Generative AI and educational assessments: a systematic review
Open accessAbstract
The launch of ChatGPT and the rapid proliferation of generative AI (GenAI) have brought transformative changes to education, particularly in the field of assessment.This has prompted a fundamental rethinking of traditional assessment practices, presenting both opportunities and challenges in evaluating student learning.While numerous studies have examined the use of GenAI in assessment, no systematic review has been conducted to synthesise the existing empirical evidence on this topic.Systematically reviewing 19 empirical studies published within 10 years, starting in 2014, this study assessed the current state of empirical evidence regarding GenAI in educational assessment practices and the future research directions required to advance this field.The findings were synthesised into four themes: (1) Educators' perceptions of GenAI in assessment practices; (2) Students' perceptions of GenAI in assessment practices; (3) Effectiveness of applying GenAI in assessment practices; and (4) Recommendations for leveraging GenAI in future assessment practices.The first three themes summarise the current empirical evidence, while the fourth theme identifies priorities for future research to guide the effective integration of GenAI into assessment practices.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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?
There is a lack of research examining the structured integration of GenAI into discipline-specific assessments, such as critical appraisal tasks in epidemiology.
“There is also a lack of research examining the structured integration of GenAI into discipline-specific assessments (25), such as critical appraisal tasks in epidemiology.”
From Integrating Generative AI into public health education: a mixed methods evaluation of student experiences (2026) · cites this paper as [25]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
Cited by 45
Research works printed but not linked: 6
- [1]1. Alabidi, S., Alarabi, K., Alsalhi, N. R., & Mansoori, M. A. (2023). The dawn of ChatGPT: Transformation in science assessment. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 2023(106), 321-337. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.14689/ejer.2023.106.019 · DOI
- [4]4. Anggoro, K., & Pratiwi, D. (2023). Fostering self-assessment in English learning with a generative AI platform: A case of Quizizz AI. Studies in Self-Access Learning Journal, 14(4), 489-501.
- [7]7. Bsharat, T., & Khlaif, Z. (2024). Generative AI-powered adaptive assessment (p. Pages: 430). https://doi.org/10.4018/979-8- 3693-6397-3 · DOI
- [18]18. Farooqui, M. O., Siddiquei, M. I., & Kathpal, S. (2024). Framing assessment questions in the age of artificial intelligence: Evidence from ChatGPT 3.5. Emerging Science Journal, 8(3), 948-956. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.28991/ESJ- 2024-08-03-09 · DOI
- [38]38. Reddy, S. (2024). Generative AI in healthcare: An implementation science informed translational path on application, integration and governance. Implementation Science, 19(1). Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-024-01357- 9 · DOI
- [44]44. Zhai, C., Wibowo, S., & Li, L. D. (2024). The effects of over- reliance on AI dialogue systems on students' cognitive abilities: A systematic review. Smart Learning Environments, 11(1), 28. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561- 024-00316-7 · DOI
- Authors
- Graduate School of Education, T. U. O. W. A., Zhao, J., Chapman, E., Sabet, P. G. P., & Global Curtin, C. U.
- Affiliations
- The University of Western Australia (AU)
- Venue
- Education Research and Perspectives
- Published
- 2024-12-31
- Pages
- 124-155
- ISSN
- 0311-2543 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4406116528
- Semantic Scholar
- bd0e088cb5db147c99d9195f463c727421c86614
- Cited by
- 45
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 37 · 2025: 8
- FWCI
- 2.61
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Education Research and Perspectives (publishedVersion)
- UWA Profiles and Research Repository (UWA) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
- 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 › Information Systems › Educational Technology and Assessment
- Keywords
- generative AI, educational assessment, ChatGPT, student assessment, educator perceptions, student perceptions, assessment practices, artificial intelligence in education, research directions
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
