The Effect of Generative AI Integration in a Peer-Learning Environment on Enhancing Law Students’ Legal Research Skills and Active Knowledge Construction

Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) has been emerging as a more visible aspect of higher education as a conversational learning support system, which can generate responsive explanations and draft text. The application of Generative AI in legal education, however, is controversial since the ability of legal research requires the discipline of evaluating the sources, the integrity of the citation and evidence-based writing. A research paper will address the impact of ChatGPT on a systematic peer-learning context to develop the legal research skills and active knowledge building of law students. Using constructivist and social constructivist perspectives of learning, the research proposed a mixed-method approach that examined the study by collecting questionnaire data and semi-structured interviews in order to gain perceptions and learning experiences of students. The results suggest the perceived efficiency, effectiveness of peer discussion, predictable legal argument structuring and verification actions consistent with responsible legal research practice. Simultaneously, learners emphasised the threats of misguided outputs and excessive dependence and argued that AI literacy and clear guidelines of usage are required. In general, the research indicates that Generative AI can serve as a useful scaffold if it is integrated into the peer-learning frameworks that need to be critically reviewed and sources checked.

Generative AI; ChatGPT; peer learning; legal education

1. Annet, K. A. (2025). Legal education and the digital divide: Communication challenges. Eurasian Experiment Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences (EEJHSS), 7(2), 116–121 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Arowosegbe, A., Alqahtani, J. S., & Oyelade, T. (2024). Students’ perception of generative AI use for academic purpose in UK higher education. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202405.1158.v1 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Bozkurt, A. (2023). Unleashing the potential of generative AI, conversational agents and chatbots in educational praxis: A systematic review and bibliometric analysis of GenAI in education. Open Praxis, 15(4), 261–270. https://doi.org/10.55982/openpraxis.15.4.609 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Bruffee, K. A. (1999). Collaborative learning: Higher education, interdependence and the authority of knowledge (2nd ed.). Johns Hopkins University Press [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2017). Research methods in education (8th ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315456539 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). SAGE Publications [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Granle, K. (2022). Beyond the Socratic method: Exploring alternative theories in legal education. Scholars International Journal of Law, Crime and Justice, 5(1), 22–29. https://doi.org/10.36348/sijlcj.2022.v05i01.004 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Hess, G. F. (2002). Heads and hearts: The teaching and learning environment in law school. Journal of Legal Education, 52(1–2), 75–111. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ657587 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Jayavardhini, P. (2024). AI study partner: Development of an LLM and Gen AI-enhanced study assistant tool. International Journal of Scientific Research in Engineering and Management, 8(3), 1–5. https://doi.org/10.55041/ijsrem29626 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Jiang, S., McClure, J., Tatar, C., Bickel, F., Rosé, C. P., & Chao, J. (2024). Towards inclusivity in AI: A comparative study of cognitive engagement between marginalised female students and peers. British Journal of Educational Technology, 55(6), 2557–2573. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13467 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2009). An educational psychology success story: Social interdependence theory and cooperative learning. Educational Researcher, 38(5), 365–379. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X09339057 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Keerthirathne, W. K. (2020). Peer learning: An overview. International Journal of Scientific Engineering and Science, 4(11), 1–6. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Kovari, A. (2025). A systematic review of AI-powered collaborative learning in higher education: Trends and outcomes from the last decade. Social Sciences & Humanities Open, 11, 101335. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2025.101335 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Kronivets, T., Yakovenko, O., Tymoshenko, Y., & Ilnytskyi, M. (2024). Dimensions of legal and moral use of artificial intelligence in education. Rev. Artif. Intell. Educ, 5, e025. https://doi.org/10.37497/rev.artif.intell.educ.v5i00.25 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Migliorini, S., & Moreira, J. I. (2024). The case for nurturing AI literacy in law schools. Asian Journal of Legal Education, 12(1), 7–24. https://doi.org/10.1177/23220058241265613 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Murray, M. D. (2024). Artificial intelligence for learning the law: Generative AI for academic support in law schools and universities. ResearchGate. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/383786349 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Nurhuda, A., Khoiron, M., Azami, Y., & Ni’mah, S. (2023). Constructivism learning theory in education: Characteristics, steps and learning models. Research in Education and Rehabilitation, 6(2), 234–242. https://doi.org/10.51558/2744-1555.2023.6.2.234 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Oliveira, H., Sanches, T., & Martins, J. (2022). Problem-based learning in a flipped classroom: A case study for active learning in legal education in international law. The Law Teacher, 56(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/03069400.2022.2040934 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Popenici, Ş., Catalano, H., Mestic, G., & Ani-Rus, A. (2023). A systematic review of the implications of artificial intelligence in shaping the future of higher education. Educatia 21, (26), 92–107. https://doi.org/10.24193/ed21.2023.26.11 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Samuel, G. (2023). Is legal knowledge regressing (thanks to AI)? Amicus Curiae, 4(3), 719–750. https://doi.org/10.14296/ac.v4i3.5628 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Schneider, T. (2020). A social constructivist grounded theory of school principal legal learning. Journal of Research on Leadership Education, 16(3), 226–242. https://doi.org/10.1177/1942775120902191 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Susskind, R. (2021). Tomorrow’s lawyers: An introduction to your future (3rd ed.). Oxford University Press [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Topping, K. J. (2005). Trends in peer learning. Educational Psychology, 25(6), 631–645. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410500345172 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Wei, L. (2023). Artificial intelligence in language instruction impacts English learning achievement, L2 motivation and self-regulated learning. Frontiers in Psychology, 14. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1261955 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Wiersma, W., & Jurs, S. G. (2009). Research methods in education: An introduction (9th ed.). Pearson Education. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Assessment of the Role of Artificial Intelligence in Repositioning TVET for Economic Development in Nigeria
• Teachers’ Use of Assure Model Instructional Design on Learners’ Problem Solving Efficacy in Secondary Schools in Bungoma County, Kenya
• “E-Booksan Ang Kaalaman”: Development, Validation, and Utilization of Electronic Book in Academic Performance of Grade 9 Students in Social Studies
• Analyzing EFL University Students’ Academic Speaking Skills Through Self-Recorded Video Presentation
• Major Findings of The Study on Total Quality Management in Teachers’ Education Institutions (TEIs) In Assam – An Evaluative Study