Using ChatGPT for Science Learning: A Study on Pre-service Teachers' Lesson Planning
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Despite the buzz around ChatGPT's potential, empirical studies exploring its actual utility in the classroom for learning remain scarce. This study aims to fill this gap by analyzing the lesson plans developed by 29 pre-service elementary teachers from a Korean university and assessing how they integrated ChatGPT into science learning activities. We first examined how the subject domains and teaching and learning methods/strategies were integrated with ChatGPT in the lesson plans. We then evaluated the lesson plans using a modified TPACK-based rubric. We further examined pre-service teachers' perceptions and concerns about integrating ChatGPT into science learning. Results show diverse applications of ChatGPT in different science domains. Fourteen types of teaching and learning methods/strategies were identified in the lesson plans. On average, the pre-service teachers' lesson plans scored high on the modified TPACK-based rubric, indicating a reasonable envisage of integrating ChatGPT into science learning, particularly in 'instructional strategies & ChatGPT'. However, they scored relatively lower on exploiting ChatGPT's functions toward its full potential compared to other aspects. The study also identifies both appropriate and inappropriate use cases of ChatGPT in lesson planning. Pre-service teachers anticipated ChatGPT to afford high-quality questioning, self-directed learning, individualized learning support, and formative assessment. Meanwhile, they also expressed concerns about its accuracy and the risks that students may be overly dependent on ChatGPT. They further suggested solutions to systemizing classroom dynamics between teachers and students. The study underscores the need for more research on the roles of generative AI in actual classroom settings and provides insights for future AI-integrated science learning.
Key facts. Cited by 8 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 18 Jan 2024.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2024: 2; 2025: 4; 2026: 2.
8 papers.
- 2024Transforming Teachers' Roles and Agencies in the Era of Generative AI: Perceptions, Acceptance, Knowledge, and Practicescited by 8
- 2025CoTAL: Human-in-the-Loop Prompt Engineering for Generalizable Formative Assessment Scoring and Feedbackcited by 4
- 2024Generative AI and Power Imbalances in Global Education: Frameworks for Bias Mitigationcited by 2
- 2025Human Experts' Evaluation of Generative AI for Contextualizing STEAM Education in the Global Southcited by 2
- 2026Baseline Performance of AI Tools in Classifying Cognitive Demand of Mathematical Taskscited by 2
- 2025Co-Designing Interdisciplinary Design Projects with AIcited by 0
- 2025An Evaluation of the Pedagogical Soundness and Usability of AI-Generated Lesson Plans Across Different Models and Prompt Frameworks in High-School Physicscited by 0
- 2026SciEval: A Benchmark for Automatic Evaluation of K-12 Science Instructional Materialscited by 0
- 2026SciEval: A Benchmark for Automatic Evaluation of K-12 Science Instructional Materials28 Apr 2026
- 2026Baseline Performance of AI Tools in Classifying Cognitive Demand of Mathematical Tasks3 Mar 2026
- 2025Human Experts' Evaluation of Generative AI for Contextualizing STEAM Education in the Global South23 Nov 2025
- 2025An Evaluation of the Pedagogical Soundness and Usability of AI-Generated Lesson Plans Across Different Models and Prompt Frameworks in High-School Physics22 Oct 2025
- 2025Co-Designing Interdisciplinary Design Projects with AI17 Oct 2025
- 2025CoTAL: Human-in-the-Loop Prompt Engineering for Generalizable Formative Assessment Scoring and Feedback3 Apr 2025
- 2024Transforming Teachers' Roles and Agencies in the Era of Generative AI: Perceptions, Acceptance, Knowledge, and Practices3 Oct 2024
- 2024Generative AI and Power Imbalances in Global Education: Frameworks for Bias Mitigation5 Jun 2024