Using Generative Artifical Intelligence in Probability: Potentials and Issues

Međunarodna naučna konferencija Vaspitanje i obrazovanje između teorije i prakse, 24. 10. 2025. (knjiga 1, 297-322. str.) 

 

AUTOR(I) / AUTHOR(S): ): Daniel Doz , Darjo Felda , Tina Cotič

 

  

Download Full Pdf   

DOI:  10.46793/zbVO25UEI.297D

SAŽETAK / ABSTRACT:

The integration of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) in probability education presents both opportunities and challenges. This paper examines the potential of GenAI as a teaching aid and problem-solving tool in probability theory, focusing on its ability to generate explanations, visualize probabilistic concepts, and provide step-by-step solutions. We analyze the accuracy and reliability of AI-generated responses in solving probability problems, comparing them with traditional approaches. While GenAI offers advantages such as personalized feedback and dynamic problem generation, concerns remain regarding the correctness of solutions, misinterpretation of probabilistic reasoning, and the necessity for human oversight. The paper concludes with recommendations for effectively incorporating AI into probability instruction while mitigating its limitations.

KLJUČNE REČI / KEYWORDS:

artificial intelligence, mathematics, probability

PROJEKAT / ACKNOWLEDGEMENT:

LITERATURA / REFERENCES:

  • Ainsworth, S. (2006). DeFT: A conceptual framework for considering learning with multiple representations. Learning and instruction, 16(3), 183–198.
  • Awang, L. A., Yusop, F. D. & Danaee, M. (2025). Current practices and future direction of artificial intelligence in mathematics education: A systematic review. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 20(2), em0823, 1–14.
  • Bahroun, Z., Anane, C., Ahmed, V. & Zacca, A. (2023). Transforming education: A comprehensive review of generative artificial intelligence in educational settings through bibliometric and content analysis. Sustainability, 15(17), 12983.
  • Batanero, C. & Álvarez-Arroyo, R. (2024). Teaching and learning of probability. ZDM–Mathematics Education, 56(1), 5–17.
  • Batanero, C. & Sanchez, E. (2005). What is the Nature of High School Students’ Conceptions and Misconceptions About Probability?. In Exploring probability in school: Challenges for teaching and learning (pp. 241–266). Boston, MA: Springer US.
  • Batanero, C., Contreras, J. M. & Díaz, C. (2012). Sesgos en el razonamiento sobre probabilidad condicional e implicaciones para la enseñanza. Revista Digital: Matemática, Educación e Internet, 12(2), 1–13.
  • Batanero, C., Chernoff, E. J., Engel, J., Lee, H. S. & Sánchez, E. (2016). Research on teaching and learning probability (p. 33). Springer Nature.
  • Bender, E. M., Gebru, T., McMillan-Major, A. & Shmitchell, S. (2021). On the dangers of stochastic parrots: Can language models be too big?. In Proceedings of the 2021 ACM conference on fairness, accountability, and transparency (pp. 610–623). Virtual event, Canada.
  • Bozkurt, A. (2023). Generative artificial intelligence (AI) powered conversational educational agents: The inevitable paradigm shift. Asian Journal of Distance Education, 18(1).
  • Bruner, J. S. (1961). The act of discovery. Harvard educational review, 31, 21–32.
  • Chang, C. Y., Lin, H. C., Yin, C. & Yang, K. H. (2025). Generative AI-assisted reflective writing for improving students’ higher order thinking. Educational Technology & Society, 28(1), 270–285.
  • Cobb, P. & McClain, K. (2002). Supporting students’ learning of significant mathematical ideas. In Wells, G. & Claxton, G. (eds.), Learning for life in the 21st century: Sociocultural perspectives on the future of education (pp. 154–166). Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
  • Cobb, P. & Yackel, E. (1996). Constructivist, emergent, and sociocultural perspectives in the context of developmental research. Educational psychologist, 31(3–4), 175–190.
  • Egara, F. O. & Mosimege, M. (2024). Exploring the integration of artificial intelligence-based ChatGPT into mathematics instruction: Perceptions, challenges, and implications for educators. Education Sciences, 14(7), 742.
  • Felda, D. & Bon Klanjšček, M. (2017). Teaching Statistics in the Background of Teaching Mathematics. The New Educational Review, 48, 65–75.
  • Fischbein, E. & Schnarch, D. (1997). Brief report: The evolution with age of probabilistic, intuitively based misconceptions. Journal for research in mathematics education, 28(1), 96–105.
  • Garfield, J. & Ben-Zvi, D. (2008). Developing students’ statistical reasoning: Connecting research and teaching practice. Dordrecht: Springer Science & Business Media.
  • Gould, R. (2017). Data literacy is statistical literacy. Statistics Education Research Journal, 16(1), 22–25.
  • Guettala, M., Bourekkache, S., Kazar, O. & Harous, S. (2024). Generative artificial intelligence in education: Advancing adaptive and personalized learning. Acta Informatica Pragensia, 13(3), 460–489.
  • Holmes, W., Bialik, M. & Fadel, C. (2019). Artificial intelligence in education promises and implications for teaching and learning. Boston, MA: Center for Curriculum Redesign.
  • Huang, Q., Lv, C., Lu, L. & Tu, S. (2025). Evaluating the quality of AI-generated digital educational resources for university teaching and learning. Systems, 13(3), 174.
  • Huerta, M. P. (2009). On conditional probability problem solving research–structures and contexts. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 4(3), 163–194.
  • Huerta, P. M. (2018). Preparing teachers for teaching probability through problem solving. In C. Batanero & E. Chernoff (eds.): Teaching and learning stochastics: Advances in probability education research (pp. 293–311). Cham: Springer.
  • Ingram, J. (2024). Randomness and probability: exploring student teachers’ conceptions. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 26(1), 1–19.
  • Jones, G. A., Langrall, C. W., Thornton, C. A. & Mogill, A. T. (1997). A framework for assessing and nurturing young children‘s thinking in probability. Educational studies in Mathematics, 32(2), 101–125.
  • Kasneci, E., Seßler, K., Küchemann, S., Bannert, M., Dementieva, D., Fischer, F. & Kasneci, G. (2023). ChatGPT for good? On opportunities and challenges of large language models for education. Learning and individual differences, 103, 102274.
  • Kazak, S. & Pratt, D. (2021). Developing the role of modelling in the teaching and learning of probability. Research in Mathematics Education, 23(2), 113–133.
  • Kilpatrick, J., Swafford, J. & Findell, B. (eds.) (2001). Adding it up: Helping children learn mathematics. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. Konold, C., Finzer, W. & Kreetong, K. (2017). Modeling as a core component of structuring data. Statistics Education Research Journal, 16(2), 191–212.
  • Leoste, J., Fenyvesi, K. & di Rosario, G. (2025). Socratic Dialogue with Generative Artificial Intelligence: Where is the Future?. In Future of Information and Communication Conference (pp. 333–344). Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland.
  • Lester, F. K. & Kroll, D. L. (1990). Teaching students to be reflective: A study of two grade seven classes. In G. Booker, P. Cobb & T. N. de Mendicuti (eds.), Proceedings fourteenth PME Conference for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, with the North American Chapter twelfth PME-NA Conference, Vol. 1 (pp. 151–158). Mexico: International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education.
  • Luckin, R., George, K. & Cukurova, M. (2022). AI for school teachers. Boca Raton: CRC Press.
  • Mao, J., Chen, B. & Liu, J. C. (2024). Generative artificial intelligence in education and its implications for assessment. TechTrends, 68(1), 58–66.
  • Noll, J. & Hancock, S. (2015). Proper and paradigmatic metonymy as a lens for characterizing student conceptions of distributions and sampling. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 88, 361–383.
  • Schoenfeld, A. H. (1985). Making sense of “out loud” problem-solving protocols. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 4(2), 171–191.
  • Sfard, A. (2008). Thinking as communicating: Human development, the growth of discourses, and mathematizing. Cambridge: Cambridge university press.
  • Sharma, S. (2017). Definitions and models of statistical literacy: a literature review. Open Review of Educational Research, 4(1), 118–133.
  • Shaughnessy, J. M. (1992). Research in Probability and Statistics: Reflections and Directions. In D. A. Grouws (eds.): Handbook of Research on Mathematics Teaching and Learning (pp. 465–494). New York, NY: National Council of Teachers of mathematics.
  • Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive science, 12(2), 257–285.
  • Tariq, M. U. (2025). Advancing Inquiry-Based Learning Through Generative AIEnabled Assessments. In Educational Assessments in the Age of Generative AI (pp. 179–206). IGI Global Scientific Publishing.
  • Tversky, A. & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases: Biases in judgments reveal some heuristics of thinking under uncertainty science, 185(4157), 1124–1131.Xu, X. (2025). Game-Based Adaptive Learning in Probability Education. International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 15(1), 1–7.
  • Zieffler, A., Garfield, J., DelMas, R. & Reading, C. (2008). A Framework to Support Research on Informal Inferential Reasoning. Statistics Education Research Journal, 7(2), 40–58.
  • Zhai, X. (2024). Transforming teachers’ roles and agencies in the era of generative AI: Perceptions, acceptance, knowledge, and practices. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 1–11.