and student experiences of generative artificial intelligence at the University of Liverpool. Perspectives: Policy and Practice in Higher Education, 30(2), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603108.2025.2505883

Johnston, H., Eaton, M., Henry, I., Deeley, E. M., & Parsons, B. N. (2025). Discovering how students use generative artificial intelligence tools for academic writing purposes. Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education, (34), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.47408/jldhe.vi34.1301

Johnston, H., Wells, R. F., Shanks, E. M., Boey, T., & Parsons, B. N. (2024). Student perspectives on the use of generative artificial intelligence technologies in higher education. International Journal for Educational Integrity, 20(1), Article 2. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40979-024-00149-4

Joshi, S. (2025). Training US workforce for generative AI models and prompt engineering: ChatGPT, Copilot, and Gemini. International Journal of Science, Engineering and Technology, 13(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.61463/ijset.vol.13.issue1.155

Knoth, N., Tolzin, A., Jansen, A., & Leimeister, J.M. (2024). AI literacy and its implications for prompt engineering strategies. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 6, Article 100225. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100225

Koroleva, D., & Jogezai, N. (2024). The desire path: Unleashing expectations, discussing apprehensions, and proposing a way forward for GAI use in higher education. Information and Learning Sciences, 126(1/2), 110–131. https://doi.org/10.1108/ILS-10-2023-0137

Lee, C. C. (2024, December 9–12). Students’ use and non-use of GAI tools in revising penetration testing reports. In Proceedings of the 2024 IEEE International Conference on Teaching, Assessment and Learning for Engineering, Bengaluru, India. https://doi.org/10.1109/TALE62452.2024.10834334

Lee, C. C., & Low, M. Y. H. (2024). Using genAI in education: The case for critical thinking. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence, 7, Article 1452131. https://doi.org/10.3389/frai.2024.1452131

Lee, H. P., Sarkar, A., Tankelevitch, L., Drosos, I., Rintel, S., Banks, R., & Wilson, N. (2025, April 26–May 1). The impact of generative AI on critical thinking: Self-reported reductions in cognitive effort and confidence effects from a survey of knowledge workers. In Proceedings of the 2025 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems, Yokohama, Japan. https://doi.org/10.1145/3706598.3713778

Lo, L. S. (2023). The CLEAR path: A framework for enhancing information literacy through prompt engineering. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 49(4), Article 102720. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2023.102720

Microsoft. (2025). Data, privacy, and security for Microsoft 365 Copilot. https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/copilot/microsoft-365/microsoft-365-copilot-privacy

Mzwri, K., & Márta T. S. (2025). The impact of prompt engineering and a generative AI-driven tool on autonomous learning: A case study. Education Sciences, 15(2), Article 199. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15020199

Parsons, B. N. (2025). Prompt to perfection: The impact of online tutorials on AI prompt literacy and student satisfaction with AI outputs [Data set]. DataCat: The Research Data Catalogue. https://doi.org/10.17638/datacat.liverpool.ac.uk/3031

Piccolo, S. R., Denny, P., Luxton-Reilly, A., Payne, S. H., & Ridge, P. G. (2023). Evaluating a large language model’s ability to solve programming exercises from an introductory bioinformatics course. PLOS Computational Biology, 19(9), Article e1011511. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1011511

Qi, J., Liu, J. A., & Xu, Y. (2025). The role of individual capabilities in maximizing the benefits for students using GenAI tools in higher education. Behavioral Sciences, 15(3), Article 328. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs15030328

Ravšelj, D., Keržič, D., Tomaževič, N., Umek, L., Brezovar, N., Iahad, N., Abdulla, A. A., Akopyan, A., Aldana Segura, M. W., AlHumaid, J., Allam, M. F., Alló, M., Andoh, R. P. K., Andronic, O., Arthur, Y. D., Aydın, F., Badran, A., Balbontín-Alvarado, R., Ben Saad, H., ... Aristovnik, A. (2025). Higher education students’ perceptions of ChatGPT: A global study of early reactions. PLoS One, 20(2), Article e0315011. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0315011

Sousa, A. E., & Cardoso, P. (2025). Use of generative AI by higher education students. Electronics, 14(7), Article 1258. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics14071258

Stephenson, R., & Armstrong, C. (2026). Student Generative Artificial Intelligence Survey 2026. Higher Education Policy Institute. https://www.hepi.ac.uk/reports/student-generative-ai-survey-2026/

Tang, K. S., Cooper, G., Rappa, N., Cooper, M., Sims, C., and Nonis, K. (2024). A dialogic approach to transform teaching, learning & assessment with generative AI in secondary education: A proof of concept. Pedagogies: An International Journal, 19(3), 493–503. https://doi.org/10.1080/1554480X.2024.2379774

Tassoti, S. (2024). Assessment of students use of generative artificial intelligence: Prompting strategies and prompt engineering in chemistry education. Journal of Chemical Education, 101(6), 2475–2482. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.4c00212

Theophilou, E., Koyutürk, C., Yavari, M., Bursic, S., Donabauer, G., Telari, A., Testa, A., Boiano, R., Hernandez-Leo, D., Ruskov, M., Taibi, D., Gabbiadini, A., & Ognibene, D. (2023). Learning to prompt in the classroom to understand AI limits: A pilot study. In R. Basili, D. Lembo, C. Limongelli, & A. Orlandini (Eds.), Lecture notes in computer science: Volume 14318 (pp. 481–496). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-47546-7_33

The University of Liverpool. (2025). Creating prompts for GenAI. https://360.articulate.com/review/content/1b2a49ab-ff21-4c6e-8888-47993284b1fe/review

Vaira, L. A., Lechien, J. R., Abbate, V., Gabriele, G., Frosolini, A., De Vito, A., Maniaci, A., Mayo-Yáñez, M., Boscolo-Rizzo, P., Saibene, A. M., Maglitto, F., Salzano, G., Califano, G., Troise, S., Chiesa-Estomba, C. M., & De Riu, G. (2025). Enhancing AI Chatbot responses in health care: The SMART prompt structure in head and neck surgery. OTO open, 9(1), Article e70075. https://doi.org/10.1002/oto2.70075

Vieriu, A. M., & Petrea, G. (2025). The impact of artificial intelligence (AI) on students’ academic development. Education Sciences, 15(3), Article 343. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15030343

Vyas, P., & Vyas, G. (2025). Generative artificial intelligence: Current trends, issues and challenges. IT Professional, 27(1), 20–26. https://doi.org/10.1109/MITP.2024.3516058

Walter, Y. (2024). Embracing the future of artificial intelligence in the classroom: The relevance of AI literacy, prompt engineering, and critical thinking in modern education. International Journal Educational Technology High Education, 21, Article 15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-024-00448-3

Wang, P., Jing, Y., & Shen, S. (2025). A systematic literature review on the application of generative artificial intelligence (GAI) in teaching within higher education: Instructional contexts, process, and strategies. The Internet and Higher Education, 65, Article 100996. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2025.100996

Wang, S., & Mo, C. (2025). Evaluation of AI chatbots in hearing health: Model timeliness and prompt design matter. International Journal of Audiology, 65(8), 992–995. https://doi.org/10.1080/14992027.2025.2606193

Yan, W., Nakajima, T., & Sawada, R. (2025). Beyond tool use: Tracking the evolution of generative AI literacy among university students through a process-oriented investigation. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 9, Article 100465. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2025.100465

Zhou, X., & Schofield, L. (2024). Developing a conceptual framework for artificial intelligence (AI) literacy in higher education. Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education, (31), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.47408/jldhe.vi31.1354

Downloads

Published

30-09-2026

How to Cite

Parsons, B. N., Murray, K., Gundersen, G., Maslin, A., & Johnston, H. (2026). Improving AI prompt literacy: experimental evidence on the effect of an online tutorial among university students . Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education, (41). https://doi.org/10.47408/jldhe.vi41.2005

Issue

No. 41 (2026)

Section

Papers

License

Copyright (c) 2026 Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

  1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
  2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
  3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).