Background: AI is increasingly examined as a tool for science-specific instruction, feedback, inquiry and teacher preparation, but research designs and claimed outcomes vary. Methods: This systematic literature review applied PRISMA 2020 reporting to a title-only Scopus search through Watase Uake on 5 September 2026. Two phrases retrieved 123 and 114 raw records, respectively (237 total). Searches were restricted to Q1 journal publications dated 2023–2026. The initial selection retained 49 articles; eight were removed in a subsequent science-education relevance audit. Two further Q1-indexed Scopus reports identified outside the Watase export were assessed but excluded as unrelated plant-science research. The final corpus comprised 41 articles, synthesized descriptively and thematically with study designs differentiated. Results: The literature describes AI as a scaffold for inquiry, dialogic science reasoning, multimodal representation, feedback, learning analytics and science-teacher preparation. Some primary studies report context-dependent benefits for measured learning outcomes, but findings cannot be generalized across heterogeneous designs. Conclusions: Appropriate science-specific pedagogy, human–AI interaction, teacher competence and ethical oversight are central considerations.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Misbah et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: