International Journal of

ADVANCED AND APPLIED SCIENCES

EISSN: 2313-3724, Print ISSN: 2313-626X

Frequency: 12

line decor
  
line decor

 Volume 13, Issue 7 (July 2026), Pages: 211-221

----------------------------------------------

 Review Paper

Impact of artificial intelligence integration in STEM education on learners’ academic performance: A meta-analytic review

 Author(s): 

Bakytzhan Kurbanbekov 1, Yerzhan Yedilbayev 1, Serik Polatuly 1, *, Bayan Kuanbayeva 2

 Affiliation(s):

1Department of Physics, Khoja Akhmet Yassawi International Kazakh-Turkish University, Turkestan, Kazakhstan
2Department of Physics and Technical Disciplines, Khalel Dosmukhamedov Atyrau University, Atyrau, Kazakhstan

 Full text

    Full Text - PDF

 * Corresponding Author. 

   Corresponding author's ORCID profile:  https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6670-2679

 Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

 
https://doi.org/10.21833/ijaas.2026.07.020

 Abstract

The integration of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies into science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education has attracted growing scholarly interest due to its potential to improve instructional quality and academic outcomes. This study quantitatively evaluated the effect of AI integration in STEM education on learners’ academic achievement using a meta-analytic approach. Following PRISMA guidelines, empirical studies published between 2015 and 2026 were retrieved from Web of Science, IEEE Xplore, and Google Scholar. Studies were included if they used an experimental or quasi-experimental design, included a control group, and provided sufficient statistical information for effect size calculation. A total of 15 studies were included. Effect sizes were calculated using Hedges’ g and synthesized using a random-effects model. The results showed a statistically significant positive effect of AI-based STEM interventions on academic achievement (g = 1.57, 95% CI [0.985, 2.156], Z = 5.256, p < 0.001). Moderate-to-substantial heterogeneity was observed (Q = 72.467, p < 0.001; I² = 73%), indicating variation across educational contexts and implementation conditions. Overall, the findings suggest that pedagogically informed AI integration can improve academic achievement in STEM education and support evidence-based educational practice and policy.

 © 2026 The Authors. Published by IASE.

 This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

 Keywords

AI in education, STEM education, Academic achievement, Meta-analysis, Generative AI

 Article history

Received 31 March 2026, Received in revised form 25 July 2026, Accepted 29 July 2026

 Acknowledgment

This research has been funded by the Science Committee of the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Republic of Kazakhstan (Grant AP26105437). This article was prepared within the framework of the postdoctoral program of Khoja Akhmet Yassawi International Kazakh-Turkish University. 

 Compliance with ethical standards

 Conflict of interest: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

 Citation:

Kurbanbekov B, Yedilbayev Y, Polatuly S, and Kuanbayeva B (2026). Impact of artificial intelligence integration in STEM education on learners’ academic performance: A meta-analytic review. International Journal of Advanced and Applied Sciences, 13(7): 211-221

  Permanent Link to this page

---------------------------------------------- 

 References (39)

  1. Alneyadi S and Wardat Y (2023). ChatGPT: Revolutionizing student achievement in the electronic magnetism unit for eleventh-grade students in Emirates schools. Contemporary Educational Technology, 15(4): ep448. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/13417   [Google Scholar]
  2. Ayanwale MA and Omeh CB (2026). AI-supported problem-based learning for enhancing computational thinking skills in STEM education. Computers in Human Behavior: Artificial Humans, 7: 100263. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbah.2026.100263   [Google Scholar]
  3. Bao L and Koenig K (2019). Physics education research for 21st century learning. Disciplinary and Interdisciplinary Science Education Research, 1: 2. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43031-019-0007-8   [Google Scholar]
  4. Bhutoria A (2022). Personalized education and artificial intelligence in the United States, China, and India: A systematic review using a human-in-the-loop model. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 3: 100068. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2022.100068   [Google Scholar]
  5. Chen L, Chen P, and Lin Z (2020). Artificial intelligence in education: A review. IEEE Access, 8: 75264-75278. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2988510   [Google Scholar]
  6. Chng E, Tan AL, and Tan SC (2023). Examining the use of emerging technologies in schools: A review of artificial intelligence and immersive technologies in STEM education. Journal for STEM Education Research, 6(3): 385-407. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41979-023-00092-y   [Google Scholar]
  7. Dai CP, Ke F, Pan Y, Moon J, and Liu Z (2024). Effects of artificial intelligence-powered virtual agents on learning outcomes in computer-based simulations: A meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 36: 31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09855-4   [Google Scholar]
  8. del Olmo‐Muñoz J, González‐Calero JA, Diago PD, Arnau D, and Arevalillo‐Herráez M (2022). Using intra‐task flexibility on an intelligent tutoring system to promote arithmetic problem‐solving proficiency. British Journal of Educational Technology, 53(6): 1976-1992. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13228   [Google Scholar]
  9. Essel HB, Vlachopoulos D, Tachie-Menson A, Johnson EE, and Baah PK (2022). The impact of a virtual teaching assistant (chatbot) on students' learning in Ghanaian higher education. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 19: 57. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-022-00362-6   [Google Scholar]
  10. Galili I (2021). Scientific knowledge as a culture: A paradigm of knowledge representation for the meaningful teaching and learning of science. In: Galili I (Ed.), Scientific knowledge as a culture: The pleasure of understanding: 245–275. Springer, Cham, Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-80201-1   [Google Scholar]
  11. Huang AY, Lu OH, and Yang SJ (2023). Effects of artificial intelligence–enabled personalized recommendations on learners’ learning engagement, motivation, and outcomes in a flipped classroom. Computers & Education, 194: 104684. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104684   [Google Scholar]
  12. Huang X and Qiao C (2024). Enhancing computational thinking skills through artificial intelligence education at a STEAM high school. Science & Education, 33: 383-403. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-022-00392-6   [Google Scholar]
  13. Hwang GJ and Tu YF (2021). Roles and research trends of artificial intelligence in mathematics education: A bibliometric mapping analysis and systematic review. Mathematics, 9(6): 584. https://doi.org/10.3390/math9060584   [Google Scholar]
  14. Ji Y, Zhan Z, Li T, Zou X, and Lyu S (2025). Human–machine cocreation: The effects of ChatGPT on students’ learning performance, AI awareness, critical thinking, and cognitive load in a STEM course toward entrepreneurship. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 18: 402-415. https://doi.org/10.1109/TLT.2025.3554584   [Google Scholar]
  15. Kasneci E, Seßler K, Küchemann S et al. (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   [Google Scholar]
  16. Kaushik R, Parmar M, and Jhamb S (2021). Roles and research trends of artificial intelligence in mathematics education. In the 2nd International Conference on Computational Methods in Science & Technology (ICCMST), IEEE, Mohali, India: 202-205. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICCMST54943.2021.00050   [Google Scholar]
  17. Kumar JA (2021). Educational chatbots for project-based learning: Investigating learning outcomes for a team-based design course. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 18: 65. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-021-00302-w   [Google Scholar] PMid:34926790 PMCid:PMC8670881
  18. Kumar KS, Selvan T, Mahendraprabu M, Ganesan K, Ramnath R, and Kumar NS (2024). Examining the role of virtual reality, augmented reality, and artificial intelligence in adapting STEM education for next-generation inclusion. International Journal of Emerging Knowledge Studies, 2(12): 876-883. https://doi.org/10.70333/ijeks-02-12-025   [Google Scholar]
  19. Lampropoulos G (2025). Augmented reality, virtual reality, and intelligent tutoring systems in education and training: A systematic literature review. Applied Sciences, 15(6): 3223. https://doi.org/10.3390/app15063223   [Google Scholar]
  20. Lee YF, Hwang GJ, and Chen PY (2022). Impacts of an AI-based chabot on college students’ after-class review, academic performance, self-efficacy, learning attitude, and motivation. Educational Technology Research and Development, 70: 1843-1865. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-022-10142-8   [Google Scholar]
  21. Lee YF, Hwang GJ, and Chen PY (2025). Technology-based interactive guidance to promote learning performance and self-regulation: A chatbot-assisted self-regulated learning approach. Educational Technology Research and Development, 73: 2279-2304. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-025-10478-x   [Google Scholar]
  22. Liao J, Yang J, and Zhang W (2021). The student-centered STEM learning model based on artificial intelligence project: A case study on intelligent car. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (iJET), 16(21): 100-120. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v16i21.25001   [Google Scholar]
  23. Mystakidis S, Christopoulos A, and Pellas N (2022). A systematic mapping review of augmented reality applications to support STEM learning in higher education. Education and Information Technologies, 27: 1883-1927. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10682-1   [Google Scholar]
  24. Niño-Rojas F, Lancheros-Cuesta D, Jiménez-Valderrama MTP, Mestre G, and Gómez S (2024). Systematic review: Trends in intelligent tutoring systems in mathematics teaching and learning. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 12(1): 203-229. https://doi.org/10.46328/ijemst.3189   [Google Scholar]
  25. Omeh CB and Ayanwale MA (2025). Artificial intelligence meets PBL: Transforming computer-robotics programming motivation and engagement. Frontiers in Education, 10: 1674320. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2025.1674320   [Google Scholar]
  26. Ouyang F and Jiao P (2021). Artificial intelligence in education: The three paradigms. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 2: 100020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2021.100020   [Google Scholar]
  27. Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM et al. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372: n71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71   [Google Scholar] PMid:33782057
  28. Panigrahi R, Srivastava PR, and Sharma D (2018). Online learning: Adoption, continuance, and learning outcome—A review of literature. International Journal of Information Management, 43: 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2018.05.005   [Google Scholar]
  29. Redmond P, Abawi L, Brown A, Henderson R, and Heffernan A (2018). An online engagement framework for higher education. Online Learning Journal, 22(1): 183-204. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v22i1.1175   [Google Scholar]
  30. Sahito ZH and Khoso FJ (2025). The effectiveness of technology-enhanced learning tools, including virtual labs and AI-powered platforms, in improving STEM education outcomes among secondary school students. International Journal of Social Science & Entrepreneurship, 5(4): 28-48. https://doi.org/10.58622/sknm9428   [Google Scholar]
  31. Thai KP, Bang HJ, and Li L (2022). Accelerating early math learning with research-based personalized learning games: A cluster randomized controlled trial. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 15(1): 28-51. https://doi.org/10.1080/19345747.2021.1969710   [Google Scholar]
  32. Tlili A, Saqer K, Salha S, and Huang R (2025). Investigating the effect of artificial intelligence in education (AIEd) on learning achievement: A meta-analysis and research synthesis. Information Development, 41(3): 825-842. https://doi.org/10.1177/02666669241304407   [Google Scholar]
  33. VanLEHN K (2011). The relative effectiveness of human tutoring, intelligent tutoring systems, and other tutoring systems. Educational Psychologist, 46(4): 197-221. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2011.611369   [Google Scholar]
  34. Wu R and Yu Z (2024). Do AI chatbots improve students learning outcomes? Evidence from a meta‐analysis. British Journal of Educational Technology, 55(1): 10-33. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13334   [Google Scholar]
  35. Xu W and Ouyang F (2022). The application of AI technologies in STEM education: A systematic review from 2011 to 2021. International Journal of STEM Education, 9: 59. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-022-00377-5   [Google Scholar]
  36. Yilmaz R and Yilmaz FGK (2023). The effect of generative artificial intelligence (AI)-based tool use on students' computational thinking skills, programming self-efficacy and motivation. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 4: 100147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2023.100147   [Google Scholar]
  37. Yin J, Goh TT, Yang B, and Xiaobin Y (2021). Conversation technology with micro-learning: The impact of chatbot-based learning on students’ learning motivation and performance. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 59(1): 154-177. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633120952067   [Google Scholar]
  38. Zawacki-Richter O, Marín VI, Bond M, and Gouverneur F (2019). Systematic review of research on artificial intelligence applications in higher education – Where are the educators? International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 16: 39. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-019-0171-0   [Google Scholar]
  39. Zheng L, Niu J, Zhong L, and Gyasi JF (2023). The effectiveness of artificial intelligence on learning achievement and learning perception: A meta-analysis. Interactive Learning Environments, 31(9): 5650-5664. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2021.2015693   [Google Scholar]