AI chatbots in programming education: guiding success or encouraging plagiarism
Salvato in:
| Pubblicato in: | Discover Artificial Intelligence vol. 4, no. 1 (Dec 2024), p. 87 |
|---|---|
| Autore principale: | |
| Altri autori: | |
| Pubblicazione: |
Springer Nature B.V.
|
| Soggetti: | |
| Accesso online: | Citation/Abstract Full Text Full Text - PDF |
| Tags: |
Nessun Tag, puoi essere il primo ad aggiungerne!!
|
MARC
| LEADER | 00000nab a2200000uu 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | 3131665308 | ||
| 003 | UK-CbPIL | ||
| 022 | |a 2731-0809 | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1007/s44163-024-00203-7 |2 doi | |
| 035 | |a 3131665308 | ||
| 045 | 2 | |b d20241201 |b d20241231 | |
| 100 | 1 | |a Akçapınar, Gökhan |u Hacettepe University, Department of Computer Education and Instructional Technology, Ankara, Türkiye (GRID:grid.14442.37) (ISNI:0000 0001 2342 7339) | |
| 245 | 1 | |a AI chatbots in programming education: guiding success or encouraging plagiarism | |
| 260 | |b Springer Nature B.V. |c Dec 2024 | ||
| 513 | |a Journal Article | ||
| 520 | 3 | |a This study examines the impact of an AI programming assistant on students' exam scores and their tendency to accept incorrect AI-generated information. The customized AI programming assistant was developed by the authors using GPT based Large Language Model (LLM). A one group pretest–posttest quasi-experimental design was utilized to answer research questions. Students were asked to take identical programming exams twice: once without AI assistance and once with the option to use the AI assistant. Results showed that the students’ average exam scores significantly increased from 48.33 to 74.47 with a large effect size (d = 1.56) when they used the AI assistance. On the other hand, when student—AI interaction logs were analyzed for a specific question, it was found that AI generated incorrect answers to 36 students. Thirty-three of these students (92%) answered the question incorrectly. Even more interestingly, despite the AI-generated response containing an obvious error, 22 of them (61%) copied and pasted the AI's response directly into the answer field. Only 3 students (8%) ignored the incorrect response generated by the AI and answered the question correctly. A significant portion of students accepting incorrect information provided by AI underscores the need for careful integration of AI tools into learning environments. Moreover, our findings emphasize the importance of specially developed AI tools rather than free tools like ChatGPT in exploring the new type of interaction between students and AI. | |
| 653 | |a Object oriented programming | ||
| 653 | |a Teaching | ||
| 653 | |a Programming languages | ||
| 653 | |a Students | ||
| 653 | |a Plagiarism | ||
| 653 | |a Automation | ||
| 653 | |a Python | ||
| 653 | |a Large language models | ||
| 653 | |a Generative artificial intelligence | ||
| 653 | |a Learning | ||
| 653 | |a Education | ||
| 653 | |a Chatbots | ||
| 700 | 1 | |a Sidan, Elif |u Hacettepe University, Department of Computer Education and Instructional Technology, Ankara, Türkiye (GRID:grid.14442.37) (ISNI:0000 0001 2342 7339) | |
| 773 | 0 | |t Discover Artificial Intelligence |g vol. 4, no. 1 (Dec 2024), p. 87 | |
| 786 | 0 | |d ProQuest |t Research Library | |
| 856 | 4 | 1 | |3 Citation/Abstract |u https://www.proquest.com/docview/3131665308/abstract/embedded/ZKJTFFSVAI7CB62C?source=fedsrch |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |3 Full Text |u https://www.proquest.com/docview/3131665308/fulltext/embedded/ZKJTFFSVAI7CB62C?source=fedsrch |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |3 Full Text - PDF |u https://www.proquest.com/docview/3131665308/fulltextPDF/embedded/ZKJTFFSVAI7CB62C?source=fedsrch |