Cited by 26Artificial Intelligence in EducationScience Education and PedagogyIntelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive Learning

Integrating generative artificial intelligence in the design of scientific inquiry for middle school students

Min, Taeho, Lee, Bongwoo, Jho, Hunkoog·2025·Education and Information Technologies

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10639-025-13410-1

Cites

57 of 57 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • GenAI is employed to support student engagement with challenging topics such as quantum theory, interdisciplinary knowledge transfer, and experimental design and hypothesis formulation.

    “GenAI is employed to address these goals by supporting student engagement with challenging topics such as quantum theory, interdisciplinary knowledge transfer, and experimental design and hypothesis formulation-areas often limited by insufficient teacher resources and the lack of personalized instruction [91-94].”
  • AI provides strong scaffolds for core practices, markedly improving the quality and conventionality of learner outputs-for example, enhancing grammatical accuracy and argumentative coherence in writing, and supporting problem-solving and experimental design in science and mathematics-thereby helping learners meet baseline practice demands more efficiently.

    “First, AI provides strong scaffolds for core practices, markedly improving the quality and conventionality of learner outputs-for example, enhancing grammatical accuracy and argumentative coherence in writing [86,87,145], and supporting problem-solving and experimental design in science and mathematics [77,88,93,103,147]-thereby helping learners meet baseline practice demands more efficiently.”
  • Some studies document confusion, frustration, and other negative emotions driven by mistrust, technical limits, or unmet expectations, and even declines in self-efficacy.

    “Some studies document confusion, frustration, and other negative emotions driven by mistrust, technical limits, or unmet expectations [78,87,93,98], and even declines in self-efficacy [140].”
  • Analyzing student traces with GenAI systems is not new, especially for research purposes.

    “Analyzing the student traces with GenAI systems is not something new, especially for research purposes (e.g., [1,12]).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Min, T., Lee, B., & Jho, H.
Affiliations
Dankook University (KR)
Corresponding author
Lee, Bongwoo
Venue
Education and Information Technologies
Published
2025-02-10
Volume
30
Issue
11
Pages
15329-15360
ISSN
  • 1360-2357 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-7608
OpenAlex
W4407342213
Cited by
26
References
57
Citations by year
2026: 20 · 2025: 6
FWCI
27.03
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Education and Information Technologies (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Artificial Intelligence in Education
  • Social Sciences › Education › Science Education and Pedagogy
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Intelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive Learning
Keywords
generative AI, scientific inquiry, junior high school students, physics experiments, open-ended experiments, student-AI interaction, AI assistants, student perceptions of AI, experimental design, high school science education

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review