Physical Archives or AI? Student Preferences in Evidence-Based Teaching
Comparing hands-on archival experience with AI access, this study tracks student preferences. It positions special collections as essential labs for developing critical thinking. View findings!
Presented by:
Shima Hosseininasab, North Carolina State University
Hear it from the author:
Transcript:
Hi everyone, I’m Shima Hosseininasab. I am a public historian and Instructor. With generative AI making information so easy to get, I wanted to find out: are students still finding value in physical archives, or do they see them as outdated? My poster, “Physical Archives or AI?”, looks at this exact tension.
Between August and November 2025, I conducted a mixed-method study involving 186 students across various disciplines. Following hands-on sessions with physical primary sources, I used a Likert-scale questionnaire and qualitative feedback to measure how students value archival authenticity versus AI convenience.
The quantitative data shown in the bar charts and students' written feedback indicate that students overwhelmingly felt that physical materials helped them analyze information more deeply, form their own interpretations, discover unexpected connections, and get inspired to do research and be creative.
Key Words:
Primary Source Literacy, Inquiry-Based Learning, AI versus Authenticity
Abstract:
Teaching with primary sources offers a unique opportunity to use the original materials created during the period or event under study to develop critical thinking and encourage a deeper connection to the past. However, the rise of generative AI risks narrowing students’ analytical depth through effortless information synthesis. Using a mixed-methods approach, the researcher surveyed 186 students following hands-on instruction sessions between August and November 2025. Quantitative Likert-scale data and qualitative feedback reveal how students navigate the tension between AI convenience and archival authenticity. Results position special collections as essential labs for developing vital 21st-century skills that AI cannot replicate.
Outcomes:
1. Recognize how physical materials act as catalysts for student-led inquiry that AI synthesis cannot trigger.
2. Identify the “Authenticity Gap” in student research, where physical engagement leads to deeper emotional and intellectual connections than digital interfaces.
3. Advocate for integrating special collections as essential labs that preserve critical thinking in an increasingly algorithmic academic landscape.
References:
Baines, J. (2023). Establishing special collections literacy for undergraduate students: an investigation into benefits and barriers of access. Archives and Records, 44(1), 8–35. https://doi.org/10.1080/23257962.2022.2149481
Grafe, M. (2021). Treating the Digital Disease: The Role of Digital and Physical Primary Sources in Undergraduate Teaching. RBM: A Journal of Rare Books, Manuscripts, and Cultural Heritage, 22(1), 25. doi:https://doi.org/10.5860/rbm.22.1.25
Legg, K., Ellis, R. E., & Hall, C. (2020). Applying the seven principles of good practice: archives in the 21st century university: Archives and Records: The Journal of the Archives and Records Association. Archives and Records, 41(2), 109–125. https://doi.org/10.1080/23257962.2020.1728525