Using ChatGPT for Science Learning: A Study on Pre-service Teachers' Lesson Planning

IF 2.9 3区 教育学 Q2 COMPUTER SCIENCE, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies Pub Date : 2024-03-15 DOI:10.1109/TLT.2024.3401457
Gyeong-Geon Lee;Xiaoming Zhai
{"title":"Using ChatGPT for Science Learning: A Study on Pre-service Teachers' Lesson Planning","authors":"Gyeong-Geon Lee;Xiaoming Zhai","doi":"10.1109/TLT.2024.3401457","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"While ongoing efforts have continuously emphasized the integration of ChatGPT with science teaching and learning, there are limited empirical studies exploring its actual utility in the classroom. This study aims to fill this gap by analyzing the lesson plans developed by 29 pre-service elementary teachers and assessing how they integrated ChatGPT into science learning activities. We first examined how ChatGPT was integrated with the subject domains, teaching methods/strategies, and then evaluated the lesson plans using a generative artificial intelligence (AI)-technological pedagogical and content knowledge (TPACK)-based rubric. We further examined pre-service teachers' perceptions and concerns about integrating ChatGPT into science learning. Results show a diverse number of ChatGPT applications in different science domains—e.g., Biology (9/29), Chemistry (7/29), and Earth Science (7/29). A total of 14 types of teaching methods/strategies were identified in the lesson plans. On average, the pre-service teachers' lesson plans scored high on the modified TPACK-based rubric (M = 3.29; SD = 0.91; on a 1–4 scale), indicating a reasonable envisage of integrating ChatGPT into science learning, particularly in “instructional strategies and ChatGPT” (M = 3.48; SD = 0.99). However, they scored relatively lower on exploiting ChatGPT's functions toward its full potential (M = 3.00; SD = 0.93), compared to other aspects. We also identified several inappropriate use cases of ChatGPT in lesson planning (e.g., as a source of hallucinated Internet material and technically unsupported visual guidance). Pre-service teachers anticipated ChatGPT to afford high-quality questioning, self-directed learning, individualized learning support, and formative assessment. Meanwhile, they also expressed concerns about its accuracy and the risks that students may be overly dependent on ChatGPT. They further suggested solutions to systemizing classroom dynamics between teachers and students. The study underscores the need for more research on the roles of generative AI in actual classroom settings and provides insights for future AI-integrated science learning.","PeriodicalId":49191,"journal":{"name":"IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies","volume":"17 ","pages":"1683-1700"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/10531039/","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

While ongoing efforts have continuously emphasized the integration of ChatGPT with science teaching and learning, there are limited empirical studies exploring its actual utility in the classroom. This study aims to fill this gap by analyzing the lesson plans developed by 29 pre-service elementary teachers and assessing how they integrated ChatGPT into science learning activities. We first examined how ChatGPT was integrated with the subject domains, teaching methods/strategies, and then evaluated the lesson plans using a generative artificial intelligence (AI)-technological pedagogical and content knowledge (TPACK)-based rubric. We further examined pre-service teachers' perceptions and concerns about integrating ChatGPT into science learning. Results show a diverse number of ChatGPT applications in different science domains—e.g., Biology (9/29), Chemistry (7/29), and Earth Science (7/29). A total of 14 types of teaching methods/strategies were identified in the lesson plans. On average, the pre-service teachers' lesson plans scored high on the modified TPACK-based rubric (M = 3.29; SD = 0.91; on a 1–4 scale), indicating a reasonable envisage of integrating ChatGPT into science learning, particularly in “instructional strategies and ChatGPT” (M = 3.48; SD = 0.99). However, they scored relatively lower on exploiting ChatGPT's functions toward its full potential (M = 3.00; SD = 0.93), compared to other aspects. We also identified several inappropriate use cases of ChatGPT in lesson planning (e.g., as a source of hallucinated Internet material and technically unsupported visual guidance). Pre-service teachers anticipated ChatGPT to afford high-quality questioning, self-directed learning, individualized learning support, and formative assessment. Meanwhile, they also expressed concerns about its accuracy and the risks that students may be overly dependent on ChatGPT. They further suggested solutions to systemizing classroom dynamics between teachers and students. The study underscores the need for more research on the roles of generative AI in actual classroom settings and provides insights for future AI-integrated science learning.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
使用 ChatGPT 学习科学:关于职前教师备课的研究
尽管人们一直在努力强调将 ChatGPT 与科学教学相结合,但探索其在课堂中实际效用的实证研究却十分有限。本研究旨在通过分析 29 位职前小学教师编写的教案,评估他们如何将 ChatGPT 整合到科学学习活动中,从而填补这一空白。我们首先考察了 ChatGPT 如何与学科领域、教学方法/策略相结合,然后使用基于生成人工智能(AI)-技术教学和内容知识(TPACK)的评分标准对教案进行了评估。我们进一步研究了职前教师对将 ChatGPT 整合到科学学习中的看法和担忧。结果显示,ChatGPT 在不同科学领域的应用数量各不相同,如生物(9/29)、化学(7/29)和地球科学(7/29)。教案中共确定了 14 种教学方法/策略。平均而言,职前教师的教案在基于 TPACK 的修改评分标准中得分较高(M = 3.29;SD = 0.91;1-4 分),表明他们对将 ChatGPT 整合到科学学习中有合理的设想,尤其是在 "教学策略和 ChatGPT "方面(M = 3.48;SD = 0.99)。然而,与其他方面相比,他们在充分发挥 ChatGPT 功能方面的得分相对较低(M = 3.00;SD = 0.93)。我们还发现了 ChatGPT 在备课中的一些不恰当使用情况(例如,作为幻觉网络材料的来源和无技术支持的视觉引导)。职前教师期待 ChatGPT 能够提供高质量的提问、自主学习、个性化学习支持和形成性评估。同时,他们也对 ChatGPT 的准确性以及学生可能过度依赖 ChatGPT 的风险表示担忧。他们进一步提出了将教师和学生之间的课堂动态系统化的解决方案。这项研究强调了对生成式人工智能在实际课堂环境中的作用进行更多研究的必要性,并为未来的人工智能整合科学学习提供了启示。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies
IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies COMPUTER SCIENCE, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS-
CiteScore
7.50
自引率
5.40%
发文量
82
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies covers all advances in learning technologies and their applications, including but not limited to the following topics: innovative online learning systems; intelligent tutors; educational games; simulation systems for education and training; collaborative learning tools; learning with mobile devices; wearable devices and interfaces for learning; personalized and adaptive learning systems; tools for formative and summative assessment; tools for learning analytics and educational data mining; ontologies for learning systems; standards and web services that support learning; authoring tools for learning materials; computer support for peer tutoring; learning via computer-mediated inquiry, field, and lab work; social learning techniques; social networks and infrastructures for learning and knowledge sharing; and creation and management of learning objects.
期刊最新文献
Exploring EFL Learners’ Integration and Perceptions of ChatGPT's Text Revisions: A Three-Stage Writing Task Study Adaptive Question–Answer Generation With Difficulty Control Using Item Response Theory and Pretrained Transformer Models Empowering Instructors: Augmented Reality Authoring Toolkit for Aviation Weather Education The Impact of Artificial General Intelligence-Assisted Project-Based Learning on Students’ Higher Order Thinking and Self-Efficacy Embedding Test Questions in Educational Mobile Virtual Reality: A Study on Hospital Hygiene Procedures
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1