Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Advances in Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) have sparked widespread debate in education. According to a survey by the Digital Education Council (DEC), 86 percent of students use AI in their learning, with ChatGPT being the most widely used tool. Given that students constitute a considerable proportion of GenAI users, concerns arise regarding the potential misuse of this technology by students themselves. Consequently, researchers and educators should rethink how GenAI tools interacts with curriculum needs and pedagogical strategies, particularly through frameworks such as TPACK, to enhance student learning while mitigating potential risks. However, the state-of-the-art of integrating GenAI into student learning remains unclear. To address this gap, this study systematically reviewed high-quality empirical studies published after 30 November 2022 (release date of ChatGPT) on integrating GenAI into student learning from a TPACK perspective. The findings aim to provide an evidence-based foundation for future research and instructional design. For the former, we analyzed the 71 studies from the perspectives of publishing year, country/region of corresponding author, authorship type, sample size, learning stage, educational setting, duration, research method and focus, as well as the moderating effect of key research design variables on learning outcomes. For the latter, we analyzed the 71 studies from the perspectives of learning content, learning tool, pedagogical strategy, assessment method, and learning outcome, as well as the moderating effect of key instructional design variables on learning outcomes. Moreover, we also summarized the recommendations of these studies for future research and instruction. The empirical evidence suggested that GenAI has the potential to enhance student learning in cognitive, affective and behavioral domains. However, deficiencies in research and instructional design still remain, including short duration, small sample sizes, and incomplete pedagogical scaffolding, etc. Based on the review's findings, this study also identifies two critical priorities for future research and instruction.
Liu et al. (Sat,) studied this question.