The proliferation of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) means we are witnessing transformative change in education. While GenAI offers exciting possibilities for personalised learning and innovative teaching methodologies, its potential for reinforcing biases and perpetuating stereotypes poses ethical and pedagogical concerns. This article aims to critically examine the images produced by the integration of DALL-E 3 and ChatGPT, focusing on representations of science classrooms and educators. Applying a capital lens, we analyse how these images portray forms of culture (embodied, objectified and institutionalised) and explore if these depictions align with, or contest, stereotypical representations of science education. The science classroom imagery showcased a variety of settings, from what the GenAI described as vintage to contemporary. Our findings reveal the presence of stereotypical elements associated with science educators, including white-lab coats, goggles and beakers. While the images often align with stereotypical views, they also introduce elements of diversity. This article highlights the importance for ongoing vigilance about issues of equity, representation, bias and transparency in GenAI artefacts. This study contributes to broader discourses about the impact of GenAI in reinforcing or dismantling stereotypes associated with science education.

This study investigates the potential of customized generative AI (GenAI) chatbots to foster dialogic learning and argumentation in science education. Framed by Bakhtin’s theory of heteroglossia emphasizing the interplay of multiple voices in discourse, a customized chatbot called Dialogic Science Teacher (DST) was deliberately designed to embody dialogic learning principles. This instructional approach positions GenAI as a dialogic partner rather than an authoritative knowledge provider. Using a case study approach, 21 students from two high schools interacted with DST to explore socioscientific issues as they learned physics, chemistry, and biology. Analysis of students’ chatlogs revealed four prominent dialogic characteristics: perspective-taking, reasoning, arguing, and creative thinking. Qualitative findings illustrated how dialogic interactions with DST were characterized by students in critically reflecting, reasoning, arguing, and developing innovative ideas and alternative perspectives in response to challenging scientific problems. Quantitative findings further demonstrated high percentages of these dialogic characteristics in both schools, thus indicating DST’s reach in facilitating dialogic interaction among the students. These findings underscore the significance of embedding dialogic learning principles into GenAI tools, highlighting their potential to encourage critical thinking, argumentation, and co-construction of knowledge in science classroom discourse. The study offers both theoretical and practical insights to ongoing discussions on GenAI’s role as a collaborative learning partner in science education.

The introduction of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) tools like ChatGPT has raised many challenging questions about the nature of teaching, learning, and assessment in every subject area, including science. Unlike other disciplines, natural science is unique because the ontological and epistemological understanding of nature is fundamentally rooted in our interaction with material objects in the physical world. GenAI, powered by statistical probability arising from a massive corpus of text, is devoid of any connection to the physical world. The use of GenAI thus raises concerns about our connection to reality and its effect on science education. This paper emphasizes the importance of materiality (or material reality) in shaping scientific knowledge and argues for its recognition in the era of GenAI. Drawing on the perspectives of new materialism and science studies, the paper highlights how materiality forms an indispensable aspect of human knowledge and meaning-making, particularly in the discipline of science. It further explains how materiality is central to the epistemic authority of science and cautions the outputs generated by GenAI that lack contextualization to a material reality. The paper concludes by providing recommendations for research and teaching that recognize the role of materiality in the context of GenAI, specifically in practical work, scientific argumentation, and learning with GenAI. As we navigate a future dominated by GenAI, understanding how the epistemic authority of science arises from our connection to the physical world will become a crucial consideration in science education.

Research in languages and literacies in science education (LLSE) has developed substantial theoretical and pedagogical insights into how students learn science through language, discourse, and multimodal representations. At the same time, language is central to the functioning of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI). On this common basis concerning the role of language, this paper explores how foundational ideas from LLSE studies can inform the use of GenAI in science education. A bibliometric analysis of 412 journal articles from Web of Science provided the initial step to identify major themes and relationships in the LLSE literature. The analysis revealed four clusters of research in LLSE: reading and writing scientific text, science discourse and interaction, multilingual science classroom, and multimodality and representations. Each cluster was further analyzed through close reading of selected articles to identify and connect key constructs to the potential use of GenAI. These constructs include the interactive‐constructive reading model, text genre, reading‐writing integration, dialogic interaction, critical questioning, argumentation, translanguaging, hybridity, thematic pattern, modal affordance, and transduction. From these ideas and connections, the paper recommends several pedagogical principles for science educators to guide the use of GenAI. It concludes that LLSE research offers valuable insights for researchers and teachers to investigate and design the use of GenAI in science education. In turn, the impending use of GenAI also calls for a rethinking of literacy that will shape future research in LLSE.