Comparing Student and Generative Artificial Intelligence Chatbot Responses to Organic Chemistry Writing-to-Learn Assignments

IF 2.5 3区 教育学 Q2 CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Journal of Chemical Education Pub Date : 2023-09-07 DOI:10.1021/acs.jchemed.3c00664
Field M. Watts*, Amber J. Dood, Ginger V. Shultz and Jon-Marc G. Rodriguez, 
{"title":"Comparing Student and Generative Artificial Intelligence Chatbot Responses to Organic Chemistry Writing-to-Learn Assignments","authors":"Field M. Watts*,&nbsp;Amber J. Dood,&nbsp;Ginger V. Shultz and Jon-Marc G. Rodriguez,&nbsp;","doi":"10.1021/acs.jchemed.3c00664","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p >Chemistry education research demonstrates the value of open-ended writing tasks, such as writing-to-learn (WTL) assignments, for supporting students’ learning with topics including reasoning about reaction mechanisms. The emergence of generative artificial intelligence (AI) technology, such as chatbots ChatGPT and Bard, raises concerns regarding the value of open-ended writing tasks in the classroom; one concern involves academic integrity and whether students will use these chatbots to produce sufficient responses to open-ended writing tasks. The present study investigates the degree to which generative AI chatbots exhibit mechanistic reasoning in response to organic chemistry WTL assignments. We produced responses from three generative AI chatbots (ChatGPT-3.5, ChatGPT-4, and Bard) to two WTL assignments developed to elicit students’ mechanistic reasoning. Using previously reported machine learning models for analyzing student writing in response to the WTL assignments, we analyzed the chatbot responses for the inclusion of features pertinent to mechanistic reasoning. Herein, we report quantitative analyses of (1) the differences between chatbot responses on the two assignments and (2) the differences between chatbot and authentic student responses. Findings indicate that chatbots respond differently to different WTL assignments. Additionally, the chatbots rarely incorporated the discussion of electron movement, a key feature of mechanistic reasoning. Furthermore, the chatbots, in general, do not engage in mechanistic reasoning at the same level as students. We contextualize the results by considering academic integrity with the assumption that students’ intentions are to engage in academically honest behavior, and we focus on understanding the ethical uses of generative AI for classroom assignments.</p>","PeriodicalId":43,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Chemical Education","volume":"100 10","pages":"3806–3817"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Chemical Education","FirstCategoryId":"92","ListUrlMain":"https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.jchemed.3c00664","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Chemistry education research demonstrates the value of open-ended writing tasks, such as writing-to-learn (WTL) assignments, for supporting students’ learning with topics including reasoning about reaction mechanisms. The emergence of generative artificial intelligence (AI) technology, such as chatbots ChatGPT and Bard, raises concerns regarding the value of open-ended writing tasks in the classroom; one concern involves academic integrity and whether students will use these chatbots to produce sufficient responses to open-ended writing tasks. The present study investigates the degree to which generative AI chatbots exhibit mechanistic reasoning in response to organic chemistry WTL assignments. We produced responses from three generative AI chatbots (ChatGPT-3.5, ChatGPT-4, and Bard) to two WTL assignments developed to elicit students’ mechanistic reasoning. Using previously reported machine learning models for analyzing student writing in response to the WTL assignments, we analyzed the chatbot responses for the inclusion of features pertinent to mechanistic reasoning. Herein, we report quantitative analyses of (1) the differences between chatbot responses on the two assignments and (2) the differences between chatbot and authentic student responses. Findings indicate that chatbots respond differently to different WTL assignments. Additionally, the chatbots rarely incorporated the discussion of electron movement, a key feature of mechanistic reasoning. Furthermore, the chatbots, in general, do not engage in mechanistic reasoning at the same level as students. We contextualize the results by considering academic integrity with the assumption that students’ intentions are to engage in academically honest behavior, and we focus on understanding the ethical uses of generative AI for classroom assignments.

Abstract Image

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
比较学生和生成型人工智能聊天机器人对有机化学写作学习作业的反应
化学教育研究表明,开放式写作任务,如随学写作(WTL)作业,对于支持学生学习包括反应机制推理在内的主题的价值。生成人工智能(AI)技术的出现,如聊天机器人ChatGPT和Bard,引发了人们对课堂上开放式写作任务价值的担忧;一个问题涉及学术诚信,以及学生是否会使用这些聊天机器人对开放式写作任务做出足够的反应。本研究调查了生成型人工智能聊天机器人对有机化学WTL任务表现出机械推理的程度。我们从三个生成型人工智能聊天机器人(ChatGPT-3.5、ChatGPT-4和Bard)对两个WTL作业做出了回应,这两个作业是为了引出学生的机械推理而开发的。使用先前报道的机器学习模型来分析学生对WTL作业的反应,我们分析了聊天机器人的反应,以包含与机械推理相关的特征。在此,我们报告了对以下内容的定量分析:(1)聊天机器人对两项作业的反应之间的差异;(2)聊天机器人与真实学生反应之间的区别。研究结果表明,聊天机器人对不同的WTL分配的反应不同。此外,聊天机器人很少结合电子运动的讨论,这是机械推理的一个关键特征。此外,聊天机器人通常不会像学生一样从事机械推理。我们通过考虑学术诚信,假设学生的意图是从事学术诚信行为,将结果置于情境中,我们专注于理解生成人工智能在课堂作业中的道德用途。
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
Journal of Chemical Education
Journal of Chemical Education 化学-化学综合
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
50.00%
发文量
465
审稿时长
6.5 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Chemical Education is the official journal of the Division of Chemical Education of the American Chemical Society, co-published with the American Chemical Society Publications Division. Launched in 1924, the Journal of Chemical Education is the world’s premier chemical education journal. The Journal publishes peer-reviewed articles and related information as a resource to those in the field of chemical education and to those institutions that serve them. JCE typically addresses chemical content, activities, laboratory experiments, instructional methods, and pedagogies. The Journal serves as a means of communication among people across the world who are interested in the teaching and learning of chemistry. This includes instructors of chemistry from middle school through graduate school, professional staff who support these teaching activities, as well as some scientists in commerce, industry, and government.
期刊最新文献
Issue Editorial Masthead Issue Publication Information Education Implications of Artificial Intelligence-Based Chemistry and Physics Nobel Prizes Understanding Student Help-Seeking for Contextualizing Chemistry through Curated Chatbot Data Analysis Do You Want to Make a Battery? Insights from the Development and Evaluation of a Chemistry Public Engagement Activity.
×
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