Generative Artificial Intelligence in Basic Education: A Critical Integrative Review of AI Literacy, Human-AI Pedagogy, and Curriculum Redesign
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
บทคัดย่อ
Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) has entered basic education faster than evidence, curriculum, and governance have developed. Existing discussions often combine generic artificial intelligence with GenAI, report immediate task performance as learning, and transfer findings from higher education to school-age learners. This critical integrative review examines how GenAI is being used in K-12 teaching and learning, what knowledge, skills, and attitudes it may support, which risks condition those outcomes, and what curriculum and teacher-development responses are warranted. The analytic corpus comprised 47 documents published mainly from 2020 to August 2026: 11 research syntheses, 16 empirical or contextual studies, nine policy and competency documents, and 11 foundational or methodological works. Sources were coded by educational level, AI role, learning activity, outcome domain, study design, risk, and implementation condition; empirical claims were weighted more heavily than conceptual or policy propositions. The evidence supports cautious conclusions. Structured, teacher-guided use can improve feedback, ideation, explanation, and short-term task performance, but durable learning remains uncertain and unguarded outsourcing may reduce independent performance. AI literacy therefore requires technical understanding, critical verification, ethical judgment, and learner agency rather than prompting skill alone. An author-constructed 5E application and a human-centered implementation framework position GenAI as a bounded tutor,collaborator, or assistant while preserving productive struggle and AI-free assessment checkpoints. For Thailand, adoption should be conditioned by Thai-language and cultural validation, child-data protection, rural infrastructure, and sustained teacher competence. The review concludes that curriculum redesign should optimize human-AI complementarity, not automate schooling.
Article Details
อนุญาตภายใต้เงื่อนไข Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
เอกสารอ้างอิง
Alfarwan, A. (2025). Generative AI use in K-12 education: A systematic review. Frontiers in Education, 10, 1647573. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2025.1647573
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), ep448. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/13417
Baker, R. S., & Hawn, A. (2022). Algorithmic bias in education. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 32, 1052–1092. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-021-00285-9
Bastani, H., Bastani, O., Sungu, A., Ge, H., Kabakcı, Ö., & Mariman, R. (2025). Generative AI without guardrails can harm learning: Evidence from high school mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 122(26), e2422633122. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2422633122
Bitzenbauer, P. (2023). ChatGPT in physics education: A pilot study on easy-to-implement activities. Contemporary Educational Technology, 15(3), ep430. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/13176
Bybee, R. W., Taylor, J. A., Gardner, A., Van Scotter, P., Powell, J. C., Westbrook, A., & Landes, N. (2006). The BSCS 5E instructional model: Origins and effectiveness. BSCS.
Casal-Otero, L., Catala, A., Fernández-Morante, C., Taboada, M., Cebreiro, B., & Barro, S. (2023). AI literacy in K-12: A systematic literature review. International Journal of STEM Education, 10, 29. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-023-00418-7
Cheah, Y. H., & Kim, J. (2025). STEM teachers' perceptions, familiarity, and support needs for integrating generative artificial intelligence in K-12 education. School Science and Mathematics. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssm.18334
Chiu, T. K. F. (2024). A classification tool to foster self-regulated learning with generative artificial intelligence by applying self-determination theory: A case of ChatGPT. Educational Technology Research and Development, 72, 2401–2416. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-024-10366-w
Deng, R., Jiang, M., Yu, X., Lu, Y., & Liu, S. (2025). Does ChatGPT enhance student learning? A systematic review and meta-analysis of experimental studies. Computers & Education, 227, 105224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2024.105224
Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education. Macmillan.
Han, A., Zhou, X., Cai, Z., Han, S., Ko, R., Corrigan, S., & Peppler, K. (2024). Teachers, parents, and students' perspectives on integrating generative AI into elementary literacy education. In Proceedings of the 2024 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Article 678, pp. 1–17). Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/3613904.3642438
Hays, L., Jurkowski, O., & Sims, S. K. (2024). ChatGPT in K-12 education. TechTrends, 68, 281–294. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-023-00924-z
Holmes, W., Bialik, M., & Fadel, C. (2019). Artificial intelligence in education: Promises and implications for teaching and learning. Center for Curriculum Redesign.
International Telecommunication Union. (2022). E-learning in Thailand: Mapping the digital divide. https://www.itu.int/hub/publication/d-pref-them-28-2022/
Jauhiainen, J. S., & Guerra, A. G. (2023). Generative AI and ChatGPT in school children's education: Evidence from a school lesson. Sustainability, 15(18), 14025. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151814025
Kim, D., Lee, S., Kim, Y., Rutherford, A., & Park, C. (2025). Representing the under-represented: Cultural and core capability benchmarks for developing Thai large language models. In Proceedings of the 31st International Conference on Computational Linguistics (pp. 4114–4129). Association for Computational Linguistics. https://aclanthology.org/2025.coling-main.278/
Kong, S. C., & Yang, Y. (2024). A human-centered learning and teaching framework using generative artificial intelligence for self-regulated learning development through domain knowledge learning in K–12 settings. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 17, 1588–1599. https://doi.org/10.1109/TLT.2024.3392830
Lin, X., & Tan, H. (2025). A systematic review of generative AI in K-12: Mapping goals, activities, roles, and outcomes via the 3P model. Systems, 13(10), 840. https://doi.org/10.3390/systems13100840
Long, D., & Magerko, B. (2020). What is AI literacy? Competencies and design considerations. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1–16). Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/3313831.3376727
Ma, M., Ng, D. T. K., Liu, Z., & Wong, G. K. W. (2025). Fostering responsible AI literacy: A systematic review of K-12 AI ethics education. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 8, 100422. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2025.100422
Miao, F., & Cukurova, M. (2024). AI competency framework for teachers. UNESCO. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000391104
Miao, F., & Holmes, W. (2023). Guidance for generative AI in education and research. UNESCO. https://doi.org/10.54675/EWZM9535
Miao, F., & Shiohira, K. (2024). AI competency framework for students. UNESCO. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000391105
Min, T., Lee, B., & Jho, H. (2025). Integrating generative artificial intelligence in the design of scientific inquiry for middle school students. Education and Information Technologies, 30, 15329–15360. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-025-13410-1
Molenaar, I. (2022). Towards hybrid human-AI learning technologies. European Journal of Education, 57(4), 632–645. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12527
Nantaburom, S. (2026). Perspectives of secondary school students toward using generative AI as a summative assessment tool of social studies courses in Thailand. Discover Education, 5, 549. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-026-01565-z
Ng, D. T. K., Leung, J. K. L., Chu, S. K. W., & Qiao, M. S. (2021). Conceptualizing AI literacy: An exploratory review. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 2, 100041. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2021.100041
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2023). OECD digital education outlook 2023: Towards an effective digital education ecosystem. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/c74f03de-en
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2026). OECD digital education outlook 2026: Exploring effective uses of generative AI in education. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/062a7394-en
Risko, E. F., & Gilbert, S. J. (2016). Cognitive offloading. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 20(9), 676–688. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2016.07.002
Song, Y., Kim, J., Xing, W., Liu, Z., Li, C., & Oh, H. (2025). Elementary school students' and teachers' perceptions toward creative mathematical writing with generative AI. Journal of Research on Technology in Education. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2025.2455057
Su, J., & Yang, W. (2024). Powerful or mediocre? Kindergarten teachers' perspectives on using ChatGPT in early childhood education. Interactive Learning Environments, 32(10), 6496–6508. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2023.2266490
Tang, K. S., Cooper, G., Rappa, N., Cooper, M., Sims, C., & Nonis, K. (2024). A dialogic approach to transform teaching, learning and assessment with generative AI in secondary education: A proof of concept. Pedagogies: An International Journal, 19(3), 493–503. https://doi.org/10.1080/1554480X.2024.2379774
Tongchai, A., & Malakul, S. (2026). Thai teachers' perceptions of integrating generative AI in K-12 education: Opportunities and challenges. TechTrends, 70, 93–105. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-025-01128-3
Torraco, R. J. (2016). Writing integrative literature reviews: Using the past and present to explore the future. Human Resource Development Review, 15(4), 404–428. https://doi.org/10.1177/1534484316671606
U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Technology. (2023). Artificial intelligence and the future of teaching and learning: Insights and recommendations. https://www.ed.gov/sites/ed/files/documents/ai-report/ai-report.pdf
UNESCO Global Education Monitoring Report Team. (2023). Global education monitoring report 2023: Technology in education—A tool on whose terms? UNESCO. https://www.unesco.org/gem-report/en/technology
UNICEF. (2025). Guidance on AI and children (Version 3.0). UNICEF Innocenti. https://www.unicef.org/innocenti/reports/policy-guidance-ai-children
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
Wang, N., Wang, X., & Su, Y.-S. (2024). Critical analysis of the technological affordances, challenges and future directions of generative AI in education: A systematic review. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 44(1), 139–155. https://doi.org/10.1080/02188791.2024.2305156
Whittemore, R., & Knafl, K. (2005). The integrative review: Updated methodology. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 52(5), 546–553. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2005.03621.x
Yang, T. C., Hsu, Y. C., & Wu, J. Y. (2025). The effectiveness of ChatGPT in assisting high school students in programming learning: Evidence from a quasi-experimental research. Interactive Learning Environments, 33(6), 3726–3743. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2025.2450659
Yusuf, A., Pervin, N., Román-González, M., & Noor, N. M. (2024). Generative AI in education and research: A systematic mapping review. Review of Education, 12(2), e3489. https://doi.org/10.1002/rev3.3489
Zhang, L., Deng, X., & Shadiev, R. (2026). A meta-review of generative AI in education: Synthesizing findings from systematic reviews. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 64(4), 1068–1092. https://doi.org/10.1177/07356331261419689
Zhang, P., & Tur, G. (2024). A systematic review of ChatGPT use in K-12 education. European Journal of Education, 59(2), e12599. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12599
Zhang, T., Lai, Y. C., & Yu, P. L. H. (2026). Generative artificial intelligence in K-12 education: A systematic review. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 21, 34. https://doi.org/10.58459/rptel.2026.21034
