Jul 2026· The Journal of Future and Convergence Education· Vol 4, pp. 29-58· 0 citations
TL;DR
This study is significant in that it specified the core of GAI-based reading education not as the introduction of AI functions but as the design of boundaries between AI support and learners’ direct performance.
Abstract
This study aims to analyze recurring design issues in reading education using Generative Artificial Intelligence (GAI) and to structure them into design principles applicable to reading instruction. To this end, 47 core studies were analyzed, and meaning units, initial codes, subcategories, and provisional upper categories were derived. Subsequently, a first-round independent rating and a second-round re-rating were conducted with six experts in reading education, Korean language education, AI literacy, AI ethics, educational technology, and educational evaluation. In the second-round re-rating, all 40 items showed an I-CVI of .83 or higher, and the S-CVI/Ave was .96. As a result, five design principles for GAI-based reading education were derived: learning support and performance efficiency (Efficiency type), creative expansion of reading experience (Augmentation type), critical verification of AI-generated output (Critique type), protection of learner-directed reading (Detachment type), and adaptive learning support (Personalization type). These principles were also explained as being combined through adaptive regulation, a complementary pathway, auxiliary interactions, and tension– balance relationships. Based on these findings, a one-period instructional design example was presented for argumentative text reading in the second year of middle school. This study is significant in that it specified the core of GAI-based reading education not as the introduction of AI functions but as the design of boundaries between AI support and learners’ direct performance.
A Design Science Research approach is adopted and multiple GenAI-based interventions at a French business school are implemented, indicating increased student awareness and confidence in critically using GenAI and six actionable design principles are derived to support the meaningful integration of GenAI into higher ed...
Sarah Hönigsberg, Laura Watkowski, Sabrine Mallek et al.· 0 citations
The results suggested that GenAI improved teachers’ originality, multimodal lesson design, and learner-centered instructional practices, however, participants were worried about authenticity and overreliance on AI as well.
Thanh Loan Vu, Minh Tri Nguyen· International Journal of AI...· 0 citations
The evidence supports a cautious conclusion: AI commonly expands ideation, visualization, feedback, and workflow options, while stronger claims about improved creativity or learning depend on controlled designs, objective/artefact-based assessment, and longer-term evidence.
Jin-Jin Zhu, Vimala Govindasamy· Journal of Educational and S...· 0 citations
Empirical evidence is contributed from educational action research showing that structured pedagogical interventions can promote the critical, ethical, and responsible use of Generative Artificial Intelligence in education.
Rodrigo Florêncio da Silva· Information· 1 citation
The findings suggest that the educational value of generative AI depends on pedagogical orchestration, guided prompting and reflection rather than simple access to the tool.
Cheng-Wei Hung, Pen Chen· Journal of Applied Research...· 0 citations
It is suggested that no-AI diagnostic assessment can make students’ judgement of AI-generated vocational work visible and can help teachers identify where AI-assisted task completion has not yet developed into stable professional judgement.
Zheng-Jia Liu· PLoS ONE· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.