Learning With Generative AI Through Custom Chatbots

Authors

  • Kevin Flynn Clemson University Author

Keywords:

Generative AI, inquiry-based learning, Active Learning, custom GPT, Marketing Education, chatbot pedagogy

Abstract

Many educators fear that generative AI may erode student learning by letting students skip essential critical thinking and mastery. Tools like ChatGPT provide instant answers to questions that previously demanded effort and deeper engagement. However, integrating AI thoughtfully can transform it from a shortcut to a catalyst for active learning. In three recent marketing courses (Fall 2024, Spring 2025, Summer 2025), AI-driven interventions—like guided chatbot-driven lectures and POGIL-style simulations—were implemented. Qualitative analysis of transcripts, reflections, and quiz scores found that these tools improved conceptual understanding and fostered metacognitive engagement for inquiry and strategic exercises. Thoughtful AI integration supports, rather than supplants, cognitive effort.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Baskara, A. (2023). Generative AI in higher education: A review of pedagogical opportunities and risks. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 20(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00404-1

Chickering, A. W., & Gamson, Z. F. (1987). Seven principles for good practice in undergraduate education. AAHE Bulletin, 39(7), 3–7.

Ericsson, K. A., Krampe, R. T., & Tesch-Römer, C. (1993). The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance. Psychological Review, 100(3), 363–406.

Farrell, J. J., Moog, R. S., & Spencer, J. N. (1999). A guided inquiry general chemistry course. Journal of Chemical Education, 76(4), 570–574. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed076p570

Hale, D., & Mullen, L. G. (2009). Designing process-oriented guided-inquiry activities: An innovation for marketing classes. Marketing Education Review, 19(1), 73–80.

Jonassen, D. H. (1991). Objectivism versus constructivism: Do we need a new philosophical paradigm? Educational Technology Research and Development, 39(3), 5–14. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02296434

Moog, R. S., Creegan, F. J., Hanson, D. M., Spencer, J. N., & Straumanis, A. (2006). Process-Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning (POGIL) and the second-year curriculum. In Invention and Impact: Building Excellence in Undergraduate STEM Education. Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science.

Slepchuk, N., & John, A. (2025). Teaching with chatbots: An S-O-R perspective on AI-mediated learning. Marketing Education Review. (Manuscript under review).

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Walker, L. C., & Warfa, A. R. M. (2017). Process-oriented guided inquiry learning (POGIL) marginally affects student achievement measures but substantially increases the odds of passing a course: A meta-analytic study. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 54(9), 1185–1210. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21398

Wang, Z., Lu, Y., & Wu, Y. (2024). Designing AI feedback for deeper learning: Evidence from generative chatbots in education. Computers & Education: Artificial Intelligence, 5, 100148. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2023.100148

Published

2026-03-17

Data Availability Statement

Data is available upon request.

Issue

Section

Articles

Categories

How to Cite

Learning With Generative AI Through Custom Chatbots. (2026). Journal on Excellence in College Teaching. https://celt.miamioh.edu/index.php/JECT/article/view/1326