Date
Publisher
arXiv
Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly positioned as solutions for
education, yet evaluations often reduce their impact to narrow performance
metrics. This paper reframes the question by asking "what kind of impact should
LLMs have in education?" Drawing on Biesta's tripartite account of good
education: qualification, socialisation, and subjectification, we present a
meta-analysis of 133 experimental and quasi-experimental studies (k = 188).
Overall, the impact of LLMs on student learning is positive but uneven. Strong
effects emerge in qualification, particularly when LLMs function as tutors in
sustained interventions. Socialisation outcomes appear more variable,
concentrated in sustained, reflective interventions. Subjectification, linked
to autonomy and learner development, remains fragile, with improvements
confined to small-scale, long-term studies. This purpose-level view highlights
design as the decisive factor: without scaffolds for participation and agency,
LLMs privilege what is easiest to measure while neglecting broader aims of
education. For HCI and education, the issue is not just whether LLMs work, but
what futures they enable or foreclose.
What is the application?
Who is the user?
Study design
