Exploring Student and AI Generated Texts: Reflections on Reflection Texts

IF 2.4 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Electronic Journal of e-Learning Pub Date : 2024-08-08 DOI:10.34190/ejel.22.6.3473
Marcia Håkansson Lindqvist, Catarina Arvidsson
{"title":"Exploring Student and AI Generated Texts: Reflections on Reflection Texts","authors":"Marcia Håkansson Lindqvist, Catarina Arvidsson","doi":"10.34190/ejel.22.6.3473","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"As pointed out by many scholars, Artificial Intelligence (AI) provides both opportunities and challenges in regard to assignments and examination in higher education. The accessibility and use of AI in regard to student assignments, examinations and assessments places demands on teachers’ work in course design and formats of assignments and examination. For teachers, this work is a constant and continuous process, in line with the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL) according to Boyer (1991). In order to meet these new demands, teachers need to reflect upon design, as reflective practitioners (Schön, 1987). Reflective design may alleviate the challenges with AI as well as make use of the opportunities with the use of AI. In this paper there are two sets of data. This study aspires to contribute to the current state of AI (ChatGPT) as it is applied in higher education through an empirical study of authentic reflection texts by students in comparison to AI (ChatGPT) generated texts. The first set of data is authentic reflection texts (N=20) written by students. The second set of data is texts generated by AI (ChatGPT). The texts are analysed using reflective thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2019). The themes in the two sets of texts are described, analysed and compared. The two sets of data are then explored, analysed and compared to highlight similarities and differences between the authentic texts and the texts generated by AI. These insights may provide support for teachers in regard to the design of assignments and examinations as well as the practical use of AI (ChatGPT) in higher education.","PeriodicalId":46105,"journal":{"name":"Electronic Journal of e-Learning","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Electronic Journal of e-Learning","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.34190/ejel.22.6.3473","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

As pointed out by many scholars, Artificial Intelligence (AI) provides both opportunities and challenges in regard to assignments and examination in higher education. The accessibility and use of AI in regard to student assignments, examinations and assessments places demands on teachers’ work in course design and formats of assignments and examination. For teachers, this work is a constant and continuous process, in line with the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL) according to Boyer (1991). In order to meet these new demands, teachers need to reflect upon design, as reflective practitioners (Schön, 1987). Reflective design may alleviate the challenges with AI as well as make use of the opportunities with the use of AI. In this paper there are two sets of data. This study aspires to contribute to the current state of AI (ChatGPT) as it is applied in higher education through an empirical study of authentic reflection texts by students in comparison to AI (ChatGPT) generated texts. The first set of data is authentic reflection texts (N=20) written by students. The second set of data is texts generated by AI (ChatGPT). The texts are analysed using reflective thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2019). The themes in the two sets of texts are described, analysed and compared. The two sets of data are then explored, analysed and compared to highlight similarities and differences between the authentic texts and the texts generated by AI. These insights may provide support for teachers in regard to the design of assignments and examinations as well as the practical use of AI (ChatGPT) in higher education.
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
探索学生和人工智能生成的文本:对反思文本的思考
正如许多学者所指出的,人工智能(AI)为高等教育的作业和考试提供了机遇,也带来了挑战。人工智能在学生作业、考试和评估方面的普及和使用,对教师在课程设计和作业与考试形式方面的工作提出了要求。对教师而言,这项工作是一个持续不断的过程,与博耶(1991)提出的 "教学学术"(SoTL)相一致。为了满足这些新的要求,教师作为反思性的实践者,需要对设计进行反思(Schön, 1987)。反思性设计可以减轻人工智能带来的挑战,也可以利用人工智能带来的机遇。本文有两组数据。本研究希望通过对学生真实反思文本与人工智能(ChatGPT)生成文本的实证研究,为人工智能(ChatGPT)在高等教育中的应用现状做出贡献。第一组数据是学生撰写的真实反思文本(N=20)。第二组数据是由人工智能(ChatGPT)生成的文本。这些文本采用反思主题分析法(Braun & Clarke, 2019)进行分析。对两组文本中的主题进行描述、分析和比较。然后对两组数据进行探索、分析和比较,以突出真实文本和人工智能生成文本之间的异同。这些见解可为教师设计作业和考试以及在高等教育中实际使用人工智能(ChatGPT)提供支持。
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
Electronic Journal of e-Learning
Electronic Journal of e-Learning EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
5.90
自引率
18.20%
发文量
34
审稿时长
20 weeks
期刊最新文献
Exploring Student and AI Generated Texts: Reflections on Reflection Texts Technostress Impact on Educator Productivity: Gender Differences in Jordan's Higher Education Quo Vadis, University? A Roadmap for AI and Ethics in Higher Education Examining Student Characteristics, Self-Regulated Learning Strategies, and Their Perceived Effects on Satisfaction and Academic Performance in MOOCs Operationalizing a Weighted Performance Scoring Model for Sustainable e-Learning in Medical Education: Insights from Expert Judgement
×
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