Guided Integration or Prohibition? A Quasi-Experimental Study of Generative AI in Project-Based Learning
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.47941/jep.3877Keywords:
Generative AI, Project-Based Learning, Higher Education, Instructional Policy, Academic IntegrityAbstract
Purpose: The rapid expansion of generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools in higher education has prompted institutional responses ranging from prohibition to structured integration. However, empirical evidence comparing these approaches within authentic classroom contexts remains limited. This quasi-experimental study examines whether guided AI integration enhances student learning outcomes in a project-based undergraduate course.
Methodology: Two intact sections of a senior-level global trade course (N = 60) completed an identical semester-long group project. One section operated under a structured AI policy (Experimental Group), while the other followed a strict human-only policy (Control Group).
Findings: Independent-samples t-tests revealed statistically significant differences in overall project performance favoring the Experimental Group across written and presentation components. Students in the Experimental Group demonstrated stronger analytical organization, clearer conceptual application, and more effective synthesis of course content. Self-reported measures further indicated higher perceived learning, greater professional growth, and reduced stress. Indicators consistent with AI-assisted writing were observed in some Control Group submissions; however, these observations were not formally quantified and are interpreted cautiously.
Unique Contribution to Theory, Policy and Practice: Findings suggest that structured and transparent AI integration, when aligned with instructional design principles, may support stronger performance outcomes than prohibition-based approaches within this course context. The study contributes empirical evidence to ongoing discussions regarding AI governance in higher education and offers implications for instructional policy design.
Downloads
References
Baidoo-Anu, D., & Owusu Ansah, L. (2023). Education in the era of generative AI: Understanding the potential benefits of ChatGPT in promoting teaching and learning. Journal of AI, 7(1), 52–62. https://doi.org/10.61969/jai.1337500
Balalle, H., & Pannilage, S. (2025). Reassessing academic integrity in the age of AI: A systematic literature review on AI and academic integrity. Social Sciences & Humanities Open, 11, Article 101299. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2025.101299
Bearman, M., Ryan, J., & Ajjawi, R. (2023). Discourses of artificial intelligence in higher education: A critical literature review. Higher Education, 86(2), 369–385. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-022-00937-2
Bond, M., Khosravi, H., De Laat, M., Bergdahl, N., Negrea, V., Oxley, E., Pham, P., Chong, S. W., & Siemens, G. (2024). A meta‐systematic review of artificial intelligence in higher education: A call for increased ethics, collaboration, and rigour. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 21, Article 4. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00436-z
Cotton, D. R. E., Cotton, P. A., & Shipway, J. R. (2023). Chatting and cheating? Ensuring academic integrity in the era of ChatGPT. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 48(8), 1281–1296. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2023.2190148
Deng, R., Jiang, M., Yu, X., Lu, Y., & Liu, S. (2025). Does ChatGPT enhance student learning? A systematic review and meta-analysis of experimental studies. Computers & Education, 227, Article 105224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2024.105224
Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2004). Problem-based learning: What and how do students learn? Educational Psychology Review, 16(3), 235–266. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:EDPR.0000034022.16470.f3
Holmes, W., Porayska-Pomsta, K., Holstein, K., Sutherland, S., Baker, T., Shum, S. B., Santos, O. C., Rodrigo, M. M., du Boulay, B., & Koedinger, K. (2022). Ethics in artificial intelligence in education: Towards a community-wide framework. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 32(3), 527–560. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-022-00279-w
Kasneci, E., Seßler, K., Küchemann, S., Bannert, M., Dementieva, D., Fischer, F., Gasser, U., Groh, G., Günnemann, S., Hüllermeier, E., Krusche, S., Kutyniok, G., Michaeli, T., Nerdel, C., Pfeffer, J., Poquet, O., Sailer, M., Schmidt, A., Seidel, T., & Kasneci, G. (2023). ChatGPT for good? On opportunities and challenges of large language models for education. Learning and Individual Differences, 103, 102274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2023.102274
Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 75–86. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep4102_1
Korseberg, L., & Elken, M. (2025). Waiting for the revolution: How higher education institutions initially responded to ChatGPT. Higher Education, 89(4), 953–968. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-024-01256-4
Lo, C. K. (2023). What is the impact of ChatGPT on education? A rapid review of the literature. Education Sciences, 13(4), 410. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13040410
Naznin, K., Al Mahmud, A., Nguyen, M. T., & Chua, C. (2025). ChatGPT integration in higher education for personalized learning, academic writing, and coding tasks: A systematic review. Computers, 14(2), 53. https://doi.org/10.3390/computers14020053
Perkins, M. (2023). Academic integrity considerations of AI-generated text. Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 20(2), Article 7. https://doi.org/10.53761/1.20.2.07
Rudolph, J., Tan, S., & Tan, S. (2023). ChatGPT: Bullshit spewer or the end of traditional assessments in higher education? Journal of Applied Learning & Teaching, 6(1), 342–354. https://doi.org/10.37074/jalt.2023.6.1.9
Selwyn, N., & Abidoye, Y. (2018). The possibilities and limits of “techno-solutionism” in education: A critical analysis of artificial intelligence and datafication. Learning, Media and Technology, 43(3), 255–269. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2018.1504797
Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12(2), 257–285. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog1202_4
Tlili, A., Shehata, B., Adarkwah, M. A., Bozkurt, A., Hickey, D. T., Huang, R., & Agyemang, B. (2023). What if the devil is my guardian angel: ChatGPT as a case study of using chatbots in education. Smart Learning Environments, 10, 15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-023-00237-x
Wood, D., Bruner, J. S., & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 17(2), 89–100. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.1976.tb00381.x
Zawacki-Richter, O., Marín, V. I., Bond, M., & Gouverneur, F. (2019). Systematic review of research on artificial intelligence applications in higher education. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 16(1), Article 39. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-019-0171-0
Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview. Theory Into Practice, 41(2), 64–70. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4102_2
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Marine Aghekyan, Marie Botkin
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) 4.0 License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
