APPLYING GENERATIVE ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IN THE STUDY AND RESEARCH OF LAW BY STUDENTS: OPPORTUNITIES AND CHALLENGES
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.63456/jpslg-2-3-118Keywords:
Generative AI , Legal Education, Law Students , Legal Research , Opportunities , ChallengesAbstract
Background: Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) is increasingly influencing legal education and changing how law students access information, conduct research, and develop legal reasoning. However, its use also raises concerns regarding reliability, academic responsibility, critical thinking, and independent legal reasoning.
Objective: This study aims to examine the applications, opportunities, and challenges of generative AI in the study and research of law students and to identify approaches for its responsible integration into legal education.
Methodology: The study employs a narrative literature review of relevant academic studies, professional reports, and policy documents, with a focus on evidence published from 2023 to 2026. The analysis is guided by Connectivism, Constructivist learning perspectives, the TPACK framework, and AI literacy.
Results: The findings indicate that generative AI can support legal information retrieval, research topic development, document summarization, legal analysis, and interactive learning. Nevertheless, risks related to inaccurate or hallucinated information, over-reliance on AI, academic integrity, and the development of independent legal reasoning remain significant. The study therefore proposes responsible and strategic AI integration in which students, educators, educational institutions, and technology providers share appropriate responsibilities.
References
[1] AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION. ABA AI Task Force Year 2 Report: Integrating Artificial Intelligence into Legal Education. American Bar Association, 2025.
[2] CLIO. 2025 Legal Trends Report. Clio, 2025.
[3] DOLIDZE, T. The Evolving Role of Artificial Intelligence in Legal Education and Research. Law and World, 11(33), 92–105, 2025. DOI: 10.36475/11.1.7.
[4] MAGESH, V., SURANI, F., DAHL, M., SUZGUN, M., MANNING, C. D., & HO, D. E. Hallucination-Free? Assessing the Reliability of Leading AI Legal Research Tools. Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, 22(2), 216–242, 2025. DOI: 10.1111/jels.12413.
[5] MISHRA, P., & KOEHLER, M. J. Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge: A Framework for Teacher Knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017–1054, 2006. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9620.2006.00684.x.
[6] OPENAI. GPT-4o System Card. OpenAI, 2024.
[7] SIEMENS, G. Connectivism: A Learning Theory for the Digital Age. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 2(1), 3–10, 2005.
[8] MIAO, F., HOLMES, W., HUANG, R., & ZHANG, H. AI and Education: Guidance for Policy-Makers. UNESCO, 2021. DOI: 10.54675/PCSP7350.
[9] FREEMAN, J. Student Generative AI Survey 2025. HEPI Policy Note 61. Higher Education Policy Institute, 2025.
[10] Mata v. Avianca, Inc., No. 1:22-cv-01461 (S.D.N.Y. June 22, 2023).
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Dinh Hoang Nga (Author)

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Licensing: Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0)