Cited by 9Artificial Intelligence in EducationVocational Education and TrainingOnline Learning and Analytics

AI-enhanced skill assessment in higher vocational education: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Open access
Sun, Xia, Tian, Haoheng·2026·Informatics

Abstract

This study synthesizes empirical evidence on AI-supported skill assessment systems in higher vocational education through a systematic review and meta-analysis. Despite growing interest in generative AI within higher education, empirical research on AI-enabled assessment remains fragmented and methodologically uneven, particularly in vocational contexts. Following PRISMA 2020 guidelines, 27 peer-reviewed empirical studies published between 2010 and 2024 were identified from major international and Chinese databases and included in the analysis. Using a random-effects model, the meta-analysis indicates a moderate positive association between AI-supported assessment systems and skill-related learning outcomes (Hedges’ g = 0.72), alongside substantial heterogeneity across study designs, outcome measures, and implementation contexts. Subgroup analyses suggest variation across regional and institutional settings, which should be interpreted cautiously given small sample sizes and diverse methodological approaches. Based on the synthesized evidence, the study proposes a conceptual AI-supported skill assessment framework that distinguishes empirically grounded components from forward-looking extensions related to generative AI. Rather than offering prescriptive solutions, the framework provides an evidence-informed baseline to support future research, system design, and responsible integration of generative AI in higher education assessment. Overall, the findings highlight both the potential and the current empirical limitations of AI-enabled assessment, underscoring the need for more robust, theory-informed, and transparent studies as generative AI applications continue to evolve.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3390/informatics13020020

Cites

3 of 3 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Authors
Sun, X., & Tian, H.
Affiliations
Yibin Vocational and Technical College (CN)
Corresponding author
Tian, Haoheng
Venue
Informatics
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2026-01-28
Volume
13
Issue
2
Pages
20
ISSN
2227-9709 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W7125968677
Cited by
9
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 9
FWCI
8.22
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Informatics (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (acceptedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Artificial Intelligence in Education
  • Social Sciences › Education › Vocational Education and Training
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Science Applications › Online Learning and Analytics
Keywords
generative AI in education, higher vocational education, evaluation system, responsible AI adoption, higher education assessment

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