literature review on communicative language teaching

• Publisher Home

• About the Journal
• Editorial Team
• Article Processing Fee
• Privacy Statement
• Crossmark Policy
• Copyright Statement
• GDPR Policy
• Open Access Policy
• Publication Ethics Statement
• Author Guidelines
• Announcements

Systematic Review of Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) in Language Education: A Balanced Perspective

• Lhoussine Qasserras  

Lhoussine Qasserras

Search for the other articles from the author in:

Abstract Views 3949

Downloads 543

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.sidebar##

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##

This article presents a comprehensive review of communicative language teaching (CLT) in language education, considering both the positive impact of the approach and the criticisms raised by scholars. CLT has garnered significant attention in language education due to its emphasis on promoting effective communication and meaningful language use. This systematic review presents an impartial and well-rounded analysis of the pros and cons of CLT, citing previous studies in the literature review. It highlights the positive results of past research, demonstrating how CLT can enhance students’ communicative competence, language proficiency, cultural awareness, learner autonomy, critical thinking, and problem-solving skills. However, other studies have criticized CLT, raising concerns about its lack of explicit grammar and vocabulary instruction, insufficient preparation for formal writing, standardized exams, insufficient attention to individual learner differences, and emphasis on fluency over accuracy. By presenting both perspectives, this article aims to provide educators with a balanced understanding of CLT’s potential strengths and limitations, guiding them in designing effective language teaching practices.

Introduction

The field of language teaching has experienced the creation and growth of diverse approaches over the course of its historical progression. Several approaches and methods have gained recognition in the English Language Teaching (ELT) community, including the Grammar Translation Method, the Direct Method, the Audio-lingual Method, Suggestopedia, and Total Physical Response. These approaches or methods have undergone thorough examination and study by researchers and scholars. Every approach or method demonstrates specific areas of emphasis, weaknesses, and strengths, all solidly grounded in clearly defined theoretical frameworks. These approaches are frequently developed by integrating theoretical paradigms such as behaviourism, structuralism, constructivism, and universal grammar.

In this scholarly investigation, we embark on an examination of CLT, a pedagogical methodology that is subject to the same rigorous investigation as its precursors. CLT gives much value to meaning since communication is the ultimate goal of second language acquisition ( Magnan, 2007 ). This approach is also referred to as the notional functional strategy. It was established by the European Council in the 1970s, building on the work of language experts such as Wilkins, who analyzed the communicative meanings that a learner needs to express and understand. Instead of the traditional system of teaching grammar, he focused on meaning. For further illustration, the core idea behind CLT is that language instruction should not only focus on teaching grammar and vocabulary but also include the study of the meanings and functions of utterances in a variety of authentic contexts.

CLT is a combination of various language concepts, including sociolinguistics, functional linguistics, semantics, and pragmatics. Through the CLT approach, learners are encouraged to develop their communicative competence by using the language in meaningful and real-life situations. This approach emphasizes the importance of fluency over accuracy, making it a popular choice for language instruction in many contexts. The CLT approach, which originated in Britain, has been widely adopted in English as a Second or Foreign Language (ESL/EFL) classrooms worldwide ( Liao & Zhao, 2012 ; Ozsevik, 2010 ). This global acceptance has been extensively documented by Ellis (1996) . The aforementioned approach holds a crucial position within the domain of English language teaching (ELT), receiving acknowledgement from both linguists and language educators due to its pedagogical merit.

Methodology

Research problem.

To what extent does the implementation of communicative language teaching (CLT) in English language teaching (ELT) contexts contribute to the development of students’ language proficiency and effective communication skills, and what challenges and limitations may arise in balancing its benefits and potential drawbacks?

This research problem seeks to explore the dual nature of CLT in ELT by investigating its positive influence on language proficiency and communication skills development while also examining the challenges and limitations it may pose in terms of ensuring accuracy and addressing potential shortcomings in explicit language instruction. Understanding the overall impact of CLT on ELT will provide valuable insights for educators and policymakers seeking to optimize language teaching methods and curricula.

Research Objectives

This academic paper aims to clarify the principles and practices of the CLT approach, offering a thorough comprehension of its theoretical underpinnings and outlining its main distinguishing features. Moreover, our objective is to analyze the key benefits and constraints linked to the adoption of this instructional approach. This study serves as a vital contribution to the ongoing academic conversation on language instruction approaches, providing insightful perspectives on the dynamic nature of language education.

Research Questions

How does the implementation of communicative language teaching (CLT) in English language teaching (ELT) contexts affect the development of students’ communication skills and overall language proficiency, considering its merits as a student-centered approach?

What challenges and limitations arise in the application of communicative language teaching (CLT) in English language teaching (ELT), particularly in terms of accuracy and potential issues related to neglecting explicit language instruction?

Data Extraction

A thorough and organized method was used to collect data in order to do a full review of all the past and present studies that looked at the pros and cons of using CLT to teach English. A comprehensive literature review of scholarly papers, journal articles, research reports, and dissertations from reputable databases and academic repositories was conducted. To assure relevance and currency, we will concentrate on studies published between 1972 and 2023, with particular emphasis on studies from the last five decades.

The studies selected for analysis were carefully vetted based on their relevance and methodological rigor. Key findings about the pros and cons of using CLT in ELT were found by extracting data. These findings focused on things like student-centered learning, improving communication skills, implementation challenges, and possible limits in teaching language accuracy. By synthesizing the insights from these studies, a comprehensive understanding of the multifaceted nature of CLT in ELT was achieved. This way of collecting data made it possible for a fair and fact-based evaluation of CLT, which showed its good points and areas that might need more work.

The communicative language teaching approach has garnered significant attention in language education due to its stress on improving effective communication and meaningful language use. The results below provide a balanced analysis of the merits and demerits of CLT, drawing insights from past studies mentioned in the literature review.

Merits of CLT

Enhanced communicative competence and language proficiency.

Richards and Rodgers (2001) highlight that the CLT approach has prioritized real-life communication as a means of developing language competencies in authentic contexts. Evidence also shows that engaging students in communication tasks and activities allows students to fine-tune their ability to transmit and interpret messages proficiently, thereby enhancing their communicative competence ( Krashen, 1981 ). This approach has underscored oral communication and active engagement, helping students cultivate an advanced level of fluency and precision in language use. In this respect, once students practice the language, especially in meaningful contexts, their language proficiency is profoundly improved ( Savignon, 1972 ).

Additionally, Chaudhury (2015) conducted a study that is in accordance with the principles of CLT. This approach focuses on the improvement of communicative competence and language proficiency. The author sought to establish an interactive learning environment wherein students could actively participate in real-life communication scenarios by implementing communicative language activities, as opposed to the conventional ‘chalk and talk’ approach. The above-mentioned technique is compatible with the fundamental objective of CLT, which is to impart language learning that is both meaningful and practical. The use of a quasi-experimental, non-randomized pre-test and post-test control group design enhances the study by providing a research-supported framework for assessing the true effects of communicative language activities on learners’ communicative competence over a period of time. The results indicating a substantial disparity in post-test scores provide robust evidence for the efficacy of CLT-focused approaches in improving language proficiency and communicative competence. These findings highlight the impact of Chaudhury ’s (2015) research in advocating for the implementation of communicative language teaching methods in language education.

Fostering Learner Autonomy and Motivation

Ellis (1999) posits that the CLT approach, grounded on the idea of learner-centeredness, endeavours to facilitate students’ autonomy in assuming responsibility for their language acquisition process. Previous research has substantiated the assertion that CLT is a pedagogical technique that fosters the active participation of students, encouraging them to become engaged, creative, and self-directed learners ( Long, 1996 ; Snider & Schnurer, 2002 ). In this regard, the CLT approach facilitates the development of learner autonomy by affording students increased control and responsibility in their learning process.

In order to accomplish this objective, CLT offers students opportunities to engage in authentic communicative tasks, including but not limited to role plays, debates, dialogues, and puzzles. The primary objective of these exercises is to enhance students’ opportunities for verbal expression while concurrently reducing the teacher’s talking time. Furthermore, when students participate in these activities, whether in pairs or groups, working together towards a common goal, they assume complete responsibility for their own educational development ( Benson, 2011 ; Little, 1991 ).

Development of Cultural Competence

The CLT approach is widely recognized for its effectiveness in fostering cultural competence among language learners. This approach cultivates intercultural communication and understanding, as pointed out by Nunan (1991) , and encourages learners to engage with authentic language materials from diverse cultural contexts. When students interact with their peers from different backgrounds, they develop sensitivity and awareness of different cultures, leading to a deeper understanding of the language and its cultural implications.

Research has shown that CLT enables learners to communicate more effectively in multicultural settings by understanding and respecting different cultural norms and practices ( Byram, 1997 ; Kramsch, 1993 ). This approach’s emphasis on authentic material and peer interaction facilitates cultural immersion and provides occasions for learners to experience different cultures firsthand. Besides, the CLT approach encourages learners to use the language in its natural context, leading to a more inclusive understanding of the language’s cultural implications.

The connection of Arroussi (2014) with the concepts of communicative language teaching in relation to the promotion of cultural competency underscores the need to include culture in language instruction. The fact that the researcher saw that culture had a big effect on improving communication skills is in line with the basic ideas of CLT, which stress how important it is to use language in real, appropriate situations. From Arroussi’s point of view, language learners’ success in communication situations depends on how well they understand and value culture. This highlights the close connection between learning a language and communicating culturally. The above alignment accentuates the need to integrate cultural components into language instruction approaches, cultivating a more profound grasp of the desired language and boosting learners’ ability to communicate effectively.

The experimental study conducted by Hua (2011) presents persuasive evidence in favour of the relationship between the implementation of CLT and the development of cultural competence. The results of the study stress the efficacy of integrating cultural education into an English as a Foreign Language (EFL) course, as it led to a notable enhancement in students’ cultural consciousness and ability to communicate effectively ( Wu, 2008 ). This is in perfect agreement with the concepts of CLT, which prioritize the incorporation of authentic cultural contexts into language acquisition in order to improve learners’ proficiency in varied communication settings. Hua’s (2011) study provides evidence that being exposed to and comprehending diverse cultures not only increases students’ cultural awareness but also improves their communication skills, which is an ultimate principle of CLT ( Lee et al ., 2023 ). These findings offer significant support for the incorporation of cultural components into language instruction, which is consistent with the comprehensive approach to language acquisition advocated by CLT. This approach aims to equip students with the necessary skills to engage in meaningful and successful cross-cultural conversation.

Enhancing Critical Thinking and Problem-solving Skills

According to a study by Hasibuan and Batubara (2012) , the CLT approach is effective in improving learners’ critical thinking and problem-solving skills. The approach involves the use of communicative tasks that require learners to negotiate meaning in various contexts. By engaging in these tasks, learners are encouraged to think critically while communicating, leading to the development of cognitive abilities that extend beyond just language learning. Additionally, CLT promotes critical thinking about language itself, which can help students gain a deeper understanding of the nuances and implications of the language they are using.

Furthermore, the development of critical thinking skills and oral communication proficiency is widely recognized as a fundamental necessity in the context of 21st-century education. Numerous studies have been conducted to examine several methodologies and techniques aimed at enhancing critical thinking and oral communication abilities within the classroom setting ( Halpern, 2003 ). Existing literature provides evidence that the incorporation of communicative language teaching practices, such as in-class debates, discussions, public-speaking exercises, and role-play activities, enhances an atmosphere conducive to understanding, introspection, inquiry, negotiation, and logical evaluation. Conversely, the implementation of critical thinking exercises in language education can help in the development of oral competency skills.

Demerits of CLT

Neglect of explicit grammar and vocabulary instruction.

One of the primary criticisms directed at the communicative language teaching approach is its alleged neglect of explicit grammar and vocabulary instruction ( Larsen-Freeman, 2000 ; Spada & Lightbown, 2008 ). Nassaji (2000) stresses the importance of integrating form-focused activities within an integrative approach to L2 teaching that balances meaning with form. The author argues that an overemphasis on meaning, as seen in traditional communicative language teaching, can affect learners negatively if they neglect the language structure. Consequently, to ensure the development of proficient language learners, form-focused activities should be incorporated within a communicative and meaningful context. The article provides various pedagogical strategies, such as the use of corrective feedback, explicit instruction, and consciousness-raising tasks, to help learners develop their form-focused abilities. These strategies aim to enhance learners’ capacity to notice and analyze the form of language, leading to greater accuracy and fluency in language production.

Likewise, in his work, Grim (2008) places much emphasis on the significance of form, particularly for beginning-level learners and cultural lessons. The author argues that integrating language structures into cultural lessons at the early stages of French L2 classes can be more effective for learning second language grammar, vocabulary, and cultural content in intermediate French L2 classes. Grim’s approach departs from traditional communicative language teaching, which gives much more value to meaning than form. Instead, Grim contends that giving equal importance to form and meaning can boost language learning outcomes.

El-Dakhs (2015) argues that without systematic and explicit instruction, students may struggle to develop a solid foundation in language structure and vocabulary knowledge. This limitation may hinder learners’ ability to produce accurate and grammatically correct language. For example, the author’s critique of communicative language teaching addresses significant language accuracy issues. CLT stresses meaning and communication, while El-Dakhs’ research shows the risks of emphasizing meaning alone in language training. This view is supported by research that suggests pure CLT learners may lack linguistic accuracy, a key component of language mastery ( Ahmad & Rao, 2013 ). El-Dakhs’ criticism focuses on the necessity for a balanced approach to language development that includes communicative competency and formal teaching. Recognizing the importance of language accuracy allows educators to take a more holistic approach that ensures students communicate successfully and have the grammatical and linguistic precision needed for language competency. This perspective enhances CLT discourse by highlighting its benefits and weaknesses in language instruction.

Limited Preparation for Formal Writing and Standardized Exams

According to Bachman (1990) , some researchers express concerns that the CLT approach may not provide students with sufficient preparation for formal writing and standardized exams that require precise grammar and vocabulary usage. While CLT’s major focus on communicative activities is critical for effective communication, it may not fully address the intricacies required for formal language production. Consequently, students may lack the necessary skills to perform well in language assessment contexts that demand precise grammar and vocabulary usage. Furthermore, some sceptics argue against implementing CLT, as exemplified by Norland and Pruett-Said (2006) . These critics express apprehension regarding the potential neglect of reading and writing abilities within the framework of CLT. They elucidate that if educators fail to instruct grammatical regulations or vocabulary, learners may ultimately experience difficulty expressing themselves clearly and effectively throughout interpersonal exchanges. Finally, a limitation of communicative language teaching is its applicability mainly to small class sizes. In the context of a large classroom, teachers may allocate an important amount of time towards assessing the language proficiency of individual students and rectifying any errors they may have made ( Wilkins, 1976 ).

Prioritization of Fluency over Accuracy

While fluency is an essential component in language production, it is important to maintain a balance between fluency and accuracy. The Communicative Language Teaching approach accentuates fluency, which may contribute to the development of fossilized errors if accuracy-focused activities are neglected ( Ellis, 2003 ). These errors could become ingrained and difficult to correct, which can negatively impact language learning. Thus, it is crucial to include accuracy-focused activities in language learning to ensure that learners are not only fluent but also accurate in their language production. Striking a balance between fluency and accuracy can help learners develop a well-rounded and effective communication skill set.

Similarly, according to Brumfit and Johnson’s (1979) publication, the communicative approach to language learning, which gives emphasis to the ability to communicate effectively in a language, should not be prioritized to the detriment of language accuracy. The authors suggest that a balanced approach that incorporates both communicative competence and language accuracy is essential to achieving optimal language learning outcomes. This implies that a singular focus on communicative competence may not suffice to equip learners with the necessary language skills required for effective communication in real-life situations. As such, educators and language learners alike must strive to achieve a balance between the two approaches in order to maximize language learning outcomes.

In addition, Gerges’ (2016) research regarding the potential weakness of CLT brings attention to an essential aspect of language education. Although this approach is highly effective in improving oral fluency and communicative competence, it is essential to recognize that language proficiency encompasses more than just speaking abilities. The findings of Gerges draw attention to the significance of maintaining a balanced approach in the training of language. By placing exclusive emphasis on oral fluency, there is a possibility of unintended repercussions, including a potential decrease in the development of grammar skills and writing proficiency. This underscores the imperative for an all-inclusive strategy that incorporates both fluency and accuracy in language use.

Over the years, the communicative language teaching (CLT) approach has become increasingly popular in language education. This approach emphasizes the importance of promoting effective communication and meaningful language use in the classroom. This discussion aims to provide a broader analysis of both the merits and drawbacks of CLT, drawing upon relevant findings from the literature review mentioned above.

Research Question 1

Enhancing communication skills.

One of the main advantages of CLT is its rigorous emphasis on honing students’ communication proficiencies. This approach encourages learners to apply language skills in real-life scenarios, enabling them to develop effective communication abilities across diverse contexts. This pedagogical approach fits well with modern theories about how people learn languages, like Krashen’s Input Hypothesis ( Krashen, 1981 ), which says that people learn languages best when they are exposed to input that is just a little bit above their current level of proficiency. This helps them communicate meaningfully.

Promoting Student-centered Learning

Another advantage of CLT is that it promotes student-centered learning. In a CLT classroom, the teacher acts as a facilitator who guides and supports student interactions. This approach encourages students to take responsibility for their own learning, making it more engaging and motivating for them. For instance, Long’s Interaction Hypothesis ( Long, 1996 ) complements CLT by underscoring that interaction and negotiation of meaning during language use promote language acquisition, echoing the fundamental concept in CLT of student-centred, communicative learning. Savignon’s Communicative Competence Theory ( Tarone, 1983 ) further supports CLT’s objectives by highlighting the importance of teaching language within real-life contexts, a core principle of CLT. Additionally, Hasibuan and Batubara (2012) agree with CLT’s principles, confirming that this approach allows learners to develop their critical thinking and problem-solving skills as they collaborate with their peers. These results show that CLT goes hand in hand with language acquisition theory, making it clear that it is a way to teach that focuses on building good communication skills.

Research Question 2

Difficulties in implementation.

Nevertheless, CLT is not without its limitations. One of the main criticisms of this approach is that it can be difficult to implement in practice. For instance, it can be challenging for teachers to design and manage activities that meet the diverse needs of their students. While the acceptance of CLT is widespread among educators in English-speaking nations in the Western hemisphere, its adoption in Asia and non-native English countries is not as prevalent. According to Kustati (2013) , the efficacy of the strategy in Southeast Asian nations such as Vietnam, Cambodia, Indonesia, Thailand, Myanmar, Laos, and Malaysia is limited. The degree of success observed in these nations is constrained and subject to variation based on the specific country and socio-cultural circumstances. Similarly, Koosha and Yakhabi (2013) highlight that EFL instructors encounter problems and challenges while attempting to implement the CLT approach and optimize the learning experience in their classrooms.

Neglecting Language Accuracy

Some research suggests potential drawbacks. For example, Spada and Lightbown’s study (2008) indicates that explicit instruction, especially in grammar, can be beneficial alongside CLT. This raises questions about whether CLT, which primarily focuses on communication, might neglect the role of explicit language instruction, potentially hindering learners’ language development.

To address this criticism, language learning programmes could incorporate explicit grammar and vocabulary instruction into their curriculum. Explicit instruction can help learners develop a solid foundation in language structure and vocabulary knowledge, which is essential for effective communication. According to Canale and Swain (1980) , linguistic and communicative competence is an essential aspect of language instruction and acquisition, particularly in the context of ESL/EFL education. The authors further elaborate that communicative competence is predicated upon the interplay between grammatical competence and knowledge, as well as socio-linguistic competence and knowledge. In order to facilitate effective communication, it is essential to possess knowledge of the appropriate content, delivery, and timing of one’s message.

In 1985, Swain put forward the Output Hypothesis, which disagrees with the receptive approach of CLT and supports active language production. This displays how significant it is to include language production activities in the CLT framework. Moreover, Nation and Newton (2009) accentuate the significance of vocabulary instruction alongside communicative activities, pointing out a potential gap in CLT’s focus on vocabulary acquisition. These criticisms reveal that CLT may need to strike a better balance between communication-centred teaching and addressing these potential limitations. To avoid such negative consequences, it is crucial to incorporate accuracy-focused activities into language learning programmes.

In short, the study of communicative language teaching (CLT) demonstrates that it fits with current theories of how people learn languages because it focuses on real communication, interaction with others, and real-life situations. The efficacy of this pedagogical technique has been demonstrated in its ability to enhance learners’ communication abilities and promote a student-centered learning environment. However, it is critical to acknowledge potential constraints, such as the requirement for explicit instruction in language, the necessity for active production of language, and the acquisition of vocabulary. These factors have the potential to affect the overall effectiveness of language learning within the Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) framework.

In summary, the discourse surrounding communicative language teaching features its prominence and pertinence within the realm of language education. The CLT approach, which is based on learner-centeredness and meaningful dialogue, presents a number of benefits. This approach promotes active participation from students, facilitates the application of language in authentic contexts, and improves their ability to communicate effectively in accordance with current theories of language learning. Furthermore, the implementation of the CLT approach fosters the development of student autonomy, enhances critical thinking skills, and cultivates problem-solving ability.

However, it is imperative to recognize that CLT is not devoid of constraints. The challenges encompass obstacles encountered during the implementation process, particularly in countries where English is not the local language, as well as the possibility of disregarding language accuracy and explicit instruction. Achieving a harmonious equilibrium between pedagogical approaches that stress communication and the need to acknowledge and overcome these constraints is crucial to facilitating successful language acquisition.

Implications

The implications of the findings presented in this discourse hold substantial importance for practitioners and scholars in the field of language education. Educators ought to persist in leveraging the advantages of CLT by prioritizing the promotion of meaningful conversation, interactive engagement, and the application of language skills in authentic, real-world contexts. Yet, it is imperative for educators to take into account the incorporation of explicit language instruction, engaging language production activities, and vocabulary teaching within their communicative language teaching methodologies. This approach is fundamental in order to effectively tackle any potential constraints and offer a comprehensive language learning experience for students.

Future Research

In order to augment our understanding of the efficacy of communicative language teaching and explore prospective avenues for development, it is recommended that future research endeavours concentrate on various domains:

• Comparative Studies: Conduct comparative studies to analyze the outcomes of CLT-based instruction in comparison to other language teaching methodologies. These studies aim to measure the effectiveness of CLT in various circumstances.
• Language Production Activities: Examine the effects of integrating additional language production activities inside the CLT framework. Furthermore, it seeks to explore the ideal equilibrium between the enhancement of receptive and productive language skills.
• Vocabulary Acquisition : Look into new ways to teach vocabulary within the framework of communicative language teaching. The goal is to help students build a strong vocabulary foundation along with their communication skills.
• Teacher Training: Examine the effects of offering teacher training programmes with an emphasis on CLT in order to enrich educators’ proficiency in efficiently implementing CLT methodologies.

In conclusion, it can be argued that CLT holds significant pedagogical value. However, it is crucial to emphasize the prominence of ongoing study and adaptation in order to fully optimize its advantages and effectively address any potential limitations. This approach ultimately aims to offer learners a whole language learning experience.

Most read articles by the same author(s)

• Najib Slimani, Lhoussine Qasserras, Teacher Trainees’ Stance Towards Distance Learning During COVID-19: An Experiential Outlook , European Journal of Education and Pedagogy: Vol. 3 No. 4 (2022)

Similar Articles

• Angeliki Ypsilanti, Ioannis Karras, “Coursebook or No Coursebook”? A False Dilemma , European Journal of Education and Pedagogy: Vol. 5 No. 2 (2024)

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

A LITERATURE REVIEW ON COMMUNICATION STRATEGIES IN LANGUAGE LEARNING

Abstract Communicating successfully means to pass on meaningful messages to the listeners. In order to achieve a successful level of communication in situations, where learners face problems when there is a mismatch between their communication goals and their linguistic resources, they tend to use devices to improve their level of communication; these devices are called Communication Strategies. This paper reviews and discusses the theoretical background of the study of Communication strategies in language learning. The first part of the paper presents the most common definitions of the Communication Strategies. The second part attempts to explain the relationship between Communicative Competence and Communication Strategies. The third part describes the types, taxonomies and the origins of the Communication Strategies. The final part sheds the light on a number of empirical studies related to types of Communication Strategies and the relationship between linguistic proficiency and Communication Strategies choice in the learner's first language and his/her second language.

Related Papers

Ghaleb Rababah

This paper investigates the compensatory strategies (CpSs) used in the oral discourse of second year students studying Arabic as a second language (ASL) in the Arabic Language Institute at King Saud University in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. The study examined the various strategies used by a sample of 24 male learners who were all high school graduates from 8 different countries (Russia, Kosovo, Senegal, Tajikistan, Pakistan, Benin, Malaysia and Ethiopia), speaking 8 different languages (Russian, Albanian, Wolof, Tajik, Urdu, French, Malay and Somali). To elicit the CpS use, the subjects were audio-recorded while performing two tasks: an interview and a role-play. The data were transcribed and analysed. The results showed that the subjects used a range of compensatory strategies in their oral production. Moreover, there were differences between the individual learners' strategies according to their native language. The findings of the study showed that ASL learners were risk-takers, and they expanded their limited linguistic resources to achieve their communicative goals. The findings of the present study suggest that strategic competence as reflected in the CpSs used by ASL learners should be integrated into the ASL curriculum.

Dhina Marleni

This article deals with the effects of teaching communication strategies (CSs) on the types of communication strategies used by the students and level of speech comprehensibility. This research is largely experimental involving 23 students. The research isntruments include vocabulary test to identify students' unknown objects, treatment, and observation. Descriptive qualitative analysis was used to analyze the linguistic features, and repeated measure t-test was used to analyze the level of speech comprehensibility. The results reveal that (1) in terms of frequency, there are increases in 4 types CSs, decreases in 7 types of CSs, and a consistancy in one type of CS, (2) there is a significant increase in the level of speech comprehensibility. Therefore, it can be concluded that teaching communication strategies prommote students' communication skills.

Dr. Sunanda Patil-Shinde

When language learners do not know how to say a word in English, they can communicate effectively by using their hands, imitating sounds, inventing new words, or describing what they mean. These ways of communicating are communication strategies (CSs). This study investigated the communication strategies used by engineering students in selected oral communicative situations. Data came from three sources: (1) audio-recordings of students' performances in select oral tasks (2) retrospective interviews after completion of each task; and (3) observation notes taken at the time of students' performances in each task. To analyse the data taxonomy on communication strategies was adapted from Tarone (1977), Faerch and Kasper (1983), Ellis (1984), and Dornyei (1995). The analysis of the use of CSs showed that the selected students of the study used more CSs in the task of interview than in public speech and presentation. The most often used strategies in all the tasks are use of fillers, repetition, and restructuring.

Berhanu Shukala

This study investigated how and when oral communication strategies are used in group discussions by international students at Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, a public university in Malaysia. It aims to examine the differences in the use of communication strategies between high and low proficient speakers. The participants were a group of ten low proficient Arabic speakers of English and a group of ten high proficient Chinese and Arabic speakers of English. Data elicited from audio recordings of oral group discussions and a self-report questionnaire was used to identify communication strategies used. The findings showed that the subjects resorted to ten out of the twelve types of communication strategies specified by Tarone (1980), Faerch and Kasper (1983), and Willems (1987). The most frequently employed communication strategy was code switching; an interlingual strategy and the least used strategy was word coinage; an intralingual strategy. Further investigation indicated that different levels of oral proficiency influenced the use of communication strategies from two aspects. They are the frequency of use and the selection of types of communication strategies. This implies that international students studying at Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM) need to be made aware of the use of communication strategies depending on their level of proficiency and the fact that raising the awareness of both low proficient and also high proficient speakers to strategies that are used by speakers of different proficiency levels may well help ease communication.

Kim Hua Tan

muhammad idrus

Indian Journal of Applied …

Douglas Jarvie

This study examines the effect of communication strategy instruction on EFL students’ oral communicative ability and their strategic competence. In a 14-week English as a Foreign Language (EFL) course (English Use II) based on Communicative Language Teaching approach, 80 learners were divided into to groups. The strategy training group (n = 44) received CS training based on a training program designed for the purpose of the present research,whereas the control group (n = 36) received only the normal communicative course using Click On 3, with no explicit focus on CSs. The communication strategies targeted in the training program included circumlocution (paraphrase), appeal for help, asking for repetition, clarification request, confirmation request, self-repair, and guessing. Pre- and posttest procedures were used to find out the effect of strategy training on language proficiency and CS use. The effect of the training was assessed by three types of data collection: the participants’ pre- and post-IELTS speaking test scores, transcription data from the speaking IELTS test, and ‘Click On’ Exit Test scores. The findings revealed that participants in the strategy training group significantly outperformed the control group in their IELTS speaking test scores. The results of the post-test transcription data also confirmed that the participants in the strategy training group used more CSs, which could be attributed to the CS training program. The findings of the present research have implications for language teachers, and syllabus designers.

. Atlantis. Journal of the Spanish Association for Anglo-American Studies, 29/1, 87-105.

Ana Fernandez Dobao

RELATED PAPERS

JALT Journal

Lester Loschky

azam nezami

zina bellahsene

ปัทมา ทัตธนกีรติ

İsmail Hakkı Erten

Santiago Giutierrez

Beyza Björkman

Marianne Gullberg

Sabri T . S . Ahmed

Linguistics and Literature Studies

Montserrat Iglesias

Hossein Karami

Deena Abdl Hameed Saleh AlJa

Hamid Marashi

Journal of Language Teaching and Research

Hossein Dastjerdi

ABDUSSALAM S A L I H EMHEMED

Theses and Dissertations

Zoli Sidzumo

Massoud Yaghoubi-Notash

Menegale, M., (2013) (Ed). Autonomy in language learning: Getting learners actively involved. IATEFL: Canterbury, UK. http://lasig.iatefl.org

Luciano Mariani

Maryam Azarnoosh

Ana Bocanegra-Valle

TESOL quarterly

Alimuzzaman Hira

Lilia Novabos

Tesol Quarterly

Zoltán Dörnyei

In M. Losada Friend, P. Ron Vaz, S. Hernández Santano & J. Casanova (Eds.), Proceedings of the XXX international conference of the Spanish association for Anglo-American studies (CD-Rom). Huelva: Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad de Huelva.

Sonia Belanche

Bryan Smith

Su-Hie Ting

International Journal of Education & Literacy Studies [IJELS]

Nur ilianis Adnan

In J. L. Chamosa González (Ed.), Proceedings of the XXIII international conference of the Spanish association for Anglo-American studies (CD-Rom). León: Universidad de León.

Margot Van Mulken

Azizullah Mirzaei

Tracey Derwing

reza kafipour

Rahma Al Alawi

Suhartini Syukrie

Tzu-Hua Chen

Muhamad El Dib , Paweł Sobkowiak , Tomasz Róg , Jane Willis

Christine Goh

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

A systematic literature review of empirical research on ChatGPT in education

• Open access
• Published: 26 May 2024
• Volume 3 , article number  60 , ( 2024 )

Cite this article

You have full access to this open access article

• Yazid Albadarin   ORCID: orcid.org/0009-0005-8068-8902 1 ,
• Mohammed Saqr 1 ,
• Nicolas Pope 1 &
• Markku Tukiainen 1  

365 Accesses

Explore all metrics

Over the last four decades, studies have investigated the incorporation of Artificial Intelligence (AI) into education. A recent prominent AI-powered technology that has impacted the education sector is ChatGPT. This article provides a systematic review of 14 empirical studies incorporating ChatGPT into various educational settings, published in 2022 and before the 10th of April 2023—the date of conducting the search process. It carefully followed the essential steps outlined in the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA 2020) guidelines, as well as Okoli’s (Okoli in Commun Assoc Inf Syst, 2015) steps for conducting a rigorous and transparent systematic review. In this review, we aimed to explore how students and teachers have utilized ChatGPT in various educational settings, as well as the primary findings of those studies. By employing Creswell’s (Creswell in Educational research: planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research [Ebook], Pearson Education, London, 2015) coding techniques for data extraction and interpretation, we sought to gain insight into their initial attempts at ChatGPT incorporation into education. This approach also enabled us to extract insights and considerations that can facilitate its effective and responsible use in future educational contexts. The results of this review show that learners have utilized ChatGPT as a virtual intelligent assistant, where it offered instant feedback, on-demand answers, and explanations of complex topics. Additionally, learners have used it to enhance their writing and language skills by generating ideas, composing essays, summarizing, translating, paraphrasing texts, or checking grammar. Moreover, learners turned to it as an aiding tool to facilitate their directed and personalized learning by assisting in understanding concepts and homework, providing structured learning plans, and clarifying assignments and tasks. However, the results of specific studies (n = 3, 21.4%) show that overuse of ChatGPT may negatively impact innovative capacities and collaborative learning competencies among learners. Educators, on the other hand, have utilized ChatGPT to create lesson plans, generate quizzes, and provide additional resources, which helped them enhance their productivity and efficiency and promote different teaching methodologies. Despite these benefits, the majority of the reviewed studies recommend the importance of conducting structured training, support, and clear guidelines for both learners and educators to mitigate the drawbacks. This includes developing critical evaluation skills to assess the accuracy and relevance of information provided by ChatGPT, as well as strategies for integrating human interaction and collaboration into learning activities that involve AI tools. Furthermore, they also recommend ongoing research and proactive dialogue with policymakers, stakeholders, and educational practitioners to refine and enhance the use of AI in learning environments. This review could serve as an insightful resource for practitioners who seek to integrate ChatGPT into education and stimulate further research in the field.

Similar content being viewed by others

Empowering learners with ChatGPT: insights from a systematic literature exploration

Incorporating AI in foreign language education: An investigation into ChatGPT’s effect on foreign language learners

Large language models in education: A focus on the complementary relationship between human teachers and ChatGPT

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

1 Introduction

Educational technology, a rapidly evolving field, plays a crucial role in reshaping the landscape of teaching and learning [ 82 ]. One of the most transformative technological innovations of our era that has influenced the field of education is Artificial Intelligence (AI) [ 50 ]. Over the last four decades, AI in education (AIEd) has gained remarkable attention for its potential to make significant advancements in learning, instructional methods, and administrative tasks within educational settings [ 11 ]. In particular, a large language model (LLM), a type of AI algorithm that applies artificial neural networks (ANNs) and uses massively large data sets to understand, summarize, generate, and predict new content that is almost difficult to differentiate from human creations [ 79 ], has opened up novel possibilities for enhancing various aspects of education, from content creation to personalized instruction [ 35 ]. Chatbots that leverage the capabilities of LLMs to understand and generate human-like responses have also presented the capacity to enhance student learning and educational outcomes by engaging students, offering timely support, and fostering interactive learning experiences [ 46 ].

The ongoing and remarkable technological advancements in chatbots have made their use more convenient, increasingly natural and effortless, and have expanded their potential for deployment across various domains [ 70 ]. One prominent example of chatbot applications is the Chat Generative Pre-Trained Transformer, known as ChatGPT, which was introduced by OpenAI, a leading AI research lab, on November 30th, 2022. ChatGPT employs a variety of deep learning techniques to generate human-like text, with a particular focus on recurrent neural networks (RNNs). Long short-term memory (LSTM) allows it to grasp the context of the text being processed and retain information from previous inputs. Also, the transformer architecture, a neural network architecture based on the self-attention mechanism, allows it to analyze specific parts of the input, thereby enabling it to produce more natural-sounding and coherent output. Additionally, the unsupervised generative pre-training and the fine-tuning methods allow ChatGPT to generate more relevant and accurate text for specific tasks [ 31 , 62 ]. Furthermore, reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF), a machine learning approach that combines reinforcement learning techniques with human-provided feedback, has helped improve ChatGPT’s model by accelerating the learning process and making it significantly more efficient.

This cutting-edge natural language processing (NLP) tool is widely recognized as one of today's most advanced LLMs-based chatbots [ 70 ], allowing users to ask questions and receive detailed, coherent, systematic, personalized, convincing, and informative human-like responses [ 55 ], even within complex and ambiguous contexts [ 63 , 77 ]. ChatGPT is considered the fastest-growing technology in history: in just three months following its public launch, it amassed an estimated 120 million monthly active users [ 16 ] with an estimated 13 million daily queries [ 49 ], surpassing all other applications [ 64 ]. This remarkable growth can be attributed to the unique features and user-friendly interface that ChatGPT offers. Its intuitive design allows users to interact seamlessly with the technology, making it accessible to a diverse range of individuals, regardless of their technical expertise [ 78 ]. Additionally, its exceptional performance results from a combination of advanced algorithms, continuous enhancements, and extensive training on a diverse dataset that includes various text sources such as books, articles, websites, and online forums [ 63 ], have contributed to a more engaging and satisfying user experience [ 62 ]. These factors collectively explain its remarkable global growth and set it apart from predecessors like Bard, Bing Chat, ERNIE, and others.

In this context, several studies have explored the technological advancements of chatbots. One noteworthy recent research effort, conducted by Schöbel et al. [ 70 ], stands out for its comprehensive analysis of more than 5,000 studies on communication agents. This study offered a comprehensive overview of the historical progression and future prospects of communication agents, including ChatGPT. Moreover, other studies have focused on making comparisons, particularly between ChatGPT and alternative chatbots like Bard, Bing Chat, ERNIE, LaMDA, BlenderBot, and various others. For example, O’Leary [ 53 ] compared two chatbots, LaMDA and BlenderBot, with ChatGPT and revealed that ChatGPT outperformed both. This superiority arises from ChatGPT’s capacity to handle a wider range of questions and generate slightly varied perspectives within specific contexts. Similarly, ChatGPT exhibited an impressive ability to formulate interpretable responses that were easily understood when compared with Google's feature snippet [ 34 ]. Additionally, ChatGPT was compared to other LLMs-based chatbots, including Bard and BERT, as well as ERNIE. The findings indicated that ChatGPT exhibited strong performance in the given tasks, often outperforming the other models [ 59 ].

Furthermore, in the education context, a comprehensive study systematically compared a range of the most promising chatbots, including Bard, Bing Chat, ChatGPT, and Ernie across a multidisciplinary test that required higher-order thinking. The study revealed that ChatGPT achieved the highest score, surpassing Bing Chat and Bard [ 64 ]. Similarly, a comparative analysis was conducted to compare ChatGPT with Bard in answering a set of 30 mathematical questions and logic problems, grouped into two question sets. Set (A) is unavailable online, while Set (B) is available online. The results revealed ChatGPT's superiority in Set (A) over Bard. Nevertheless, Bard's advantage emerged in Set (B) due to its capacity to access the internet directly and retrieve answers, a capability that ChatGPT does not possess [ 57 ]. However, through these varied assessments, ChatGPT consistently highlights its exceptional prowess compared to various alternatives in the ever-evolving chatbot technology.

The widespread adoption of chatbots, especially ChatGPT, by millions of students and educators, has sparked extensive discussions regarding its incorporation into the education sector [ 64 ]. Accordingly, many scholars have contributed to the discourse, expressing both optimism and pessimism regarding the incorporation of ChatGPT into education. For example, ChatGPT has been highlighted for its capabilities in enriching the learning and teaching experience through its ability to support different learning approaches, including adaptive learning, personalized learning, and self-directed learning [ 58 , 60 , 91 ]), deliver summative and formative feedback to students and provide real-time responses to questions, increase the accessibility of information [ 22 , 40 , 43 ], foster students’ performance, engagement and motivation [ 14 , 44 , 58 ], and enhance teaching practices [ 17 , 18 , 64 , 74 ].

On the other hand, concerns have been also raised regarding its potential negative effects on learning and teaching. These include the dissemination of false information and references [ 12 , 23 , 61 , 85 ], biased reinforcement [ 47 , 50 ], compromised academic integrity [ 18 , 40 , 66 , 74 ], and the potential decline in students' skills [ 43 , 61 , 64 , 74 ]. As a result, ChatGPT has been banned in multiple countries, including Russia, China, Venezuela, Belarus, and Iran, as well as in various educational institutions in India, Italy, Western Australia, France, and the United States [ 52 , 90 ].

Clearly, the advent of chatbots, especially ChatGPT, has provoked significant controversy due to their potential impact on learning and teaching. This indicates the necessity for further exploration to gain a deeper understanding of this technology and carefully evaluate its potential benefits, limitations, challenges, and threats to education [ 79 ]. Therefore, conducting a systematic literature review will provide valuable insights into the potential prospects and obstacles linked to its incorporation into education. This systematic literature review will primarily focus on ChatGPT, driven by the aforementioned key factors outlined above.

However, the existing literature lacks a systematic literature review of empirical studies. Thus, this systematic literature review aims to address this gap by synthesizing the existing empirical studies conducted on chatbots, particularly ChatGPT, in the field of education, highlighting how ChatGPT has been utilized in educational settings, and identifying any existing gaps. This review may be particularly useful for researchers in the field and educators who are contemplating the integration of ChatGPT or any chatbot into education. The following research questions will guide this study:

What are students' and teachers' initial attempts at utilizing ChatGPT in education?

What are the main findings derived from empirical studies that have incorporated ChatGPT into learning and teaching?

2 Methodology

To conduct this study, the authors followed the essential steps of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA 2020) and Okoli’s [ 54 ] steps for conducting a systematic review. These included identifying the study’s purpose, drafting a protocol, applying a practical screening process, searching the literature, extracting relevant data, evaluating the quality of the included studies, synthesizing the studies, and ultimately writing the review. The subsequent section provides an extensive explanation of how these steps were carried out in this study.

2.1 Identify the purpose

Given the widespread adoption of ChatGPT by students and teachers for various educational purposes, often without a thorough understanding of responsible and effective use or a clear recognition of its potential impact on learning and teaching, the authors recognized the need for further exploration of ChatGPT's impact on education in this early stage. Therefore, they have chosen to conduct a systematic literature review of existing empirical studies that incorporate ChatGPT into educational settings. Despite the limited number of empirical studies due to the novelty of the topic, their goal is to gain a deeper understanding of this technology and proactively evaluate its potential benefits, limitations, challenges, and threats to education. This effort could help to understand initial reactions and attempts at incorporating ChatGPT into education and bring out insights and considerations that can inform the future development of education.

2.2 Draft the protocol

The next step is formulating the protocol. This protocol serves to outline the study process in a rigorous and transparent manner, mitigating researcher bias in study selection and data extraction [ 88 ]. The protocol will include the following steps: generating the research question, predefining a literature search strategy, identifying search locations, establishing selection criteria, assessing the studies, developing a data extraction strategy, and creating a timeline.

2.3 Apply practical screen

The screening step aims to accurately filter the articles resulting from the searching step and select the empirical studies that have incorporated ChatGPT into educational contexts, which will guide us in answering the research questions and achieving the objectives of this study. To ensure the rigorous execution of this step, our inclusion and exclusion criteria were determined based on the authors' experience and informed by previous successful systematic reviews [ 21 ]. Table 1 summarizes the inclusion and exclusion criteria for study selection.

2.4 Literature search

We conducted a thorough literature search to identify articles that explored, examined, and addressed the use of ChatGPT in Educational contexts. We utilized two research databases: Dimensions.ai, which provides access to a large number of research publications, and lens.org, which offers access to over 300 million articles, patents, and other research outputs from diverse sources. Additionally, we included three databases, Scopus, Web of Knowledge, and ERIC, which contain relevant research on the topic that addresses our research questions. To browse and identify relevant articles, we used the following search formula: ("ChatGPT" AND "Education"), which included the Boolean operator "AND" to get more specific results. The subject area in the Scopus and ERIC databases were narrowed to "ChatGPT" and "Education" keywords, and in the WoS database was limited to the "Education" category. The search was conducted between the 3rd and 10th of April 2023, which resulted in 276 articles from all selected databases (111 articles from Dimensions.ai, 65 from Scopus, 28 from Web of Science, 14 from ERIC, and 58 from Lens.org). These articles were imported into the Rayyan web-based system for analysis. The duplicates were identified automatically by the system. Subsequently, the first author manually reviewed the duplicated articles ensured that they had the same content, and then removed them, leaving us with 135 unique articles. Afterward, the titles, abstracts, and keywords of the first 40 manuscripts were scanned and reviewed by the first author and were discussed with the second and third authors to resolve any disagreements. Subsequently, the first author proceeded with the filtering process for all articles and carefully applied the inclusion and exclusion criteria as presented in Table  1 . Articles that met any one of the exclusion criteria were eliminated, resulting in 26 articles. Afterward, the authors met to carefully scan and discuss them. The authors agreed to eliminate any empirical studies solely focused on checking ChatGPT capabilities, as these studies do not guide us in addressing the research questions and achieving the study's objectives. This resulted in 14 articles eligible for analysis.

2.5 Quality appraisal

The examination and evaluation of the quality of the extracted articles is a vital step [ 9 ]. Therefore, the extracted articles were carefully evaluated for quality using Fink’s [ 24 ] standards, which emphasize the necessity for detailed descriptions of methodology, results, conclusions, strengths, and limitations. The process began with a thorough assessment of each study's design, data collection, and analysis methods to ensure their appropriateness and comprehensive execution. The clarity, consistency, and logical progression from data to results and conclusions were also critically examined. Potential biases and recognized limitations within the studies were also scrutinized. Ultimately, two articles were excluded for failing to meet Fink’s criteria, particularly in providing sufficient detail on methodology, results, conclusions, strengths, or limitations. The review process is illustrated in Fig.  1 .

The study selection process

2.6 Data extraction

The next step is data extraction, the process of capturing the key information and categories from the included studies. To improve efficiency, reduce variation among authors, and minimize errors in data analysis, the coding categories were constructed using Creswell's [ 15 ] coding techniques for data extraction and interpretation. The coding process involves three sequential steps. The initial stage encompasses open coding , where the researcher examines the data, generates codes to describe and categorize it, and gains a deeper understanding without preconceived ideas. Following open coding is axial coding , where the interrelationships between codes from open coding are analyzed to establish more comprehensive categories or themes. The process concludes with selective coding , refining and integrating categories or themes to identify core concepts emerging from the data. The first coder performed the coding process, then engaged in discussions with the second and third authors to finalize the coding categories for the first five articles. The first coder then proceeded to code all studies and engaged again in discussions with the other authors to ensure the finalization of the coding process. After a comprehensive analysis and capturing of the key information from the included studies, the data extraction and interpretation process yielded several themes. These themes have been categorized and are presented in Table  2 . It is important to note that open coding results were removed from Table  2 for aesthetic reasons, as it included many generic aspects, such as words, short phrases, or sentences mentioned in the studies.

2.7 Synthesize studies

In this stage, we will gather, discuss, and analyze the key findings that emerged from the selected studies. The synthesis stage is considered a transition from an author-centric to a concept-centric focus, enabling us to map all the provided information to achieve the most effective evaluation of the data [ 87 ]. Initially, the authors extracted data that included general information about the selected studies, including the author(s)' names, study titles, years of publication, educational levels, research methodologies, sample sizes, participants, main aims or objectives, raw data sources, and analysis methods. Following that, all key information and significant results from the selected studies were compiled using Creswell’s [ 15 ] coding techniques for data extraction and interpretation to identify core concepts and themes emerging from the data, focusing on those that directly contributed to our research questions and objectives, such as the initial utilization of ChatGPT in learning and teaching, learners' and educators' familiarity with ChatGPT, and the main findings of each study. Finally, the data related to each selected study were extracted into an Excel spreadsheet for data processing. The Excel spreadsheet was reviewed by the authors, including a series of discussions to ensure the finalization of this process and prepare it for further analysis. Afterward, the final result being analyzed and presented in various types of charts and graphs. Table 4 presents the extracted data from the selected studies, with each study labeled with a capital 'S' followed by a number.

This section consists of two main parts. The first part provides a descriptive analysis of the data compiled from the reviewed studies. The second part presents the answers to the research questions and the main findings of these studies.

3.1 Part 1: descriptive analysis

This section will provide a descriptive analysis of the reviewed studies, including educational levels and fields, participants distribution, country contribution, research methodologies, study sample size, study population, publication year, list of journals, familiarity with ChatGPT, source of data, and the main aims and objectives of the studies. Table 4 presents a comprehensive overview of the extracted data from the selected studies.

3.1.1 The number of the reviewed studies and publication years

The total number of the reviewed studies was 14. All studies were empirical studies and published in different journals focusing on Education and Technology. One study was published in 2022 [S1], while the remaining were published in 2023 [S2]-[S14]. Table 3 illustrates the year of publication, the names of the journals, and the number of reviewed studies published in each journal for the studies reviewed.

3.1.2 Educational levels and fields

The majority of the reviewed studies, 11 studies, were conducted in higher education institutions [S1]-[S10] and [S13]. Two studies did not specify the educational level of the population [S12] and [S14], while one study focused on elementary education [S11]. However, the reviewed studies covered various fields of education. Three studies focused on Arts and Humanities Education [S8], [S11], and [S14], specifically English Education. Two studies focused on Engineering Education, with one in Computer Engineering [S2] and the other in Construction Education [S3]. Two studies focused on Mathematics Education [S5] and [S12]. One study focused on Social Science Education [S13]. One study focused on Early Education [S4]. One study focused on Journalism Education [S9]. Finally, three studies did not specify the field of education [S1], [S6], and [S7]. Figure  2 represents the educational levels in the reviewed studies, while Fig.  3 represents the context of the reviewed studies.

Educational levels in the reviewed studies

Context of the reviewed studies

3.1.3 Participants distribution and countries contribution

The reviewed studies have been conducted across different geographic regions, providing a diverse representation of the studies. The majority of the studies, 10 in total, [S1]-[S3], [S5]-[S9], [S11], and [S14], primarily focused on participants from single countries such as Pakistan, the United Arab Emirates, China, Indonesia, Poland, Saudi Arabia, South Korea, Spain, Tajikistan, and the United States. In contrast, four studies, [S4], [S10], [S12], and [S13], involved participants from multiple countries, including China and the United States [S4], China, the United Kingdom, and the United States [S10], the United Arab Emirates, Oman, Saudi Arabia, and Jordan [S12], Turkey, Sweden, Canada, and Australia [ 13 ]. Figures  4 and 5 illustrate the distribution of participants, whether from single or multiple countries, and the contribution of each country in the reviewed studies, respectively.

The reviewed studies conducted in single or multiple countries

The Contribution of each country in the studies

3.1.4 Study population and sample size

Four study populations were included: university students, university teachers, university teachers and students, and elementary school teachers. Six studies involved university students [S2], [S3], [S5] and [S6]-[S8]. Three studies focused on university teachers [S1], [S4], and [S6], while one study specifically targeted elementary school teachers [S11]. Additionally, four studies included both university teachers and students [S10] and [ 12 , 13 , 14 ], and among them, study [S13] specifically included postgraduate students. In terms of the sample size of the reviewed studies, nine studies included a small sample size of less than 50 participants [S1], [S3], [S6], [S8], and [S10]-[S13]. Three studies had 50–100 participants [S2], [S9], and [S14]. Only one study had more than 100 participants [S7]. It is worth mentioning that study [S4] adopted a mixed methods approach, including 10 participants for qualitative analysis and 110 participants for quantitative analysis.

3.1.5 Participants’ familiarity with using ChatGPT

The reviewed studies recruited a diverse range of participants with varying levels of familiarity with ChatGPT. Five studies [S2], [S4], [S6], [S8], and [S12] involved participants already familiar with ChatGPT, while eight studies [S1], [S3], [S5], [S7], [S9], [S10], [S13] and [S14] included individuals with differing levels of familiarity. Notably, one study [S11] had participants who were entirely unfamiliar with ChatGPT. It is important to note that four studies [S3], [S5], [S9], and [S11] provided training or guidance to their participants before conducting their studies, while ten studies [S1], [S2], [S4], [S6]-[S8], [S10], and [S12]-[S14] did not provide training due to the participants' existing familiarity with ChatGPT.

3.1.6 Research methodology approaches and source(S) of data

The reviewed studies adopted various research methodology approaches. Seven studies adopted qualitative research methodology [S1], [S4], [S6], [S8], [S10], [S11], and [S12], while three studies adopted quantitative research methodology [S3], [S7], and [S14], and four studies employed mixed-methods, which involved a combination of both the strengths of qualitative and quantitative methods [S2], [S5], [S9], and [S13].

In terms of the source(s) of data, the reviewed studies obtained their data from various sources, such as interviews, questionnaires, and pre-and post-tests. Six studies relied on interviews as their primary source of data collection [S1], [S4], [S6], [S10], [S11], and [S12], four studies relied on questionnaires [S2], [S7], [S13], and [S14], two studies combined the use of pre-and post-tests and questionnaires for data collection [S3] and [S9], while two studies combined the use of questionnaires and interviews to obtain the data [S5] and [S8]. It is important to note that six of the reviewed studies were quasi-experimental [S3], [S5], [S8], [S9], [S12], and [S14], while the remaining ones were experimental studies [S1], [S2], [S4], [S6], [S7], [S10], [S11], and [S13]. Figures  6 and 7 illustrate the research methodologies and the source (s) of data used in the reviewed studies, respectively.

Research methodologies in the reviewed studies

Source of data in the reviewed studies

3.1.7 The aim and objectives of the studies

The reviewed studies encompassed a diverse set of aims, with several of them incorporating multiple primary objectives. Six studies [S3], [S6], [S7], [S8], [S11], and [S12] examined the integration of ChatGPT in educational contexts, and four studies [S4], [S5], [S13], and [S14] investigated the various implications of its use in education, while three studies [S2], [S9], and [S10] aimed to explore both its integration and implications in education. Additionally, seven studies explicitly explored attitudes and perceptions of students [S2] and [S3], educators [S1] and [S6], or both [S10], [S12], and [S13] regarding the utilization of ChatGPT in educational settings.

3.2 Part 2: research questions and main findings of the reviewed studies

This part will present the answers to the research questions and the main findings of the reviewed studies, classified into two main categories (learning and teaching) according to AI Education classification by [ 36 ]. Figure  8 summarizes the main findings of the reviewed studies in a visually informative diagram. Table 4 provides a detailed list of the key information extracted from the selected studies that led to generating these themes.

The main findings in the reviewed studies

4 Students' initial attempts at utilizing ChatGPT in learning and main findings from students' perspective

4.1 virtual intelligent assistant.

Nine studies demonstrated that ChatGPT has been utilized by students as an intelligent assistant to enhance and support their learning. Students employed it for various purposes, such as answering on-demand questions [S2]-[S5], [S8], [S10], and [S12], providing valuable information and learning resources [S2]-[S5], [S6], and [S8], as well as receiving immediate feedback [S2], [S4], [S9], [S10], and [S12]. In this regard, students generally were confident in the accuracy of ChatGPT's responses, considering them relevant, reliable, and detailed [S3], [S4], [S5], and [S8]. However, some students indicated the need for improvement, as they found that answers are not always accurate [S2], and that misleading information may have been provided or that it may not always align with their expectations [S6] and [S10]. It was also observed by the students that the accuracy of ChatGPT is dependent on several factors, including the quality and specificity of the user's input, the complexity of the question or topic, and the scope and relevance of its training data [S12]. Many students felt that ChatGPT's answers were not always accurate and most of them believed that it requires good background knowledge to work with.

4.2 Writing and language proficiency assistant

Six of the reviewed studies highlighted that ChatGPT has been utilized by students as a valuable assistant tool to improve their academic writing skills and language proficiency. Among these studies, three mainly focused on English education, demonstrating that students showed sufficient mastery in using ChatGPT for generating ideas, summarizing, paraphrasing texts, and completing writing essays [S8], [S11], and [S14]. Furthermore, ChatGPT helped them in writing by making students active investigators rather than passive knowledge recipients and facilitated the development of their writing skills [S11] and [S14]. Similarly, ChatGPT allowed students to generate unique ideas and perspectives, leading to deeper analysis and reflection on their journalism writing [S9]. In terms of language proficiency, ChatGPT allowed participants to translate content into their home languages, making it more accessible and relevant to their context [S4]. It also enabled them to request changes in linguistic tones or flavors [S8]. Moreover, participants used it to check grammar or as a dictionary [S11].

4.3 Valuable resource for learning approaches

Five studies demonstrated that students used ChatGPT as a valuable complementary resource for self-directed learning. It provided learning resources and guidance on diverse educational topics and created a supportive home learning environment [S2] and [S4]. Moreover, it offered step-by-step guidance to grasp concepts at their own pace and enhance their understanding [S5], streamlined task and project completion carried out independently [S7], provided comprehensive and easy-to-understand explanations on various subjects [S10], and assisted in studying geometry operations, thereby empowering them to explore geometry operations at their own pace [S12]. Three studies showed that students used ChatGPT as a valuable learning resource for personalized learning. It delivered age-appropriate conversations and tailored teaching based on a child's interests [S4], acted as a personalized learning assistant, adapted to their needs and pace, which assisted them in understanding mathematical concepts [S12], and enabled personalized learning experiences in social sciences by adapting to students' needs and learning styles [S13]. On the other hand, it is important to note that, according to one study [S5], students suggested that using ChatGPT may negatively affect collaborative learning competencies between students.

4.4 Enhancing students' competencies

Six of the reviewed studies have shown that ChatGPT is a valuable tool for improving a wide range of skills among students. Two studies have provided evidence that ChatGPT led to improvements in students' critical thinking, reasoning skills, and hazard recognition competencies through engaging them in interactive conversations or activities and providing responses related to their disciplines in journalism [S5] and construction education [S9]. Furthermore, two studies focused on mathematical education have shown the positive impact of ChatGPT on students' problem-solving abilities in unraveling problem-solving questions [S12] and enhancing the students' understanding of the problem-solving process [S5]. Lastly, one study indicated that ChatGPT effectively contributed to the enhancement of conversational social skills [S4].

4.5 Supporting students' academic success

Seven of the reviewed studies highlighted that students found ChatGPT to be beneficial for learning as it enhanced learning efficiency and improved the learning experience. It has been observed to improve students' efficiency in computer engineering studies by providing well-structured responses and good explanations [S2]. Additionally, students found it extremely useful for hazard reporting [S3], and it also enhanced their efficiency in solving mathematics problems and capabilities [S5] and [S12]. Furthermore, by finding information, generating ideas, translating texts, and providing alternative questions, ChatGPT aided students in deepening their understanding of various subjects [S6]. It contributed to an increase in students' overall productivity [S7] and improved efficiency in composing written tasks [S8]. Regarding learning experiences, ChatGPT was instrumental in assisting students in identifying hazards that they might have otherwise overlooked [S3]. It also improved students' learning experiences in solving mathematics problems and developing abilities [S5] and [S12]. Moreover, it increased students' successful completion of important tasks in their studies [S7], particularly those involving average difficulty writing tasks [S8]. Additionally, ChatGPT increased the chances of educational success by providing students with baseline knowledge on various topics [S10].

5 Teachers' initial attempts at utilizing ChatGPT in teaching and main findings from teachers' perspective

5.1 valuable resource for teaching.

The reviewed studies showed that teachers have employed ChatGPT to recommend, modify, and generate diverse, creative, organized, and engaging educational contents, teaching materials, and testing resources more rapidly [S4], [S6], [S10] and [S11]. Additionally, teachers experienced increased productivity as ChatGPT facilitated quick and accurate responses to questions, fact-checking, and information searches [S1]. It also proved valuable in constructing new knowledge [S6] and providing timely answers to students' questions in classrooms [S11]. Moreover, ChatGPT enhanced teachers' efficiency by generating new ideas for activities and preplanning activities for their students [S4] and [S6], including interactive language game partners [S11].

5.2 Improving productivity and efficiency

The reviewed studies showed that participants' productivity and work efficiency have been significantly enhanced by using ChatGPT as it enabled them to allocate more time to other tasks and reduce their overall workloads [S6], [S10], [S11], [S13], and [S14]. However, three studies [S1], [S4], and [S11], indicated a negative perception and attitude among teachers toward using ChatGPT. This negativity stemmed from a lack of necessary skills to use it effectively [S1], a limited familiarity with it [S4], and occasional inaccuracies in the content provided by it [S10].

5.3 Catalyzing new teaching methodologies

Five of the reviewed studies highlighted that educators found the necessity of redefining their teaching profession with the assistance of ChatGPT [S11], developing new effective learning strategies [S4], and adapting teaching strategies and methodologies to ensure the development of essential skills for future engineers [S5]. They also emphasized the importance of adopting new educational philosophies and approaches that can evolve with the introduction of ChatGPT into the classroom [S12]. Furthermore, updating curricula to focus on improving human-specific features, such as emotional intelligence, creativity, and philosophical perspectives [S13], was found to be essential.

5.4 Effective utilization of CHATGPT in teaching

According to the reviewed studies, effective utilization of ChatGPT in education requires providing teachers with well-structured training, support, and adequate background on how to use ChatGPT responsibly [S1], [S3], [S11], and [S12]. Establishing clear rules and regulations regarding its usage is essential to ensure it positively impacts the teaching and learning processes, including students' skills [S1], [S4], [S5], [S8], [S9], and [S11]-[S14]. Moreover, conducting further research and engaging in discussions with policymakers and stakeholders is indeed crucial for the successful integration of ChatGPT in education and to maximize the benefits for both educators and students [S1], [S6]-[S10], and [S12]-[S14].

6 Discussion

The purpose of this review is to conduct a systematic review of empirical studies that have explored the utilization of ChatGPT, one of today’s most advanced LLM-based chatbots, in education. The findings of the reviewed studies showed several ways of ChatGPT utilization in different learning and teaching practices as well as it provided insights and considerations that can facilitate its effective and responsible use in future educational contexts. The results of the reviewed studies came from diverse fields of education, which helped us avoid a biased review that is limited to a specific field. Similarly, the reviewed studies have been conducted across different geographic regions. This kind of variety in geographic representation enriched the findings of this review.

In response to RQ1 , "What are students' and teachers' initial attempts at utilizing ChatGPT in education?", the findings from this review provide comprehensive insights. Chatbots, including ChatGPT, play a crucial role in supporting student learning, enhancing their learning experiences, and facilitating diverse learning approaches [ 42 , 43 ]. This review found that this tool, ChatGPT, has been instrumental in enhancing students' learning experiences by serving as a virtual intelligent assistant, providing immediate feedback, on-demand answers, and engaging in educational conversations. Additionally, students have benefited from ChatGPT’s ability to generate ideas, compose essays, and perform tasks like summarizing, translating, paraphrasing texts, or checking grammar, thereby enhancing their writing and language competencies. Furthermore, students have turned to ChatGPT for assistance in understanding concepts and homework, providing structured learning plans, and clarifying assignments and tasks, which fosters a supportive home learning environment, allowing them to take responsibility for their own learning and cultivate the skills and approaches essential for supportive home learning environment [ 26 , 27 , 28 ]. This finding aligns with the study of Saqr et al. [ 68 , 69 ] who highlighted that, when students actively engage in their own learning process, it yields additional advantages, such as heightened motivation, enhanced achievement, and the cultivation of enthusiasm, turning them into advocates for their own learning.

Moreover, students have utilized ChatGPT for tailored teaching and step-by-step guidance on diverse educational topics, streamlining task and project completion, and generating and recommending educational content. This personalization enhances the learning environment, leading to increased academic success. This finding aligns with other recent studies [ 26 , 27 , 28 , 60 , 66 ] which revealed that ChatGPT has the potential to offer personalized learning experiences and support an effective learning process by providing students with customized feedback and explanations tailored to their needs and abilities. Ultimately, fostering students' performance, engagement, and motivation, leading to increase students' academic success [ 14 , 44 , 58 ]. This ultimate outcome is in line with the findings of Saqr et al. [ 68 , 69 ], which emphasized that learning strategies are important catalysts of students' learning, as students who utilize effective learning strategies are more likely to have better academic achievement.

Teachers, too, have capitalized on ChatGPT's capabilities to enhance productivity and efficiency, using it for creating lesson plans, generating quizzes, providing additional resources, generating and preplanning new ideas for activities, and aiding in answering students’ questions. This adoption of technology introduces new opportunities to support teaching and learning practices, enhancing teacher productivity. This finding aligns with those of Day [ 17 ], De Castro [ 18 ], and Su and Yang [ 74 ] as well as with those of Valtonen et al. [ 82 ], who revealed that emerging technological advancements have opened up novel opportunities and means to support teaching and learning practices, and enhance teachers’ productivity.

In response to RQ2 , "What are the main findings derived from empirical studies that have incorporated ChatGPT into learning and teaching?", the findings from this review provide profound insights and raise significant concerns. Starting with the insights, chatbots, including ChatGPT, have demonstrated the potential to reshape and revolutionize education, creating new, novel opportunities for enhancing the learning process and outcomes [ 83 ], facilitating different learning approaches, and offering a range of pedagogical benefits [ 19 , 43 , 72 ]. In this context, this review found that ChatGPT could open avenues for educators to adopt or develop new effective learning and teaching strategies that can evolve with the introduction of ChatGPT into the classroom. Nonetheless, there is an evident lack of research understanding regarding the potential impact of generative machine learning models within diverse educational settings [ 83 ]. This necessitates teachers to attain a high level of proficiency in incorporating chatbots, such as ChatGPT, into their classrooms to create inventive, well-structured, and captivating learning strategies. In the same vein, the review also found that teachers without the requisite skills to utilize ChatGPT realized that it did not contribute positively to their work and could potentially have adverse effects [ 37 ]. This concern could lead to inequity of access to the benefits of chatbots, including ChatGPT, as individuals who lack the necessary expertise may not be able to harness their full potential, resulting in disparities in educational outcomes and opportunities. Therefore, immediate action is needed to address these potential issues. A potential solution is offering training, support, and competency development for teachers to ensure that all of them can leverage chatbots, including ChatGPT, effectively and equitably in their educational practices [ 5 , 28 , 80 ], which could enhance accessibility and inclusivity, and potentially result in innovative outcomes [ 82 , 83 ].

Additionally, chatbots, including ChatGPT, have the potential to significantly impact students' thinking abilities, including retention, reasoning, analysis skills [ 19 , 45 ], and foster innovation and creativity capabilities [ 83 ]. This review found that ChatGPT could contribute to improving a wide range of skills among students. However, it found that frequent use of ChatGPT may result in a decrease in innovative capacities, collaborative skills and cognitive capacities, and students' motivation to attend classes, as well as could lead to reduced higher-order thinking skills among students [ 22 , 29 ]. Therefore, immediate action is needed to carefully examine the long-term impact of chatbots such as ChatGPT, on learning outcomes as well as to explore its incorporation into educational settings as a supportive tool without compromising students' cognitive development and critical thinking abilities. In the same vein, the review also found that it is challenging to draw a consistent conclusion regarding the potential of ChatGPT to aid self-directed learning approach. This finding aligns with the recent study of Baskara [ 8 ]. Therefore, further research is needed to explore the potential of ChatGPT for self-directed learning. One potential solution involves utilizing learning analytics as a novel approach to examine various aspects of students' learning and support them in their individual endeavors [ 32 ]. This approach can bridge this gap by facilitating an in-depth analysis of how learners engage with ChatGPT, identifying trends in self-directed learning behavior, and assessing its influence on their outcomes.

Turning to the significant concerns, on the other hand, a fundamental challenge with LLM-based chatbots, including ChatGPT, is the accuracy and quality of the provided information and responses, as they provide false information as truth—a phenomenon often referred to as "hallucination" [ 3 , 49 ]. In this context, this review found that the provided information was not entirely satisfactory. Consequently, the utilization of chatbots presents potential concerns, such as generating and providing inaccurate or misleading information, especially for students who utilize it to support their learning. This finding aligns with other findings [ 6 , 30 , 35 , 40 ] which revealed that incorporating chatbots such as ChatGPT, into education presents challenges related to its accuracy and reliability due to its training on a large corpus of data, which may contain inaccuracies and the way users formulate or ask ChatGPT. Therefore, immediate action is needed to address these potential issues. One possible solution is to equip students with the necessary skills and competencies, which include a background understanding of how to use it effectively and the ability to assess and evaluate the information it generates, as the accuracy and the quality of the provided information depend on the input, its complexity, the topic, and the relevance of its training data [ 28 , 49 , 86 ]. However, it's also essential to examine how learners can be educated about how these models operate, the data used in their training, and how to recognize their limitations, challenges, and issues [ 79 ].

Furthermore, chatbots present a substantial challenge concerning maintaining academic integrity [ 20 , 56 ] and copyright violations [ 83 ], which are significant concerns in education. The review found that the potential misuse of ChatGPT might foster cheating, facilitate plagiarism, and threaten academic integrity. This issue is also affirmed by the research conducted by Basic et al. [ 7 ], who presented evidence that students who utilized ChatGPT in their writing assignments had more plagiarism cases than those who did not. These findings align with the conclusions drawn by Cotton et al. [ 13 ], Hisan and Amri [ 33 ] and Sullivan et al. [ 75 ], who revealed that the integration of chatbots such as ChatGPT into education poses a significant challenge to the preservation of academic integrity. Moreover, chatbots, including ChatGPT, have increased the difficulty in identifying plagiarism [ 47 , 67 , 76 ]. The findings from previous studies [ 1 , 84 ] indicate that AI-generated text often went undetected by plagiarism software, such as Turnitin. However, Turnitin and other similar plagiarism detection tools, such as ZeroGPT, GPTZero, and Copyleaks, have since evolved, incorporating enhanced techniques to detect AI-generated text, despite the possibility of false positives, as noted in different studies that have found these tools still not yet fully ready to accurately and reliably identify AI-generated text [ 10 , 51 ], and new novel detection methods may need to be created and implemented for AI-generated text detection [ 4 ]. This potential issue could lead to another concern, which is the difficulty of accurately evaluating student performance when they utilize chatbots such as ChatGPT assistance in their assignments. Consequently, the most LLM-driven chatbots present a substantial challenge to traditional assessments [ 64 ]. The findings from previous studies indicate the importance of rethinking, improving, and redesigning innovative assessment methods in the era of chatbots [ 14 , 20 , 64 , 75 ]. These methods should prioritize the process of evaluating students' ability to apply knowledge to complex cases and demonstrate comprehension, rather than solely focusing on the final product for assessment. Therefore, immediate action is needed to address these potential issues. One possible solution would be the development of clear guidelines, regulatory policies, and pedagogical guidance. These measures would help regulate the proper and ethical utilization of chatbots, such as ChatGPT, and must be established before their introduction to students [ 35 , 38 , 39 , 41 , 89 ].

In summary, our review has delved into the utilization of ChatGPT, a prominent example of chatbots, in education, addressing the question of how ChatGPT has been utilized in education. However, there remain significant gaps, which necessitate further research to shed light on this area.

7 Conclusions

This systematic review has shed light on the varied initial attempts at incorporating ChatGPT into education by both learners and educators, while also offering insights and considerations that can facilitate its effective and responsible use in future educational contexts. From the analysis of 14 selected studies, the review revealed the dual-edged impact of ChatGPT in educational settings. On the positive side, ChatGPT significantly aided the learning process in various ways. Learners have used it as a virtual intelligent assistant, benefiting from its ability to provide immediate feedback, on-demand answers, and easy access to educational resources. Additionally, it was clear that learners have used it to enhance their writing and language skills, engaging in practices such as generating ideas, composing essays, and performing tasks like summarizing, translating, paraphrasing texts, or checking grammar. Importantly, other learners have utilized it in supporting and facilitating their directed and personalized learning on a broad range of educational topics, assisting in understanding concepts and homework, providing structured learning plans, and clarifying assignments and tasks. Educators, on the other hand, found ChatGPT beneficial for enhancing productivity and efficiency. They used it for creating lesson plans, generating quizzes, providing additional resources, and answers learners' questions, which saved time and allowed for more dynamic and engaging teaching strategies and methodologies.

However, the review also pointed out negative impacts. The results revealed that overuse of ChatGPT could decrease innovative capacities and collaborative learning among learners. Specifically, relying too much on ChatGPT for quick answers can inhibit learners' critical thinking and problem-solving skills. Learners might not engage deeply with the material or consider multiple solutions to a problem. This tendency was particularly evident in group projects, where learners preferred consulting ChatGPT individually for solutions over brainstorming and collaborating with peers, which negatively affected their teamwork abilities. On a broader level, integrating ChatGPT into education has also raised several concerns, including the potential for providing inaccurate or misleading information, issues of inequity in access, challenges related to academic integrity, and the possibility of misusing the technology.

Accordingly, this review emphasizes the urgency of developing clear rules, policies, and regulations to ensure ChatGPT's effective and responsible use in educational settings, alongside other chatbots, by both learners and educators. This requires providing well-structured training to educate them on responsible usage and understanding its limitations, along with offering sufficient background information. Moreover, it highlights the importance of rethinking, improving, and redesigning innovative teaching and assessment methods in the era of ChatGPT. Furthermore, conducting further research and engaging in discussions with policymakers and stakeholders are essential steps to maximize the benefits for both educators and learners and ensure academic integrity.

It is important to acknowledge that this review has certain limitations. Firstly, the limited inclusion of reviewed studies can be attributed to several reasons, including the novelty of the technology, as new technologies often face initial skepticism and cautious adoption; the lack of clear guidelines or best practices for leveraging this technology for educational purposes; and institutional or governmental policies affecting the utilization of this technology in educational contexts. These factors, in turn, have affected the number of studies available for review. Secondly, the utilization of the original version of ChatGPT, based on GPT-3 or GPT-3.5, implies that new studies utilizing the updated version, GPT-4 may lead to different findings. Therefore, conducting follow-up systematic reviews is essential once more empirical studies on ChatGPT are published. Additionally, long-term studies are necessary to thoroughly examine and assess the impact of ChatGPT on various educational practices.

Despite these limitations, this systematic review has highlighted the transformative potential of ChatGPT in education, revealing its diverse utilization by learners and educators alike and summarized the benefits of incorporating it into education, as well as the forefront critical concerns and challenges that must be addressed to facilitate its effective and responsible use in future educational contexts. This review could serve as an insightful resource for practitioners who seek to integrate ChatGPT into education and stimulate further research in the field.

Data availability

The data supporting our findings are available upon request.

Abbreviations

• Artificial intelligence

AI in education

Large language model

Artificial neural networks

Chat Generative Pre-Trained Transformer

Recurrent neural networks

Long short-term memory

Reinforcement learning from human feedback

Natural language processing

Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses

AlAfnan MA, Dishari S, Jovic M, Lomidze K. ChatGPT as an educational tool: opportunities, challenges, and recommendations for communication, business writing, and composition courses. J Artif Intell Technol. 2023. https://doi.org/10.37965/jait.2023.0184 .

Article   Google Scholar  

Ali JKM, Shamsan MAA, Hezam TA, Mohammed AAQ. Impact of ChatGPT on learning motivation. J Engl Stud Arabia Felix. 2023;2(1):41–9. https://doi.org/10.56540/jesaf.v2i1.51 .

Alkaissi H, McFarlane SI. Artificial hallucinations in ChatGPT: implications in scientific writing. Cureus. 2023. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.35179 .

Anderson N, Belavý DL, Perle SM, Hendricks S, Hespanhol L, Verhagen E, Memon AR. AI did not write this manuscript, or did it? Can we trick the AI text detector into generated texts? The potential future of ChatGPT and AI in sports & exercise medicine manuscript generation. BMJ Open Sport Exerc Med. 2023;9(1): e001568. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjsem-2023-001568 .

Ausat AMA, Massang B, Efendi M, Nofirman N, Riady Y. Can chat GPT replace the role of the teacher in the classroom: a fundamental analysis. J Educ. 2023;5(4):16100–6.

Google Scholar  

Baidoo-Anu D, Ansah L. Education in the Era of generative artificial intelligence (AI): understanding the potential benefits of ChatGPT in promoting teaching and learning. Soc Sci Res Netw. 2023. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4337484 .

Basic Z, Banovac A, Kruzic I, Jerkovic I. Better by you, better than me, chatgpt3 as writing assistance in students essays. 2023. arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.04536 .‏

Baskara FR. The promises and pitfalls of using chat GPT for self-determined learning in higher education: an argumentative review. Prosiding Seminar Nasional Fakultas Tarbiyah dan Ilmu Keguruan IAIM Sinjai. 2023;2:95–101. https://doi.org/10.47435/sentikjar.v2i0.1825 .

Behera RK, Bala PK, Dhir A. The emerging role of cognitive computing in healthcare: a systematic literature review. Int J Med Inform. 2019;129:154–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2019.04.024 .

Chaka C. Detecting AI content in responses generated by ChatGPT, YouChat, and Chatsonic: the case of five AI content detection tools. J Appl Learn Teach. 2023. https://doi.org/10.37074/jalt.2023.6.2.12 .

Chiu TKF, Xia Q, Zhou X, Chai CS, Cheng M. Systematic literature review on opportunities, challenges, and future research recommendations of artificial intelligence in education. Comput Educ Artif Intell. 2023;4:100118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2022.100118 .

Choi EPH, Lee JJ, Ho M, Kwok JYY, Lok KYW. Chatting or cheating? The impacts of ChatGPT and other artificial intelligence language models on nurse education. Nurse Educ Today. 2023;125:105796. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2023.105796 .

Cotton D, Cotton PA, Shipway JR. Chatting and cheating: ensuring academic integrity in the era of ChatGPT. Innov Educ Teach Int. 2023. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2023.2190148 .

Crawford J, Cowling M, Allen K. Leadership is needed for ethical ChatGPT: Character, assessment, and learning using artificial intelligence (AI). J Univ Teach Learn Pract. 2023. https://doi.org/10.53761/1.20.3.02 .

Creswell JW. Educational research: planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research [Ebook]. 4th ed. London: Pearson Education; 2015.

Curry D. ChatGPT Revenue and Usage Statistics (2023)—Business of Apps. 2023. https://www.businessofapps.com/data/chatgpt-statistics/

Day T. A preliminary investigation of fake peer-reviewed citations and references generated by ChatGPT. Prof Geogr. 2023. https://doi.org/10.1080/00330124.2023.2190373 .

De Castro CA. A Discussion about the Impact of ChatGPT in education: benefits and concerns. J Bus Theor Pract. 2023;11(2):p28. https://doi.org/10.22158/jbtp.v11n2p28 .

Deng X, Yu Z. A meta-analysis and systematic review of the effect of Chatbot technology use in sustainable education. Sustainability. 2023;15(4):2940. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15042940 .

Eke DO. ChatGPT and the rise of generative AI: threat to academic integrity? J Responsib Technol. 2023;13:100060. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrt.2023.100060 .

Elmoazen R, Saqr M, Tedre M, Hirsto L. A systematic literature review of empirical research on epistemic network analysis in education. IEEE Access. 2022;10:17330–48. https://doi.org/10.1109/access.2022.3149812 .

Farrokhnia M, Banihashem SK, Noroozi O, Wals AEJ. A SWOT analysis of ChatGPT: implications for educational practice and research. Innov Educ Teach Int. 2023. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2023.2195846 .

Fergus S, Botha M, Ostovar M. Evaluating academic answers generated using ChatGPT. J Chem Educ. 2023;100(4):1672–5. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.3c00087 .

Fink A. Conducting research literature reviews: from the Internet to Paper. Incorporated: SAGE Publications; 2010.

Firaina R, Sulisworo D. Exploring the usage of ChatGPT in higher education: frequency and impact on productivity. Buletin Edukasi Indonesia (BEI). 2023;2(01):39–46. https://doi.org/10.56741/bei.v2i01.310 .

Firat, M. (2023). How chat GPT can transform autodidactic experiences and open education.  Department of Distance Education, Open Education Faculty, Anadolu Unive .‏ https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8707-5918

Firat M. What ChatGPT means for universities: perceptions of scholars and students. J Appl Learn Teach. 2023. https://doi.org/10.37074/jalt.2023.6.1.22 .

Fuchs K. Exploring the opportunities and challenges of NLP models in higher education: is Chat GPT a blessing or a curse? Front Educ. 2023. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2023.1166682 .

García-Peñalvo FJ. La percepción de la inteligencia artificial en contextos educativos tras el lanzamiento de ChatGPT: disrupción o pánico. Educ Knowl Soc. 2023;24: e31279. https://doi.org/10.14201/eks.31279 .

Gilson A, Safranek CW, Huang T, Socrates V, Chi L, Taylor A, Chartash D. How does ChatGPT perform on the United States medical Licensing examination? The implications of large language models for medical education and knowledge assessment. JMIR Med Educ. 2023;9: e45312. https://doi.org/10.2196/45312 .

Hashana AJ, Brundha P, Ayoobkhan MUA, Fazila S. Deep Learning in ChatGPT—A Survey. In   2023 7th international conference on trends in electronics and informatics (ICOEI) . 2023. (pp. 1001–1005). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/icoei56765.2023.10125852

Hirsto L, Saqr M, López-Pernas S, Valtonen T. (2022). A systematic narrative review of learning analytics research in K-12 and schools.  Proceedings . https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-3383/FLAIEC22_paper_9536.pdf

Hisan UK, Amri MM. ChatGPT and medical education: a double-edged sword. J Pedag Educ Sci. 2023;2(01):71–89. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.31280.23043/1 .

Hopkins AM, Logan JM, Kichenadasse G, Sorich MJ. Artificial intelligence chatbots will revolutionize how cancer patients access information: ChatGPT represents a paradigm-shift. JNCI Cancer Spectr. 2023. https://doi.org/10.1093/jncics/pkad010 .

Househ M, AlSaad R, Alhuwail D, Ahmed A, Healy MG, Latifi S, Sheikh J. Large Language models in medical education: opportunities, challenges, and future directions. JMIR Med Educ. 2023;9: e48291. https://doi.org/10.2196/48291 .

Ilkka T. The impact of artificial intelligence on learning, teaching, and education. Minist de Educ. 2018. https://doi.org/10.2760/12297 .

Iqbal N, Ahmed H, Azhar KA. Exploring teachers’ attitudes towards using CHATGPT. Globa J Manag Adm Sci. 2022;3(4):97–111. https://doi.org/10.46568/gjmas.v3i4.163 .

Irfan M, Murray L, Ali S. Integration of Artificial intelligence in academia: a case study of critical teaching and learning in Higher education. Globa Soc Sci Rev. 2023;8(1):352–64. https://doi.org/10.31703/gssr.2023(viii-i).32 .

Jeon JH, Lee S. Large language models in education: a focus on the complementary relationship between human teachers and ChatGPT. Educ Inf Technol. 2023. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-11834-1 .

Khan RA, Jawaid M, Khan AR, Sajjad M. ChatGPT—Reshaping medical education and clinical management. Pak J Med Sci. 2023. https://doi.org/10.12669/pjms.39.2.7653 .

King MR. A conversation on artificial intelligence, Chatbots, and plagiarism in higher education. Cell Mol Bioeng. 2023;16(1):1–2. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12195-022-00754-8 .

Kooli C. Chatbots in education and research: a critical examination of ethical implications and solutions. Sustainability. 2023;15(7):5614. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15075614 .

Kuhail MA, Alturki N, Alramlawi S, Alhejori K. Interacting with educational chatbots: a systematic review. Educ Inf Technol. 2022;28(1):973–1018. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11177-3 .

Lee H. The rise of ChatGPT: exploring its potential in medical education. Anat Sci Educ. 2023. https://doi.org/10.1002/ase.2270 .

Li L, Subbareddy R, Raghavendra CG. AI intelligence Chatbot to improve students learning in the higher education platform. J Interconnect Netw. 2022. https://doi.org/10.1142/s0219265921430325 .

Limna P. A Review of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Education during the Digital Era. 2022. https://ssrn.com/abstract=4160798

Lo CK. What is the impact of ChatGPT on education? A rapid review of the literature. Educ Sci. 2023;13(4):410. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13040410 .

Luo W, He H, Liu J, Berson IR, Berson MJ, Zhou Y, Li H. Aladdin’s genie or pandora’s box For early childhood education? Experts chat on the roles, challenges, and developments of ChatGPT. Early Educ Dev. 2023. https://doi.org/10.1080/10409289.2023.2214181 .

Meyer JG, Urbanowicz RJ, Martin P, O’Connor K, Li R, Peng P, Moore JH. ChatGPT and large language models in academia: opportunities and challenges. Biodata Min. 2023. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13040-023-00339-9 .

Mhlanga D. Open AI in education, the responsible and ethical use of ChatGPT towards lifelong learning. Soc Sci Res Netw. 2023. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4354422 .

Neumann, M., Rauschenberger, M., & Schön, E. M. (2023). “We Need To Talk About ChatGPT”: The Future of AI and Higher Education.‏ https://doi.org/10.1109/seeng59157.2023.00010

Nolan B. Here are the schools and colleges that have banned the use of ChatGPT over plagiarism and misinformation fears. Business Insider . 2023. https://www.businessinsider.com

O’Leary DE. An analysis of three chatbots: BlenderBot, ChatGPT and LaMDA. Int J Intell Syst Account, Financ Manag. 2023;30(1):41–54. https://doi.org/10.1002/isaf.1531 .

Okoli C. A guide to conducting a standalone systematic literature review. Commun Assoc Inf Syst. 2015. https://doi.org/10.17705/1cais.03743 .

OpenAI. (2023). https://openai.com/blog/chatgpt

Perkins M. Academic integrity considerations of AI large language models in the post-pandemic era: ChatGPT and beyond. J Univ Teach Learn Pract. 2023. https://doi.org/10.53761/1.20.02.07 .

Plevris V, Papazafeiropoulos G, Rios AJ. Chatbots put to the test in math and logic problems: A preliminary comparison and assessment of ChatGPT-3.5, ChatGPT-4, and Google Bard. arXiv (Cornell University) . 2023. https://doi.org/10.48550/arxiv.2305.18618

Rahman MM, Watanobe Y (2023) ChatGPT for education and research: opportunities, threats, and strategies. Appl Sci 13(9):5783. https://doi.org/10.3390/app13095783

Ram B, Verma P. Artificial intelligence AI-based Chatbot study of ChatGPT, google AI bard and baidu AI. World J Adv Eng Technol Sci. 2023;8(1):258–61. https://doi.org/10.30574/wjaets.2023.8.1.0045 .

Rasul T, Nair S, Kalendra D, Robin M, de Oliveira Santini F, Ladeira WJ, Heathcote L. The role of ChatGPT in higher education: benefits, challenges, and future research directions. J Appl Learn Teach. 2023. https://doi.org/10.37074/jalt.2023.6.1.29 .

Ratnam M, Sharm B, Tomer A. ChatGPT: educational artificial intelligence. Int J Adv Trends Comput Sci Eng. 2023;12(2):84–91. https://doi.org/10.30534/ijatcse/2023/091222023 .

Ray PP. ChatGPT: a comprehensive review on background, applications, key challenges, bias, ethics, limitations and future scope. Internet Things Cyber-Phys Syst. 2023;3:121–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iotcps.2023.04.003 .

Roumeliotis KI, Tselikas ND. ChatGPT and Open-AI models: a preliminary review. Future Internet. 2023;15(6):192. https://doi.org/10.3390/fi15060192 .

Rudolph J, Tan S, Tan S. War of the chatbots: Bard, Bing Chat, ChatGPT, Ernie and beyond. The new AI gold rush and its impact on higher education. J Appl Learn Teach. 2023. https://doi.org/10.37074/jalt.2023.6.1.23 .

Ruiz LMS, Moll-López S, Nuñez-Pérez A, Moraño J, Vega-Fleitas E. ChatGPT challenges blended learning methodologies in engineering education: a case study in mathematics. Appl Sci. 2023;13(10):6039. https://doi.org/10.3390/app13106039 .

Sallam M, Salim NA, Barakat M, Al-Tammemi AB. ChatGPT applications in medical, dental, pharmacy, and public health education: a descriptive study highlighting the advantages and limitations. Narra J. 2023;3(1): e103. https://doi.org/10.52225/narra.v3i1.103 .

Salvagno M, Taccone FS, Gerli AG. Can artificial intelligence help for scientific writing? Crit Care. 2023. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13054-023-04380-2 .

Saqr M, López-Pernas S, Helske S, Hrastinski S. The longitudinal association between engagement and achievement varies by time, students’ profiles, and achievement state: a full program study. Comput Educ. 2023;199:104787. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2023.104787 .

Saqr M, Matcha W, Uzir N, Jovanović J, Gašević D, López-Pernas S. Transferring effective learning strategies across learning contexts matters: a study in problem-based learning. Australas J Educ Technol. 2023;39(3):9.

Schöbel S, Schmitt A, Benner D, Saqr M, Janson A, Leimeister JM. Charting the evolution and future of conversational agents: a research agenda along five waves and new frontiers. Inf Syst Front. 2023. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-023-10375-9 .

Shoufan A. Exploring students’ perceptions of CHATGPT: thematic analysis and follow-up survey. IEEE Access. 2023. https://doi.org/10.1109/access.2023.3268224 .

Sonderegger S, Seufert S. Chatbot-mediated learning: conceptual framework for the design of Chatbot use cases in education. Gallen: Institute for Educational Management and Technologies, University of St; 2022. https://doi.org/10.5220/0010999200003182 .

Book   Google Scholar  

Strzelecki A. To use or not to use ChatGPT in higher education? A study of students’ acceptance and use of technology. Interact Learn Environ. 2023. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2023.2209881 .

Su J, Yang W. Unlocking the power of ChatGPT: a framework for applying generative AI in education. ECNU Rev Educ. 2023. https://doi.org/10.1177/20965311231168423 .

Sullivan M, Kelly A, McLaughlan P. ChatGPT in higher education: Considerations for academic integrity and student learning. J ApplLearn Teach. 2023;6(1):1–10. https://doi.org/10.37074/jalt.2023.6.1.17 .

Szabo A. ChatGPT is a breakthrough in science and education but fails a test in sports and exercise psychology. Balt J Sport Health Sci. 2023;1(128):25–40. https://doi.org/10.33607/bjshs.v127i4.1233 .

Taecharungroj V. “What can ChatGPT do?” analyzing early reactions to the innovative AI chatbot on Twitter. Big Data Cognit Comput. 2023;7(1):35. https://doi.org/10.3390/bdcc7010035 .

Tam S, Said RB. User preferences for ChatGPT-powered conversational interfaces versus traditional methods. Biomed Eng Soc. 2023. https://doi.org/10.58496/mjcsc/2023/004 .

Tedre M, Kahila J, Vartiainen H. (2023). Exploration on how co-designing with AI facilitates critical evaluation of ethics of AI in craft education. In: Langran E, Christensen P, Sanson J (Eds).  Proceedings of Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education International Conference . 2023. pp. 2289–2296.

Tlili A, Shehata B, Adarkwah MA, Bozkurt A, Hickey DT, Huang R, Agyemang B. What if the devil is my guardian angel: ChatGPT as a case study of using chatbots in education. Smart Learn Environ. 2023. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-023-00237-x .

Uddin SMJ, Albert A, Ovid A, Alsharef A. Leveraging CHATGPT to aid construction hazard recognition and support safety education and training. Sustainability. 2023;15(9):7121. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15097121 .

Valtonen T, López-Pernas S, Saqr M, Vartiainen H, Sointu E, Tedre M. The nature and building blocks of educational technology research. Comput Hum Behav. 2022;128:107123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2021.107123 .

Vartiainen H, Tedre M. Using artificial intelligence in craft education: crafting with text-to-image generative models. Digit Creat. 2023;34(1):1–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/14626268.2023.2174557 .

Ventayen RJM. OpenAI ChatGPT generated results: similarity index of artificial intelligence-based contents. Soc Sci Res Netw. 2023. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4332664 .

Wagner MW, Ertl-Wagner BB. Accuracy of information and references using ChatGPT-3 for retrieval of clinical radiological information. Can Assoc Radiol J. 2023. https://doi.org/10.1177/08465371231171125 .

Wardat Y, Tashtoush MA, AlAli R, Jarrah AM. ChatGPT: a revolutionary tool for teaching and learning mathematics. Eurasia J Math, Sci Technol Educ. 2023;19(7):em2286. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/13272 .

Webster J, Watson RT. Analyzing the past to prepare for the future: writing a literature review. Manag Inf Syst Quart. 2002;26(2):3.

Xiao Y, Watson ME. Guidance on conducting a systematic literature review. J Plan Educ Res. 2017;39(1):93–112. https://doi.org/10.1177/0739456x17723971 .

Yan D. Impact of ChatGPT on learners in a L2 writing practicum: an exploratory investigation. Educ Inf Technol. 2023. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-11742-4 .

Yu H. Reflection on whether Chat GPT should be banned by academia from the perspective of education and teaching. Front Psychol. 2023;14:1181712. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1181712 .

Zhu C, Sun M, Luo J, Li T, Wang M. How to harness the potential of ChatGPT in education? Knowl Manag ELearn. 2023;15(2):133–52. https://doi.org/10.34105/j.kmel.2023.15.008 .

Download references

The paper is co-funded by the Academy of Finland (Suomen Akatemia) Research Council for Natural Sciences and Engineering for the project Towards precision education: Idiographic learning analytics (TOPEILA), Decision Number 350560.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

School of Computing, University of Eastern Finland, 80100, Joensuu, Finland

Yazid Albadarin, Mohammed Saqr, Nicolas Pope & Markku Tukiainen

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

YA contributed to the literature search, data analysis, discussion, and conclusion. Additionally, YA contributed to the manuscript’s writing, editing, and finalization. MS contributed to the study’s design, conceptualization, acquisition of funding, project administration, allocation of resources, supervision, validation, literature search, and analysis of results. Furthermore, MS contributed to the manuscript's writing, revising, and approving it in its finalized state. NP contributed to the results, and discussions, and provided supervision. NP also contributed to the writing process, revisions, and the final approval of the manuscript in its finalized state. MT contributed to the study's conceptualization, resource management, supervision, writing, revising the manuscript, and approving it.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yazid Albadarin .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

See Table  4

The process of synthesizing the data presented in Table  4 involved identifying the relevant studies through a search process of databases (ERIC, Scopus, Web of Knowledge, Dimensions.ai, and lens.org) using specific keywords "ChatGPT" and "education". Following this, inclusion/exclusion criteria were applied, and data extraction was performed using Creswell's [ 15 ] coding techniques to capture key information and identify common themes across the included studies.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Albadarin, Y., Saqr, M., Pope, N. et al. A systematic literature review of empirical research on ChatGPT in education. Discov Educ 3 , 60 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-024-00138-2

Download citation

Received : 22 October 2023

Accepted : 10 May 2024

Published : 26 May 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-024-00138-2

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Large language models
• Educational technology
• Systematic review

Advertisement

• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

Statistics and Actuarial Science

Information for new graduate students in actuarial science, data science and statistics at the university of iowa..

Welcome New Graduate Students!

Information for NEW graduate students in Actuarial Science, Data Science and Statistics at the University of Iowa. 

Last Updated, May 31, 2024.                                   Additional  updates will be sent this summer!

Important Information for International Students

The Office of International Students and Scholars does an incredible job helping you settle into Iowa City and the University of Iowa.  They have webinars to help with:  

1. Getting Started and Making Travel Arrangements

2. Achieving Success: On-campus Involvement and Cultural Adjustment (undergraduate students)

3. Graduate Student Professionalization and Support

4. Understanding Orientation Expectations, Responsibilities, and Placement Tests (graduate students)

5. On-campus Housing Assignments and Move-in Tips (undergraduate students)

6. Student Employment

7. Money Matters - University Billing

Do you need to take the SPEC (Spoken Proficiency of English for the Classroom)?

All students for whom English is not a first language (as self-reported on their admissions application) and who have first-time appointments as graduate teaching assistants (TAs) are required to go through a testing process to assess their effectiveness in speaking English before they are assigned assistantship responsibilities. Beginning in Fall 2024, there will be a new test to assess communication in English in a classroom context called SPEC (Spoken Proficiency of English in the Classroom).  This is replacing ESPA and ELPT.  Details will be coming soon.

Any graduate student who is included in the following categories needs to have their oral English proficiency tested by the TAPE Program:

• Students whose first language is not English (i.e., learned another language first) as self-reported on their admissions application, and
• Have been appointed as a Teaching Assistant

Exemptions (may change):

• Students with an official valid (within the last two years) iBT Listening score of 25 and an iBT Speaking score of 26.
• Undergraduate degrees and/or     
• Continuous attendance of English-language schools since the age of 12 (or younger)
• Students who served as teaching assistants at other institutions of higher learning in which the language of instruction is English, if they were listed as the instructor of record for a course or led a discussion section in English for at least one year, with a year defined as either two academic semesters or three academic quarters.
• Requests for exceptions regarding the SPEC  can be submitted for evaluation to a committee consisting of the Director of ESL Programs, the Associate Dean for Administrative Affairs in the Graduate College, and a representative from University Human Resources.

Requests for exemption and exceptions must come from the department by the deadline, not the student.   Deadlines to register students for the SPEC are:

• March 1  

NOT Exemptions:

• Students who come from a country where English is one of the official languages.
• Students who are U.S. permanent residents or U.S. citizens whose first language is not English.

Testing Procedures & Results

 To be announced soon!

Graduate/Professional International Students Important Dates

July 12, 2024:  Earliest date you may enter the U.S. in F-1 or J-1 status. August 11, 2024:  Latest date by which you should arrive in Iowa City August 12 - 16, 2024: International Student Orientation August 26, 2024:  Classes begin.

Housing Information for All Students

The department has a housing webpage, please let us know if you have any questions or concerns. If you are looking for a roommate, please let us know and we can update this web page!

Looking for housing options ?

All US citizens that are financially supported (TA, RA) need to be here on August 21.

All students will register for classes the week before classes start.  International students must complete the required Orientation Program before  they can register for classes.    

____________________

Fall Classes Advising will be August 19-23

All NEW UI students must meet with their advisor prior to registration.  There is no worry about getting into any of the classes we teach.  

• IF you are an Actuarial Science MS or PhD student you will need to meet with Professor Shyamalkumar.  Email him after August 12 at [email protected] to set a time to meet to discuss what classes to take, it may be on Zoom or in his office (233 Schaeffer Hall).
• IF you are a Data Science MS, Statistics MS, or PhD student you will need to meet with Professor Boxiang Wang.  Email him after August 12 at [email protected]  to set a time to meet to discuss what classes to take, it may be on Zoom or in his office (261 Schaeffer Hall).

New Graduate College Welcome and Orientation, August 21

The Graduate College Fall 2024 Graduate Student Orientation event will take place on Wednesday, August 21, 2024.  A registration form will be sent to your UI email sometime this early summer from the Graduate College. All new doctoral and master’s students are invited to attend.  

New Teaching Assistant Orientation, August 22- required for all new supported students

Sponsored by the Center for Teaching

This event will introduce participants to the role of teaching assistant at the University of Iowa and prepare them for the first week of classes and beyond. 

Participants will discuss evidence-based teaching strategies for lesson planning, inclusive teaching, and more with Center for Teaching staff. Participants will also choose two workshops of interest to them out of several options; these will be facilitated synchronously by experienced TAs.  This is a virtual event for 9-noon.

• Sign up before August 21!

New Student Department Orientation, August 23 at 9 a.m., Room to be determined.

• All New Student Orientation —Group Introductions and General Policy Procedures.

New Supported Graduate Assistants Orientation, August 23 at 1 p.m., Room to be determined.

• Our Director of Graduate Studies will have a department review of expectations and your specific roles in our department. Teaching and grading assignments will be explained, as well as preparation, teaching tips, problems and questions, quizzes and exams, weekly meetings, grading, appropriate office use and the Sexual Harassment Prevention Education

Mailbox in 241 Schaeffer Hall 

All graduate students will have a mailbox in our main office.  The faculty do as well.  Please check your mailbox at least once a week!

Office Desk Assignment

Nearly all supported students will have a desk in one of our offices.  The assignment priority (in this order) includes Ph.D. and Fellowship candidates, research assistants, half-time teaching assistants, quarter-time teaching assistants and lastly graders.  Having a desk is a privilege and should be used only for university business.  Office assignments will be given to students on, August 23.  Keys are checked out ONLY after that time.  Please remember to keep the rooms clean and take out all trash to the large bins in the main hallways.

Set-up your University of Iowa Email

All University of Iowa students are required to activate their assigned uiowa.edu email address, as all official communication from university offices are now sent via email, rather than hard copy. This address usually follows the pattern [email protected]   (However, often a number is also attached.) 

To activate the account:

• Log on to  MyUI
• Click on My UIowa / My Email / Request Email Account
• Complete the specified steps.

Students who prefer to maintain only their work or home email addresses can do so by routing the uiowa.edu email to a work or home account. To do so, follow these steps:

• Click on My UIowa / My Email / Update Email Routing Address

Important Notes:

• If your uiowa.edu email address is routed to a different account, you will  not  need to change your address in ICON, as your messages will already forward to your routed address.
• Log on to MYUI.
• Click on My UIowa / My Email / Email Account Filter bulk mail.
• Make sure that none of the categories are checked.

Required Graduate Assistants Teaching Courses:

• ONLINE CLASS Requirement: Sexual Harassment Prevention Edu.  Use your HawkID and password to log into Employee Self Service. Click the Personal tab, next (under Learning and Development) click on Sexual Harassment Prevention Edu., follow instructions.
• ONLINE CLASS Requirement:  Federal Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), Use your HawkID and password to log into Employee Self Service. Click the Personal tab, next (under Learning and Development) next click on Available Online Icon Courses, next FERPA Training, then click on View Details twice and the last click will be to Enroll in this ICON Course Session.
• A six-hour orientation program will be required of all students who are certified at level A or B and are teaching for the first time.  This orientation helps new teaching assistants understand the culture of the U.S. classroom and treats topics such as student expectations, teacher-student relationships, and understanding and answering student questions. Discussion focuses on suggestions for maximizing comprehensibility in spoken English. This course meets twice for 3 hours early in the semester. Both meetings are held in the evening.

Administrative Department Staff:

Professor aixin tan (until july 1, 2024).

Director of Graduate Studies, Statistics and Data Science Graduate Advisor: [email protected]   (319) 335-0821.

Professor Boxiang Wang (beginning July 1, 2024)

Director of Graduate Studies, Statistics and Data Science Graduate Advisor: [email protected] (319) 335-2294.

Professor N.D. Shyamalkumar

Actuarial Science Graduate Advisor:  [email protected]    (319) 335-1980

Margie Ebert

Academic Services Coordinator ,  [email protected]  (319) 335-2082

Heather Roth

Administrative Services Coordinator  [email protected]   (319) 335-0712

Tammy Siegel

Department Administrator ,  [email protected] , (319) 335-0706