Search and Filter

Repository Feedback

Your feedback helps us improve the repository's content relevance and usability. Please share your thoughts to help us better serve researchers and practitioners.

Submit feedback

Submit a research study

Contribute to the repository:

Add a paper

Socratic AI In K–12 Science Classrooms: Effects On Critical Thinking, Motivation, And Self-Regulation In A Randomized Controlled Trial

Sean Kao, Texas A&M University
Patricia Grant, Texas A&M University
Steven Woltering, Texas A&M University
Date
Publisher
Research Square
Link
https://sciety.org/articles/activity/10.21203/rs.3.rs-8118546/v1
Teaching scientific reasoning at scale is challenging due to limited opportunities for individualized feedback. Generative AI offers a potential solution by providing adaptive scaffolding through Socratic Dialogue. In a randomized controlled trial with 90 10th-grade students, we compared three conditions: (1) Control, (2) Argument-Driven Inquiry (ADI), and (3) AI-powered ADI using ChatGPT’s Study Mode . Students completed pre- and post-intervention assessments of scientific argumentation, critical thinking, self-efficacy, cognitive engagement, and metacognitive self-regulation. Controlling for baseline performance, students in the AI-powered condition showed significantly greater gains in scientific argumentation and critical thinking, as well as higher self-efficacy and cognitive engagement compared with both ADI and control groups. Effects on metacognitive self-regulation were nonsignificant. These findings provide the first experimental evidence that Socratic AI tutors can enhance adolescents’ reasoning and engagement in real classrooms, pointing to new scalable models for supporting complex cognitive skills.
Study at a glance
  • Question: Does using a Socratic AI tutor during science inquiry improve students' reasoning, motivation, and self-regulation?
  • Setting and data: Classrooms, 90 10th-grade students.
  • Method: Randomized controlled trial
Why it matters

Teaching scientific reasoning at scale is challenging because students have limited opportunities for individualized feedback, though generative AI may offer a potential solution through adaptive scaffolding.

Key findings
  • Tenth graders using AI-powered inquiry achieved significantly greater gains in scientific argumentation and critical thinking than students in standard inquiry or control groups.
  • Students in the AI condition reported higher self-efficacy and cognitive engagement compared to peers in the other two groups.
  • The AI-powered intervention had nonsignificant effects on students' metacognitive self-regulation.

Summary drafted with AI from the paper’s abstract and may contain errors. See the full paper for details.

What is the application?
Teaching – Assessment and Feedback,
Learning – Student Support
Who is the user?
Student
Who age?
High School (9-12)
Why use AI?
Outcomes – Other Academic,
Outcomes – Differentiation,
Outcomes – Social Emotional,
Outcomes – Durable Skills
Study design
Impact – Randomized Controlled Trial