To what extent can generative AI supplement education? How is it impacting the way we learn? How does this differ among varying educational institutions and systems? These have been predominant questions with the emergence of this technology, which has utterly transformed the learning, but also teaching process. Many are quick to welcome it and use it as a tool at one’s disposal to enrich the learning experience, however, doubts persist in the scope of plagiarism, and faulty research and information, among other concerns. To expand, I will reflect on my experience within the process of writing my bachelor thesis: “Interaction of Chatbot Anthropomorphism, Competence, and UI Design; The Effect on End-User Technology Acceptance” in the scope of banking chatbots.
Chat GPT was my ‘go-to’ as a supplementary tool to guide my research to provide me with an overall picture of technical concepts, and aid in any confusion I harbored throughout my data analysis process. Moreover, to design my experimental study, I developed mock-up simulations of four banking chatbot scenarios for a quantitative survey. I used a combination of previous literature, and chat GPT generated items as guidance to develop survey constructs to measure what I was testing. I had inputted previous literature constructs, how I defined key terms such as anthropomorphism, user interface design, and perceived competence, and asked for survey questions and statements as output. My use of chat GPT had the purpose of brainstorming, and understanding certain analytical and theoretical concepts such as the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), and Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT). This usage had largely enriched my learning experience with the amount of information that was able to be accessed, and how I was able to independently guide my understanding through a wholly unfamiliar research domain. With this, it struck me that the theory I was researching on the Technology Acceptance Model, and its two facets of perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use, was applicable to the theory and modelled to denote its emergence and widespread acceptance of generative AI in education.
This blog clearly exemplifies the practice of integrating generative AI into educational research and demonstrates the value that AI tools present for study and comprehension within a broad theme. An illustrative example of such benefits is presented by the your experience using AI as part of your own thesis research.
Your post emphasizes on the advantages and less on the negative impact and ethical issues related to using Generative AI. Adding a short section about the ethical questions arising from the use of AI-derived content in scientific papers would certainly make the overall picture wider.
From my perspective, incorporating AI tools such as ChatGPT in my academic research did not only have a better understanding of complex concepts but also stimulated self-directed research and analytical thinking on new grounds. However, I try to maintain responsible usage and understand that increased reliance on artificial intelligence-based content in education may pose challenges. Due to the rapid development in AI technology, it becomes highly important to find such a balance which would stimulate the innovation yet does not violate principles of academic ethics on the one hand, and create an appropriate atmosphere for studying that would assist in achieving the desired goals.
Hi Hanshika, thank you for this insightful blog post. It was interesting to read about how researchers use ChatGPT. Personally, my use is very similar. I also use it to explain concepts to me. Another post mentioned using it for grammar checking similar to Grammarly. When using it “as a teacher” (see my blog posts), I like to give it very specific prompts. You may want to check that out if you’re interested. What were your prompts when you conducted research and do you have a pattern?