CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 53Artificial Intelligence in EducationArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationArtificial Intelligence Applications

Generative AI Solutions for Faculty and Students: A Review of Literature and Roadmap for Future Research

Open access
Marchena Sekli, Giulio, Godo, Amy, Carlos Véliz, José·2024·Journal of Information Technology Education: Research
DOI 10.28945/5304
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Aim/Purpose: This paper aims to address the gap in comprehensive, real-world applications of Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) in education, particularly in higher education settings. Despite the evident potential of GenAI in transforming educational practices, there is a lack of consolidated knowledge about its practical effectiveness and real-world impact. Background: This study addresses this gap by conducting a systematic literature review to collate and analyze real-life instances of GenAI applications in higher education, thus providing a nuanced understanding of its practical implementations and measurable outcomes. Methodology: The paper utilizes a systematic literature review methodology, adopting the PRISMA approach complemented by a thematic analysis procedure to ensure a comprehensive and in-depth evaluation of the literature. It synthesizes information from relevant articles from 2022 to 2024, focusing on the applications of GenAI in higher education. This analysis covers various aspects, including research settings, analysis scales, data types, collection tools, and analytical methods. Contribution: The paper contributes to the academic community by offering a comprehensive review of GenAI applications in education, highlighting the current precision level of these tools, and providing strategic recommendations for their effective use in academia. Furthermore, the research defines seven specific cases where Gen AI can be utilized as a reference for educational institutions in their adoption strategies. Findings: Key findings include the versatility of GenAI in generating teaching materials, enhancing skill development, supporting student tasks, academic performance evaluation, feedback delivery, and its role as a virtual assistant and in research support. Recommendations for Practitioners: Practitioners are advised to explore the integration of GenAI for diverse educational purposes, from content creation to student assessment, while being cognizant of its limitations and ethical considerations. Recommendation for Researchers: Future research should focus on addressing the gaps identified, such as the implications of GenAI in research roles, its application in various disciplines, and the exploration of newly developed AI tools tailored to specific educational needs. Impact on Society: The findings of this paper highlight the potential of GenAI in revolutionizing the educational sector, offering personalized learning experiences, and significantly influencing teaching methodologies and student engagement, but it also reveals significant deficiencies of Generative AI, known as hallucinations, which can impact the expected results. Future Research: Subsequent research should explore the evolving capabilities of GenAI models, their impact on various academic disciplines, and the development of pedagogical strategies to optimize their use in education.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.28945/5304

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Classroom discussions about the broader impacts of AI on education, society, and future careers invite students to engage critically with the technology's role in their lives.

    “Classroom discussions about the broader impacts of AI on education, society, and future careers, invite students to engage critically with the technology's role in their lives (Alshamy et al., 2025; Sekli et al., 2024; Urban et al., 2024).”

    From Six Institutional Intervention Areas to Support Ethical and Effective Student Use of Generative AI in Higher Education: A Narrative Review (2026) · cites this paper as Sekli et al., 2024

    The Research Gaps section says AI’s ethical dilemmas require discussion and that education must address preparation for professional life in an AI era. It does not say that classroom discussions of AI’s impacts on education, society, and future careers prompt students to engage critically with the technology. (LLM, conf=0.72)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 61

  1. ChatGPT 3.5, Mplus 10.21577/0100-4042.20230059; 10.1111/opo.13207; https://hdl.handle.net/10125/7353010.1016/j.acpath. 2023.100099; 10.3390/educsci13100998; 10.4103/ijves.ijves_37_23; 10.1007/s10639-023- 12249-8; 10.1177/00207640231178451; 10.1177/10944281231215024; 10.14201/shhmo2023451101146; · DOI
  2. 4103/idoj.idoj_72_23; Skill development ChatGPT 3.5, ChatGPT 4.0, GPTZero 10.3390/languages9010005; 10.1080/03323315.2023.2284901; 10.3389/feduc.2023.1295413; 10.30935/cedtech/13176; 10.1007/s10639-023-11834- 1; 10.3389/feduc.2023.1251163; 10.30935/cedtech/13417; 10.1021/acs.jchemed.3c00505; 10.1177/00178969231197371; 10.1108/JME-06-2023- 0043; 10.1186/s41239-023-00427-0 Student task development support ChatGPT 3.5, Dall-E, MidJourney, Codex 10.1080/10447318.2023.2269006; 10.1386/eta_00143_1; 10.3390/mti7080081; 10.1111/cts.13723; 10.1177/03064190231166665; https://doi.org/10.1111/dsji.12306 Academic performance evaluation ChatGPT 3.5, ChatGPT 4.0, BLOOM-large, BLOOMz 10.1080/02602938.2024.2301722; 10.2967/jnmt.123.266485; 10.1016/j.mex.2023.102531; 10.1080/2331186X.2023.2210461; 10.1177/07356331231191174; Feedback delivery ChatGPT 3.5, ChatGPT 4.0 10.3991/ijep.v13i8.45621; 10.1186/s41239-023-00425- 2; 10.3390/educsci13090885; 10.32457/ejep.v16i2.2412; 10.1007/s11423-023-10239- 8; 10.1007/s10639-023-12146-0; · DOI
  3. Virtual assistant (chatbot) ChatGPT 3.5, ChatGPT 4.0, LangChain 10.3390/app132212446; 10.3390/bdcc8010002 Research support ChatGPT 10.14742/ajet.8843 · DOI
  4. Alneyadi, S., & Wardat, Y. (2023). ChatGPT: Revolutionizing student achievement in the electronic magnetism unit for eleventh-grade students in Emirates schools. Contemporary Educational Technology, 15(4), Article ep448. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/13417 · DOI · Paper page
  5. Álvarez-Álvarez, C., & Falcon, S. (2023). Students' preferences with university teaching practices: Analysis of testimonials with artificial intelligence. Educational Technology Research and Development, 71, 1709-1724. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-023-10239-8 · DOI
  6. Ansari, A. N., Ahmad, S., & Bhutta, S. M. (2023). Mapping the global evidence around the use of ChatGPT in higher education: A systematic scoping review. Education and Information Technologies. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-12223-4 · DOI · Paper page
  7. Barrett, A., & Pack, A. (2023). Not quite eye to AI: Student and teacher perspectives on the use of generative artificial intelligence in the writing process. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 20, Article 59. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00427-0 · DOI · Paper page
  8. Barrett, J. S., Skolnik, J. M., Ingram, M., Kuo, Y. M., Metzloff, A. E., Jin, R., Wu, Y., & Kroushl, N. (2024). En- gaging student opinions on vaccine development innovation: Experiences from a "Shark Tank" project. Clinical and Translational Science, 17(2), e13723. https://doi.org/10.1111/cts.13723 · DOI
  9. Boschetti, F. (2019). Semantic analysis and thematic annotation. In M. Berti (Ed.), Digital classical philology: An- cient Green and Latin in the digital revolution (pp. 321-339). De Gruyter Saur. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110599572-018 · DOI
  10. Carrasco Rodriguez, A. (2023). Reinventing the teaching of early modern history in secondary school: The use of ChatGPT to enhance learning and educational innovation. Studia Historica: Historia Moderna, 45(1), 101- 145. https://doi.org/10.14201/shhmo2023451101146 · DOI
  11. Chaudhry, I. S., Sarwary, S. A. M., El Refae, G. A., & Chabchoub, H. (2023). Time to revisit existing student's performance evaluation approach in higher education sector in a new era of ChatGPT -A case study. Co- gent Education, 10(1), Article 2210461. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2023.2210461 · DOI · Paper page
  12. Cooper, G. (2023). Examining science education in ChatGPT: An exploratory study of generative artificial in- telligence. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 32(3), 444-452. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-023- 10039-y · DOI · Paper page
  13. Dai, Y., Lai, S., Lim, C. P., & Liu, A. (2023). ChatGPT and its impact on research supervision: Insights from Australian postgraduate research students. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 39(4), 74-88. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.8843 · DOI · Paper page
  14. Dasari, D., Hendriyanto, A., Sahara, S., Suryadi, D., Muhaimin, L. H., Chao, T., & Fitriana, L. (2024). ChatGPT in didactical tetrahedron, does it make an exception? A case study in mathematics teaching and learning. Frontiers in Education, 8, 1295413. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2023.1295413 · DOI
  15. Deike, M. (2024). Evaluating the performance of ChatGPT and Perplexity AI in business reference. Journal of Business & Finance Librarianship, 29(2), 125-154. https://doi.org/10.1080/08963568.2024.2317534 · DOI
  16. Dinh, H., & Tran, T. K. (2023). EduChat: An AI-based chatbot for university-related information using a hy- brid approach. Applied Sciences, 13(22), 12446. https://doi.org/10.3390/app132212446 · DOI
  17. Galli, G. (2024, January 15). Peeling back the curtain to unmask the wizard of AI: Considering the collaborative relationship between non-technical subject matter experts and artificial intelligence. SSRN. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4694869 · DOI
  18. Grassini, S. (2023). Shaping the future of education: exploring the potential and consequences of AI and ChatGPT in educational settings. Education Sciences, 13(7), 692. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13070692 · DOI · Paper page
  19. Guo, K., & Wang, D. (2023). To resist it or to embrace it? Examining ChatGPT's potential to support teacher feedback in EFL writing. Education and Information Technologies, 29, 8435-8463. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-12146-0 · DOI · Paper page
  20. Guo, Y., & Lee, D. (2023). Leveraging ChatGPT for enhancing critical thinking skills. Journal of Chemical Educa- tion, 100(12), 4876-4883. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.3c00505 · DOI · Paper page
  21. Heinrichs, J. (2024). Fireflies.ai review: The best AI notetaker for meetings? Unite.AI. https://www.unite.ai/fireflies-ai-review/
  22. Hijriyah, L., Alias, A., & Sahabuddin, M. F. M. (2023). Exploring walkability research trends based on system- atic literature review (SLR) by applying PRISMA. Open House International, 49(1), 63-121. https://doi.org/10.1108/ohi-02-2023-0031 · DOI
  23. Hsu, M.-H. (2023). Mastering medical terminology with ChatGPT and Termbot. Health Education Journal, 83(4), 352-358. https://doi.org/10.1177/00178969231197371 · DOI · Paper page
  24. Ibrahimov, V. (2023). Visualise you academic research and literature review with Litmaps. Medium. https://me- dium.com/@aiVugar/visualise-you-academic-research-and-literature-review-with-litmaps-7bda22e1f49c
  25. Ismail, S. N., Ramli, A., & Aziz, H. A. (2021a). Influencing factors on safety culture in mining industry: A sys- tematic literature review approach. Resources Policy, 74, 102250. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resour- pol.2021.102250 · DOI
  26. Ismail, S. N., Ramli, A., & Aziz, H. A. (2021b). Research trends in mining accidents study: A systematic litera- ture review. Safety Science, 143, 105438. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2021.105438 · DOI
  27. Jeon, J., & Lee, S. (2023). Large language models in education: A focus on the complementary relationship be- tween human teachers and ChatGPT. Education and Information Technologies, 28, 15873-15892. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-11834-1 · DOI · Paper page
  28. Karakose, T., Demirkol, M., Yirci, R., Polat, H., Ozdemir, T. Y., & Tülübaş, T. (2023). A conversation with ChatGPT about digital leadership and technology integration: Comparative analysis based on human-AI collaboration. Administrative Sciences, 13(7), 157. https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci13070157 · DOI
  29. Kirwan, A. (2023). ChatGPT and university teaching, learning and assessment: Some initial reflections on teaching academic integrity in the age of Large Language Models. Irish Educational Studies, 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1080/03323315.2023.2284901 · DOI · Paper page
  30. Lesage, J., Brennan, R., Eaton, S. E., Moya, B., McDermott, B., Wiens, J., & Herrero, K. (2024). Exploring nat- ural language processing in mechanical engineering education: Implications for academic integrity. Interna- tional Journal of Mechanical Engineering Education, 52(1), 88-105. https://doi.org/10.1177/03064190231166665 · DOI
  31. Lim, W. M., Gunasekara, A., Pallant, J. L., Pallant, J. I., & Pechenkina, E. (2023). Generative AI and the future of education: Ragnarök or reformation? A paradoxical perspective from management educators. The Inter- national Journal of Management Education, 21(2), 100790. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme.2023.100790 · DOI · Paper page
  32. Lo, C. K. (2023). What is the impact of ChatGPT on education? A rapid review of the literature. Education Sci- ences, 13(4), 410. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13040410 · DOI · Paper page
  33. López-García, G., Jerez, J. M., Ribelles, N., Alba, E., & Veredas, F. J. (2021). Transformers for clinical coding in spanish. IEEE Access, 9, 72387-72397. https://doi.org/10.1109/access.2021.3080085 · DOI
  34. Masters, K., Benjamin, J., Agrawal, A., MacNeill, H., Pillow, M. T., & Mehta, N. (2024). Twelve tips on creating and using custom GPTs to enhance health professions education. Medical Teacher, 46(6), 752-756. https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159x.2024.2305365 · DOI
  35. McCallum, L. (2024). New takes on developing intercultural communicative competence: Using AI tools in tel- ecollaboration task design and task completion. Journal for Multicultural Education, 18(1/2), 153-172. https://doi.org/10.1108/jme-06-2023-0043 · DOI
  36. Mhlanga, D. (2023). FinTech and artificial intelligence for sustainable development: The role of smart technologies in achieving development goals. Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-37776-1_17 · DOI · Paper page
  37. Michalon, B., & Camacho-Zuñiga, C. (2023). ChatGPT, a brand-new tool to strengthen timeless competencies. Frontiers in Education, 8, 1251163. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2023.1251163 · DOI
  38. Michel-Villarreal, R., Vilalta-Perdomo, E., Salinas-Navarro, D. E., Thierry-Aguilera, R., & Gerardou, F. S. (2023). Challenges and opportunities of generative AI for higher education as explained by ChatGPT. Edu- cation Sciences, 13(9), 856. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13090856 · DOI · Paper page
  39. Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., & Altman, D. G. (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. BMJ, 339, b2535. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.b2535 · DOI · Paper page
  40. Mondal, H., Marndi, G., Behera, J. K., & Mondal, S. (2023). ChatGPT for teachers: Practical examples for uti- lizing artificial intelligence for educational purposes. Indian Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, 10(3), 200-205. https://doi.org/10.4103/ijves.ijves_37_23 · DOI · Paper page
  41. Ngo, A., Gupta, S., Perrine, O., Reddy, R., Ershadi, S., & Remick, D. (2024). ChatGPT 3.5 fails to write appro- priate multiple choice practice exam questions. Academic Pathology, 11(1), 100099. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acpath.2023.100099 · DOI
  42. Oppenlaender, J., Linder, R., & Silvennoinen, J. (2023). Prompting AI art: An investigation into the creative skill of prompt engineering. arXiv:2303.13534v2. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2303.13534 · DOI
  43. Ossa, C., & Willatt, C. (2023). Providing academic writing feedback assisted by Generative Artificial Intelli- gence in initial teacher education contexts. European Journal of Education and Psychology, 16(2). https://doi.org/10.32457/ejep.v16i2.2412 · DOI
  44. Perkins, M. (2023). Academic integrity considerations of AI Large Language Models in the post-pandemic era: ChatGPT and beyond. Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 20(2). https://doi.org/10.53761/1.20.02.07 · DOI · Paper page
  45. Popovici, M. D. (2023). ChatGPT in the classroom. Exploring its potential and limitations in a functional pro- gramming course. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2023.2269006 · DOI · Paper page
  46. Psiropoulos, D., Barr, S., Eriksson, C., Fletcher, S., Hargis, J., & Cavanaugh, C. (2016). Professional develop- ment for iPad integration in general education: Staying ahead of the curve. Education and Information Technol- ogies, 21, 209-228. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-014-9316-x · DOI
  47. Qadir, J. (2023, May). Engineering education in the era of ChatGPT: Promise and pitfalls of generative AI for education. Proceedings of the IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference, Kuwait. https://doi.org/10.1109/educon54358.2023.10125121 · DOI · Paper page
  48. Ross, E. A. (2023). A new frontier: AI and ancient language pedagogy. Journal of Classics Teaching, 24(48), 143- 161. https://doi.org/10.1017/s2058631023000430 · DOI
  49. Ruiz-Rojas, L. I., Acosta-Vargas, P., De-Moreta-Llovet, J., & Gonzalez-Rodriguez, M. (2023). Empowering ed- ucation with generative artificial intelligence tools: Approach with an instructional design matrix. Sustaina- bility, 15(15), 11524. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151511524 · DOI · Paper page
  50. Sharadgah, T. A., & Sa'di, R. A. (2022). A systematic review of research on the use of artificial intelligence in English language teaching and learning (2015-2021): What are the current effects? Journal of Information Tech- nology Education: Research, 21, 337-377. https://doi.org/10.28945/4999 · DOI
  51. Smith, A., Hachen, S., Schleifer, R., Bhugra, D., Buadze, A., & Liebrenz, M. (2023). Old dog, new tricks? Ex- ploring the potential functionalities of ChatGPT in supporting educational methods in social psychiatry. International Journal of Social Psychiatry, 69(8), 1882-1889. https://doi.org/10.1177/00207640231178451 · DOI · Paper page
  52. Tobler, S. (2024). Smart grading: A generative AI-based tool for knowledge-grounded answer evaluation in ed- ucational assessments. MethodsX, 12, 102531. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mex.2023.102531 · DOI
  53. Urrutia, F., & Araya, R. (2024). Who's the best detective? Large language models vs. traditional machine learn- ing in detecting incoherent fourth grade math answers. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 61(8), 187- 218. https://doi.org/10.1177/07356331231191174 · DOI
  54. Vaismoradi, M., Turunen, H., & Bondas, T. (2013). Content analysis and thematic analysis: Implications for conducting a qualitative descriptive study. Nursing and Health Science, 15(3), 398-405. https://doi.org/10.1111/nhs.12048 · DOI · Paper page
  55. van den Berg, G., & du Plessis, E. (2023). ChatGPT and generative AI: Possibilities for its contribution to les- son planning, critical thinking and openness in teacher education. Education Sciences, 13(10), 998. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13100998 · DOI · Paper page
  56. Vartiainen, H., Tedre, M., & Jormanainen, I. (2023). Co-creating digital art with generative AI in K-9 education: Socio-material insights. International Journal of Education Through Art, 19(3), 405-423. https://doi.org/10.1386/eta_00143_1 · DOI · Paper page
  57. Walters, W. H., & Wilder, E. I. (2023). Fabrication and errors in the bibliographic citations generated by ChatGPT. Scientific Reports, 13, Article 14045. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-41032-5 · DOI · Paper page
  58. White, J., Fu, Q., Hays, S., Sandborn, M., Olea, C., Gilbert, H., Elnashar, A., Spencer-Smith, J., & Schmidt, D. (2023). A prompt pattern catalog to enhance prompt engineering with ChatGPT. arXiv:2302.11382v1. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2302.11382 · DOI · Paper page
  59. Yang, X., Wang, Q., & Lyu, J. (2023). Assessing ChatGPT's educational capabilities and application potential. ECNU Review of Education. https://doi.org/10.1177/20965311231210006 · DOI
  60. Zadorozhnyy, A., & Lai, W. Y. W. (2024). ChatGPT and L2 written communication: A game-changer or just another tool? Languages, 9(1), 5. https://doi.org/10.3390/languages9010005 · DOI
  61. Zupic, I., & Čater, T. (2015). Bibliometric methods in management and organization. Organizational Research Methods, 18(3), 429-472. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428114562629 · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Marchena Sekli, G., Godo, A., & Carlos Véliz, J.
Affiliations
  • CENTRUM Católica Graduate Businesss School, Lima, Perú; Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú, Lima, Perú
  • Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú (PE)
  • CENTRUM Católica Graduate Businesss School, Lima, Perú; Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú, Lima, Perú, Lima, Peru
Venue
Journal of Information Technology Education: Research
Publisher
Informing Science Institute
Published
2024
Volume
23
Pages
014
ISSN
  • 1539-3585 (ISSN-L)
  • 1547-9714
DOI
10.28945/5304
OpenAlex
W4399373889
Cited by
53
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 18 · 2025: 31 · 2024: 4
FWCI
19.99
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
Journal of Information Technology Education Research (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Artificial Intelligence in Education
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Artificial Intelligence Applications
Keywords
generative AI, higher education, artificial intelligence in education, student assessment, feedback delivery, virtual assistants, research support, hallucinations, personalized learning, student engagement, AI adoption strategy, AI ethics in 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