Critical literacy in the AI era: Student perceptions of the ‘Prompt-Observe-Evaluate’ method in an engineering Fintech-focused EAP course

doi:10.65961/AJELT-2026-4-003

PDF(451 KB)

Asian Journal of English Language Teaching ›› 2026, Vol. 35 ›› Issue (4) : 22-50. DOI: 10.65961/AJELT-2026-4-003

Critical literacy in the AI era: Student perceptions of the ‘Prompt-Observe-Evaluate’ method in an engineering Fintech-focused EAP course

Marc Craig LeBane

Author information +

History +

Abstract

Integrating Generative AI into English for Academic Purposes (EAP) risks inducing “cognitive offloading,” where thinking processes are outsourced to AI, undermining the critical literacy engineering students need to analyze complex Fintech issues. This two-year action research study (2024–2025) at the Chinese University of Hong Kong (N=96) evaluated whether constraint-based AI protocols can successfully shift AI from a simple content generator to a metacognitive scaffold. Using mixed methods (surveys and interviews), the study examined an intervention featuring a “Prompt-Observe-Evaluate” reading protocol and “Persona-Based” writing feedback, explicitly banning direct AI summarization. Results showed significantly increased student self-efficacy in ethical AI use. Students also reported improved critical thinking, driven by the requirement to verify AI outputs against source texts to spot hallucinations and bias. By 2025, 100% of participants recognized ethical risks like dependency and data privacy. Ultimately, these findings suggest that EAP instruction requires “human-in-the-loop” constraints, positioning AI as a collaborative reasoning partner rather than a substitute for active cognitive engagement.

Key words

critical literacy, generative AI, metacognition

Cite this article

EndNote

Ris (Procite)

Bibtex

Download Citations

Marc Craig LeBane. (2026). Critical literacy in the AI era: Student perceptions of the ‘Prompt-Observe-Evaluate’ method in an engineering Fintech-focused EAP course.Asian Journal of English Language Teaching , 35(4): 22-50. https://doi.org/10.65961/AJELT-2026-4-003

References

Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191–215. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191
Cho, K., Cho, M., & Hacker, D. J. (2010). Self-monitoring support for learning to write. Interactive Learning Environments, 18(2), 101–113. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10494820802292386
Cong-Lem, N., Tat Nguyen, T., & Nhat Hoang Nguyen, K. (2025). Critical thinking in the age of generative AI: Effects of a short-term experiential learning intervention on EFL learners. International Journal of TESOL Studies, 250522, 1-21. https://doi.org/10.58304/ijts.250522
Eaton, S. E. (2025, April 23). Teaching fact-checking through deliberate errors: An essential AI literacy skill. Retrieved from http://postplagiarism.com/2025/04/23/teaching-fact-checking-through-deliberate-errors-an-essential-ai-literacy-skill/
Huang, J., & Mizumoto, A. (2024). Examining the effect of generative AI on students’ motivation and writing self-efficacy. Digital Applied Linguistics, 1, 102324. https://doi.org/10.29140/dal.v1.102324
Hudson, E. (2025, April 27). AI and the teaching of writing six core principles. Retrieved from https://erichudson.substack.com/p/ai-and-the-teaching-of-writing
Iqbal, J., Hashmi, Z. F., Asghar, M. Z., & Abid, M. N. (2025). Generative AI tool use enhances academic achievement in sustainable education through shared metacognition and cognitive offloading among preservice teachers. Scientific Reports, 15(1), 16610. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-01676-x
McMinn, S. (2025, May 9). In the AI era, how do we battle cognitive laziness in students? Retrieved from https://www.timeshighereducation.com/campus/ai-era-how-do-we-battle-cognitive-laziness-students
Neshaei, S. P., Mejia-Domenzain, P., Davis, R. L., & Käser, T. (2025). Metacognition meets AI: Empowering reflective writing with large language models. British Journal of Educational Technology, 56(5), 1864–1896. http://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13601
Rad, H. S., Alipour, R., & Jafarpour, A. (2023). Using artificial intelligence to foster students’ writing feedback literacy, engagement, and outcome: A case of Wordtune application. Interactive Learning Environments, 32(9), 5020–5040. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2023.2208170
Rashid, S. (2025). Habit predicting higher education EFL students’ intention and use of AI: A nexus of UTAUT-2 model and metacognition theory. Education Sciences, 15(6), 756. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/educsci15060756
Risko, E. F., & Gilbert, S. J. (2016). Cognitive offloading. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 20(9), 676–688. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2016.07.002
Sidra, S., & Mason, C. (2024). Reconceptualizing AI literacy: The importance of metacognitive thinking in an artificial intelligence (AI)-enabled workforce. In 2024 IEEE Conference on Artificial Intelligence (CAI) (pp. 1181–1186). http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/cai59869.2024.00211
Teng, M. F. (2025). Understanding EFL student writers’ metacognitive awareness in utilizing ChatGPT. System, 135, 103848. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2025.103848
Teng, M. F., & Ma, M. (2024). Assessing metacognition-based student feedback literacy for academic writing. Assessing Writing, 59, 100811. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2024.100811
The Chinese University of Hong Kong. (2025a). Undergraduate student handbook: University core requirements. Retrieved from https://rgsntl.rgs.cuhk.edu.hk/aqs_prd_applx/public/handbook/document.aspx?id=1938&tv=F&lang=en
The Chinese University of Hong Kong. (2025b). Use of artificial intelligence tools in teaching, learning and assessments: A guide for students. Retrieved from https://www.aqs.cuhk.edu.hk/documents/A-guide-for-students_use-of-AI-tools.pdf
Zimmerman, B. J., & Moylan, A. R. (2009). Self-regulated learning: Where motivation and metacognition intersect. In D. J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), Handbook of metacognition in education (pp. 299–315). New York, NY: Routledge.