Your browser does not fully support modern features. Please upgrade for a smoother experience.
The Combination of Artificial Intelligence and Formative Assessment in Teacher Education: A Systematic Review: History
View Latest Version
Please note this is an old version of this entry, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Contributor: Miriam Molina-Soria , José Luis Aparicio-Herguedas , Teresa Fuentes-Nieto , Víctor M. López-Pastor

The combination of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Formative Assessment (FA) in Teacher Education explores how emerging technologies can enhance teaching practices and professional development. AI tools can provide personalized feedback, identify learning needs, and support reflective practice among educators. Integrating AI-driven formative assessment methods allows for continuous evaluation of teaching competencies, promoting adaptive learning, data-informed decision-making, and improved instructional quality in teacher education programs. The purpose of this study was to conduct a systematic review of the use of Formative Assessment (FA) and Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Teacher Education (TE) during the period 2020–2025 (inclusive). The review was conducted following the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) methodology, which ensures a rigorous, transparent, and reproducible process in the selection and analysis of studies. To this end, scientific articles published in the Scopus, Web of Science and Dialnet databases were reviewed, considering publications in English and Spanish. The objective was to identify trends, methodological approaches, results, and research gaps that show how AI is being integrated, or not, into FA processes in TE. The review also sought to analyze the impact of AI on student participation in assessment, feedback, decision-making, and the learning and assessment process itself, synthesizing the current evidence on the relationship between AI and FA in TE.

  • artificial intelligence
  • formative assessment
  • shared assessment
  • teacher education
  • skills
We can consider AI as a set of technologies that is changing the way we access, produce, and share knowledge. AI is already widely present in society, and its use is growing exponentially across all fields, including education [1].
In higher education, the use of AI by students is widespread. According to the Chegg Global Student Survey [2], 80% of university students report having used generative AI tools to support their studies; this figure rises to 92% according to the Higher Education Policy Institute + Kortext Student Generative AI Survey [3], with 88% using it for tasks that involve assessment. With regard to university teaching staff, the Digital Education Council report [4] indicates that 61% of faculties report having already used AI in their teaching, and 86% see themselves using it in the future. In this context, learning to coexist with AI in higher education is key. AI is prompting a rethinking of the teaching–learning process among university faculties, who are often overwhelmed by a lack of knowledge about a technology that is advancing at great speed.
A recent study [5] analyzes the different uses of AI by university faculties, finding that preparation and instructional design (developing materials, generating ideas, etc.) is the most widespread use. However, other uses can also be identified, such as: (a) support for teaching and learning (virtual assistants, intelligent tutoring systems, or personalized learning systems); (b) analysis and monitoring of learning (analyzing learning data, detecting difficulties, adjusting instruction, etc.); (c) automatic generation of feedback and assessment (assessing tasks, providing faster and more detailed feedback, etc.); (d) reduction of administrative time (materials management, content preparation, internal planning processes); (e) AI training as instructional content (courses and workshops to develop AI literacy, spaces for dialogue on the ethics of AI use, etc.); and (f) promotion of educational equity (improving access to resources, offering personalized support, facilitating learning for people with diverse needs).
Furthermore, recent studies [6][7][8] show that university students are using AI very actively to study, resolve doubts, complete assignments, seek explanations, summarize readings, and explore related topics—the main motivation for its use being time savings, though they do not always have a deep understanding of the implications involved.
The use of AI in Teacher Education (TE) is also becoming increasingly widespread; practically all students use different AI applications in the preparation of their academic work [9], and in recent years, research on the use of AI in TE has grown considerably [10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17]. Studies agree on the need for AI literacy in TE for both teachers and students. Given the barrier posed by AI literacy and its responsible integration, it is essential that TE faculties have the knowledge and strategies necessary to navigate an ever-evolving technological landscape [14].
Among the competencies and knowledge that TE students must acquire and know how to apply, assessment methods stand out. The use of formative assessment (FA) systems in TE appears to have several advantages, based on evidence collected in numerous studies [18][19][20][21][22]. The FA model seeks to generate processes for improvement and learning in three directions: (a) improving students’ learning processes and the quality of their outputs; (b) improving and refining teachers’ instructional competencies; and (c) redirecting and improving the teaching–learning activities carried out in the classroom, both during the course itself and after its completion, with a view to the following academic year [22].
Moreover, several studies seem to indicate that there is considerable transfer between experiences in TE and professional practice as teachers, given that future teachers in training tend to reproduce in their teaching practice the same methods they experienced as students [19][23][24][25]. However, some recent works provide evidence that there does appear to be transfer between the use of FA systems during TE and the subsequent application of this type of assessment in their practice as teachers [19][23][26][27].
The emergence and widespread use of AI in TE makes it necessary to rethink many of the learning and assessment activities that have been used in recent years. The use of AI linked to formative assessment (FA) processes generates new learning opportunities [9] that need to be investigated in a systematic way. Unlike broader reviews on AI in education, this study specifically focuses on AI applied to FA in TE and synthesizes the literature by identifying five key pedagogical uses of AI within FA processes, thereby providing a structured and novel analytical framework.
As the guiding question of this research, we asked: Is AI being used in FA processes in TE? Therefore, the objective was to identify trends, methodological approaches, results, and research gaps that show how AI is being integrated—or not—into FA processes within TE.
Accordingly, this systematic review aimed to answer the following research question: How is AI being used in formative assessment processes in Teacher Education?

This entry is adapted from the peer-reviewed paper 10.3390/encyclopedia6030066

References

  1. Bick, A.; Blandin, A.; Deming, D.J.; Louis, S. The Rapid Adoption of Generative AI. In FRB St. Louis Working Paper; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, Research Division: St. Louis, MO, USA, 2024.
  2. Chegg Global Student Survey 2025. Available online: https://www.chegg.org/global-student-survey-2025 (accessed on 10 February 2026).
  3. Freeman, J. Student Generative AI Survey 2025; HEPI Policy Note 61; Student Generative AI Survey 2025-HEPI; HEPI: Oxford, UK, 2025.
  4. Digital Education Council Global AI Faculty Survey 2025. Available online: https://www.digitaleducationcouncil.com/post/digital-education-council-global-ai-faculty-survey (accessed on 10 February 2026).
  5. Mah, D.K.; Groß, N. Artificial intelligence in higher education: Exploring faculty use, self-efficacy, distinct profiles, and professional development needs. Int. J. Educ. Technol. High. Educ. 2024, 21, 58.
  6. Pitts, G.; Rani, N.; Mildort, W.; Cook, E.M. Students’ Reliance on AI in Higher Education: Identifying Contributing Factors. arXiv 2025.
  7. Rajki, Z.; Dringó-Horváth, I.; Nagy, J.T. Artificial Intelligence in Higher Education: Students’ Artificial Intelligence Use and its Influencing Factors. J. Univ. Teach. Learn. Pract. 2025, 22, 1–21.
  8. Wecks, J.O.; Voshaar, J.; Plate, B.J.; Zimmermann, J. Generative AI Usage and Exam Performance. arXiv 2024.
  9. Fuentes-Nieto, T.; Aparicio-Herguedas, J.L.; López-Pastor, V.M. Artificial Intelligence and Formative and Shared Assessment. Appl. Sci. 2025, 15, 12067.
  10. Ayuso del Puerto, D.; Gutiérrez-Esteban, P. La Inteligencia Artificial como recurso educativo durante la formación inicial del profesorado. RIED Rev. Iberoam. Educ. Distancia 2022, 25, 347–362.
  11. Bae, H.; Jaesung, H.; Park, J.; Choi, G.W.; Moon, J. Pre-service Teachers’ Dual Perspectives on Generative AI: Benefits, Challenges, and Integrating into Teaching and Learning. Online Learn. 2024, 28, 131–156.
  12. Barbieri, W.; Ruby, N.N.N. Generative AI as a “placement buddy”: Supporting pre-service teachers in work-integrated learning, self-management and crisis resolution. Australas. J. Educ. Technol. 2025, 41, 34–49.
  13. Blonder, R.; Feldman-Maggor, Y.; Rap, S. Are They Ready to Teach? Generative AI as a Means to Uncover Pre-Service Science Teachers’ PCK and Enhance Their Preparation Program. J. Sci. Educ. Technol. 2024, 34, 1301–1310.
  14. Kelley, M.; Wenzel, T. Advancing Artificial Intelligence Literacy in Teacher Education Through Professional Partnership Inquiry. Educ Sci. 2025, 15, 659.
  15. Sadidi, F.; Prestel, T. Impact of Criterion-Based Reflection on Prospective Physics Teachers’ Perceptions of ChatGPT-Generated Content. arXiv 2024.
  16. Spasopoulos, T.; Sotiropoulos, D.; Kalogiannakis, M. Generative AI in Pre-Service Science Teacher Education: A Systematic Review. Adv. Mob. Learn. Educ. Res. 2025, 5, 1501–1523.
  17. Wang, J.; Chen, Y.; Li, Y. Evaluation and Feedback System for Physical Education Teaching Effectiveness Based on Artificial Intelligence. Int. J. Comput. Intell. Syst. 2025, 18, 303.
  18. Fraile-Aranda, A.F.; Herguedas-Aparicio, J.L.; Dieste, S.A.; Romero-Martín, R. The Formative Evaluation of Generic Competences in the Training of Physical Education Teachers. Estud. Pedagóg. 2018, 2, 39–53.
  19. Herrero-González, D.; López-Pastor, V.M.; Manrique-Arribas, J.C.; Moura, A. Formative and shared assessment: Literature review on the main contributions in physical education and physical education teacher education. Eur. Phy. Educ. Rev. 2024, 30, 493–510.
  20. Hortigüela-Alcalá, D.; Palacios-Picos, A.; López-Pastor, V.M. The impact of formative and shared or co-assessment on the acquisition of transversal competences in higher education. Assess Eval. High. Educ. 2019, 44, 933–945.
  21. Ibarra-Sáiz, M.S.; Rodríguez-Gómez, G.; Boud, D. Developing student competence through peer assessment: The role of feedback, self-regulation and evaluative judgement. High. Educ. 2020, 80, 137–156.
  22. López-Pastor, V.M.; Sicilia-Camacho, A. Formative and shared assessment in higher education. Lessons learned and challenges for the future. Assess. Eval High. Educ. 2017, 42, 77–97.
  23. Hamodi, C.; López-Pastor, V.M.; López-Pastor, A.T. If I experience formative assessment whilst studying at university, will I put it into practice later as a teacher? Formative and shared assessment in Initial Teacher Education (ITE). Eur. J. Teach. Educ. 2017, 40, 171–190.
  24. Lorente, E.; Kirk, D. Alternative democratic assessment in PETE: An action-research study exploring risks, challenges and solutions. Sport Educ. Soc. 2013, 18, 77–96.
  25. Lorente, E.; Kirk, D. Student teachers’ understanding and application of assessment for learning during a physical education teacher education course. Eur. Phy. Educ. Rev. 2016, 22, 65–81.
  26. Barrientos-Hernán, E.J.; López-Pastor, V.M.; Lorente-Catalán, E.; Kirk, D. Challenges with using formative and authentic assessment in physical education teaching from experienced teachers’ perspectives. Curric. Stud. Health Phys. Educ. 2023, 14, 109–126.
  27. Molina-Soria, M.; López-Pastor, V.M.; Hortigüela-Alcalá, D.; Pascual-Arias, C.; Fernández-Garcimartín, C. Formative and Shared Assessment and Feedback: An example of good practice in Physical Education in Pre-service Teacher Education. Rev. Cult. Cienc. Deporte. 2023, 18, 157–169.
More
© Text is available under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy.
This entry is offline, you can click here to edit this entry!
Academic Video Service
Feedback