Comparing the Performance of College Chemistry Students with ChatGPT for Calculations Involving Acids and Bases

IF 2.5 3区 教育学 Q2 CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Journal of Chemical Education Pub Date : 2023-09-15 DOI:10.1021/acs.jchemed.3c00500
Ted M. Clark*, Ellie Anderson, Nicole M. Dickson-Karn, Comelia Soltanirad and Nicolas Tafini, 
{"title":"Comparing the Performance of College Chemistry Students with ChatGPT for Calculations Involving Acids and Bases","authors":"Ted M. Clark*,&nbsp;Ellie Anderson,&nbsp;Nicole M. Dickson-Karn,&nbsp;Comelia Soltanirad and Nicolas Tafini,&nbsp;","doi":"10.1021/acs.jchemed.3c00500","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p >Student performance on open-response calculations involving acid and base solutions before and after instruction in general chemistry and analytical chemistry courses was compared with the output from the artificial intelligence chatbot ChatGPT. Applying a theoretical model of expertise for problem solving that includes problem conceptualization, problem strategy, and solution, it is found that students errors following instruction primarily involved problem conceptualization and the misapplication of heuristics like the Henderson–Hasselbalch equation When the same problems were used as input to ChatGPT the responses were comparable to worked examples found in general chemistry textbooks in terms of length and detail and usually displayed strong problem conceptualization. Response accuracy of the chatbot varied greatly for different topics, being best for calculations of pH for a strong acid or strong base and much lower for more complex problems involving titrations or aqueous salts. Chatbot and student errors differed in that the chatbot did not misapply heuristics but did make mathematical errors uncommon for students. The variability in the correctness of ChatGPT’s responses and the nature of its errors vis-à-vis students will influence its potential use as an instructional resource for calculations involving acids and bases.</p>","PeriodicalId":43,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Chemical Education","volume":"100 10","pages":"3934–3944"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-15","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.3c00500","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

Student performance on open-response calculations involving acid and base solutions before and after instruction in general chemistry and analytical chemistry courses was compared with the output from the artificial intelligence chatbot ChatGPT. Applying a theoretical model of expertise for problem solving that includes problem conceptualization, problem strategy, and solution, it is found that students errors following instruction primarily involved problem conceptualization and the misapplication of heuristics like the Henderson–Hasselbalch equation When the same problems were used as input to ChatGPT the responses were comparable to worked examples found in general chemistry textbooks in terms of length and detail and usually displayed strong problem conceptualization. Response accuracy of the chatbot varied greatly for different topics, being best for calculations of pH for a strong acid or strong base and much lower for more complex problems involving titrations or aqueous salts. Chatbot and student errors differed in that the chatbot did not misapply heuristics but did make mathematical errors uncommon for students. The variability in the correctness of ChatGPT’s responses and the nature of its errors vis-à-vis students will influence its potential use as an instructional resource for calculations involving acids and bases.

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
大学化学专业学生与ChatGPT在酸碱计算中的表现比较
将学生在普通化学和分析化学课程教学前后在涉及酸碱溶液的开放反应计算中的表现与人工智能聊天机器人ChatGPT的输出进行比较。将专业知识的理论模型应用于问题解决,包括问题概念化、问题策略和解决方案,研究发现,学生在教学中的错误主要涉及问题概念化和启发式方法的误用,如Henderson–Hasselbalch方程。当将相同的问题作为ChatGPT的输入时,在长度和细节方面,其回答与普通化学教科书中的例题相当,通常表现出强烈的问题概念化。聊天机器人的响应精度因主题而异,最适合计算强酸或强碱的pH值,而对于涉及滴定或水性盐的更复杂问题,则要低得多。聊天机器人和学生错误的不同之处在于,聊天机器人没有误用启发式,但确实使学生不常见的数学错误。ChatGPT反应正确性的可变性及其相对于学生的错误性质将影响其作为涉及酸和碱的计算的教学资源的潜在用途。
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