Generative artificial intelligence is promoted as a way of tailoring instruction to learners, yet most reported applications stay within language and general-education settings, and few measure outcomes in courses whose value lies in design and production skill. This paper describes a four-module generative AI framework for resource development that links learner and content modelling, generation, assessment and community iteration to a course-grounded knowledge base, with the teacher reviewing before release. It was evaluated in a twelve-week quasi-experiment in a professional core course, Micro-lecture Design and Production, at a Chinese vocational college. Two intact classes (n = 45, 44) were taught by the same instructor, who designed the framework; assignment was not random. Covariance-adjusted posttest means differed by 5.6 points (82.3 versus 76.7, p < .001, partial η² = .24), and the framework-supported class reported higher motivation and satisfaction; self-directed learning differed modestly. Preparation time per unit fell by half, though the work became more concentrated and the knowledge base carried a large one-off cost. Because the design cannot separate the framework from the additional resources it produced, the results are framed as associations rather than effects.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gao et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: