ChatGPT and the frustrated Socrates

Gregorcic, Bor; Pendrill, Ann-Marie

doi:10.1088/1361-6552/acc299

Cited by 49 publications

(43 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The analysis, however, points to a contradiction in the literature. Contrary to some promising attempts (e.g., Ganguli et al, 2023) that argue language models can engage in self-correction, other recent studies (e.g., Gregorcic & Pendrill, 2023) do not confirm such attempts. Gregorcic and Pendrill (2023) engaged in a Socratic dialogue with ChatGPT to fix the errors and contradictions in ChatGPT's responses to their question.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 57%

“…They will likely provide an acceptable explanation and relevant information in response to a prompt (Farrokhnia et al, 2023;Huh, 2023). For instance, ChatGPT produced advanced responses linguistically for physics questions but were unreliable and contradictory (Gregorcic & Pendrill, 2023). It assumed a single truth without evidence (Cooper, 2023).…”

Section: R Esultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…While the public is excited about using generative artificial intelligence (AI) in educational settings, various voices call for a cautious approach to adopting language models (Khan et al, 2023;Tlili et al, 2023). These voices highlight concerns around output quality, usefulness, privacy and ethical issues; they also refer to cheating, honesty, misleading and manipulation (Gregorcic & Pendrill, 2023;Roy & Rambo-Hernandez, 2021;Tlili et al, 2023).…”

Section: Implications For Practicementioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Exploring the impact of language models, such as ChatGPT, on student learning and assessment

Zirar

2023

Review of Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent developments in language models, such as ChatGPT, have sparked debate. These tools can help, for example, dyslexic people, to write formal emails from a prompt and can be used by students to generate assessed work. Proponents argue that language models enhance the student experience and academic achievement. Those concerned argue that language models impede student learning and call for a cautious approach to their adoption. This paper aims to provide insights into the role of language models in reshaping student learning and assessment in higher education. For that purpose, it probes the impact of language models, specifically ChatGPT, on student learning and assessment. It also explores the implications of language models in higher education settings, focusing on their effects on pedagogy and evaluation. Using the Scopus database, a search protocol was employed to identify 25 articles based on relevant keywords and selection criteria. The developed themes suggest that language models may alter how students learn and are assessed. While language models can provide information for problem‐solving and critical thinking, reliance on them without critical evaluation adversely impacts student learning. Language models can also generate teaching and assessment material and evaluate student responses, but their role should be limited to ‘play a specific and defined role’. Integration of language models in student learning and assessment is only helpful if students and educators play an active and effective role in checking the generated material's validity, reliability and accuracy. Propositions and potential research questions are included to encourage future research.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 57%

Section: R Esultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Implications For Practicementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Exploring the impact of language models, such as ChatGPT, on student learning and assessment

Zirar

2023

Review of Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…On the one hand, items created by ChatGPT may initiate classroom discussions about correct solutions. From time to time, ChatGPT will produce items (or answers to these items) that are not (entirely) correct from a scientific point of view (part b in Figure 3)-for example, Gregorcic and Pendrill (2023) have found "ChatGPT to be a reliable source of problematic and incorrect answers to conceptual physics questions" (p. 8). Such invalid questions produced by ChatGPT can be used in classroom to reflect on their scientific correctness.…”

Section: Development Of a Conceptual Survey Using Chatgpt For Use In ...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Floridi and Chiriatti (2020) conclude that "humanity will need to be even more intelligent and critical" (p. 692). In the same direction, Kasneci et al (2023) suggest integrating large language models into classroom practice "in a way that complements and enhances the learning experience" (p. 7), e.g., helping students' developing critical thinking skills (Gregorcic & Pendrill, 2023). In any case, the "physics education community is well-positioned to investigate the use and capabilities of ChatGPT and other AI systems" (Wang, 2023).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

ChatGPT in physics education: A pilot study on easy-to-implement activities

Bitzenbauer

2023

CONT ED TECHNOLOGY

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Large language models, such as ChatGPT, have great potential to enhance learning and support teachers, but they must be used with care to tackle limitations and biases. This paper presents two easy-to-implement examples of how ChatGPT can be used in physics classrooms to foster critical thinking skills at the secondary school level. A pilot study (n=53) examining the implementation of these examples found that the intervention had a positive impact on students’ perceptions of ChatGPT, with an increase in agreement with statements related to its benefits and incorporation into their daily lives.

show abstract

Can ChatGPT be an author? A study of artificial intelligence authorship policies in top academic journals

Lund,

Naheem

2023

Learned Publishing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Academic publishers have quickly responded to the impact of artificial intelligence (AI) tools on authorship and academic integrity. However, there remains a lack of understanding about AI authorship policies and the attitude of academic journals towards these tools. This study aims to address this gap by examining the AI authorship policies of 300 top academic journals during the period of late‐spring 2023. Over half of the journals examined have an AI authorship policy and guidelines for acknowledging AI usage in manuscript preparation. These acknowledgments are typically made in the methods or acknowledgement sections, although some journals have introduced a new, special section on AI usage. The study also found that AI authorship policies may differ depending on the publisher and discipline of the journal. Many publishers have adopted uniform AI authorship policies that are implemented across all journals that they publish. These results are useful for publishers, editors, and researchers who want to learn more about how academic journals are dealing with the emergence of large language models and other AI tools in scholarly communications.

show abstract

ChatGPT and the frustrated Socrates

Cited by 49 publications

References 9 publications

Exploring the impact of language models, such as ChatGPT, on student learning and assessment

Exploring the impact of language models, such as ChatGPT, on student learning and assessment

ChatGPT in physics education: A pilot study on easy-to-implement activities

Can ChatGPT be an author? A study of artificial intelligence authorship policies in top academic journals

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About