AI Ed Wiki logoAI Ed Wiki
Use with AI

📄 Research Article

The AI-Powered Co-inquirer: A Systematic Review of ChatGPT for Inquiry-Based Learning in STEAM Education

● high · 2026-08-22 · chatgpt, generative-ai, inquiry-based-learning, steam-education, stem-education, systematic-review, critical-thinking

Synthesis: This systematic review of 24 empirical studies maps ChatGPT-supported inquiry-based learning in STEAM education across the five inquiry phases. ChatGPT was primarily used during conceptualization, investigation, and discussion — as learning tool, tutor, learning peer, domain expert, and teaching assistant — improving performance, critical thinking, engagement, and motivation. But learner-level challenges (over-reliance, hallucination, superficial conclusions) and educator/institutional challenges (curricular misalignment, reduced instructional depth, Academic Integrity) persist. An integrated framework synthesizes ChatGPT's roles, advantages, and challenges across the inquiry phases.

Key Findings

  1. 24 empirical studies, uneven disciplinary coverage. Science received the most attention; technology, arts, engineering, and integrated STEAM were underrepresented. Studies split evenly between K-12 and higher education, with undergraduates the largest group and no study focused on elementary learners.
  2. Roles cluster in three of five inquiry phases. ChatGPT was used mainly in conceptualization, investigation, and discussion — supporting question formulation, inquiry design, problem-solving, and reflection. Its use in the orientation and conclusion phases remains largely unexplored.
  3. Multiple roles. ChatGPT functioned as a learning tool, tutor, learning peer, domain expert, and teaching assistant. For students it enhanced academic performance, critical thinking, engagement, and motivation while supporting individualized learning; for processes it improved interaction, reduced educator workload, and enabled differentiated learning.
  4. Multifaceted challenges. Learners may over-rely on ChatGPT-generated answers, accept inaccurate feedback, experience conceptual confusion, or produce superficial conclusions when AI outputs are treated as authoritative. Hallucinations undermine evidence synthesis in the conclusion phase. Institutional challenges include curricular misalignment, reduced instructional depth, unequal access, privacy concerns, academic-integrity risks, and algorithmic bias.
  5. An integrated framework and four research agendas. The review proposes a framework synthesizing ChatGPT's roles, advantages, and challenges across the five inquiry phases, plus four agendas for future research on responsible, pedagogically aligned integration.

Implications

For STEAM and inquiry-based learning, this review positions ChatGPT as an "AI-powered co-inquirer" that can genuinely support the generative, questioning, and reflective phases of inquiry — but its value depends on pedagogical scaffolding to prevent over-reliance and uncritical acceptance of output. The challenges align with the wiki's Cognitive Offloading and AI Literacy threads: treating AI output as authoritative risks superficial learning. The call for sustained teacher mediation and curricular alignment connects to Teacher Role and Educational Policy AI. It complements the empirical problem-posing study (Dai Chatbots Problem Posing Primary 2026) at the primary level.

Connected Concepts

Connected Articles

Citation

Jiang, H., Li, Y., Chugh, R., Xin, Y., & Cheng, H. (2026). The AI-powered co-inquirer: a systematic review of ChatGPT for inquiry-based learning in STEAM education. International Journal of STEM Education, 13, 42.