CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 129Artificial Intelligence in EducationArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationIntelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive Learning

Assessment of Students Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence: Prompting Strategies and Prompt Engineering in Chemistry Education

Open access
Tassoti, Sebastian·2024·Journal of Chemical Education
DOI 10.1021/acs.jchemed.4c00212
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

High Resolution Image Download MS PowerPoint Slide The rapid integration of generative artificial intelligence (AI) into educational settings prompts an urgent examination of its efficacy and the strategies that students employ to harness its potential. This study focuses on preservice chemistry teachers use of generative AI for chemistry-specific problem-solving and task completion. We found that there is a prevalent reliance on copy-pasting tactics in initial prompting approaches, and students need guidance to improve their prompting abilities. By implementing the “Five S” prompting framework, we explore the evolution of student prompts and the resultant satisfaction with AI-generated responses. Our findings indicate that, while students initially struggle with the nuances of effective prompting, the adoption of structured frameworks significantly enhances their perceived quality of AI-generated answers. This research sheds light on the current state of AI use among students but also underscores the importance of targeted educational frameworks to refine AI interaction in academic contexts. In particular, we suggest critical engagement and methodological prompt engineering strategies to maximize the educational benefits of generative AI technologies.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1021/acs.jchemed.4c00212

Cites

19 of 19 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • GenAI tools, if not used effectively, can short-circuit students' learning process.

    “These findings provide preliminary evidence that genAI tools, if not used effectively, can short-circuit students' learning process.”

    From Scaffold or Crutch? Examining College Students' Use and Views of Generative AI Tools for STEM Education (2025) · cites this paper as Tassoti (2024)

  • Tassoti (2024) found that undergraduate students in a chemistry course predominantly relied on copying-pasting problems as their prompting strategy when interacting with genAI-based chatbots.

    “Tassoti (2024) examined the prompting strategies of undergraduate students in a chemistry course and found that students predominantly relied on copying-pasting problems as their prompting strategy when interacting with genAI-based chatbots.”

    From Scaffold or Crutch? Examining College Students' Use and Views of Generative AI Tools for STEM Education (2025) · cites this paper as Tassoti (2024)

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Tassoti, S.
Affiliations
University of Graz (AT)
Corresponding author
Tassoti, Sebastian
ORCID
Tassoti, Sebastian
Venue
Journal of Chemical Education
Publisher
American Chemical Society (ACS)
Published
2024-05-22
Volume
101
Issue
6
Pages
2475-2482
ISSN
  • 0021-9584 (ISSN-L)
  • 1938-1328
DOI
10.1021/acs.jchemed.4c00212
OpenAlex
W4398194304
Cited by
129
References
19
Citations by year
2026: 65 · 2025: 48 · 2024: 16
FWCI
48.50
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
Journal of Chemical Education (publishedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • Karl-Franzens-Universit?t Graz
  • Joachim Herz Stiftung
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Artificial Intelligence in Education
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Intelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive Learning
Keywords
generative AI, prompt engineering, prompting strategies, pre-service chemistry teachers, chemistry problem solving, AI-generated responses, student use of AI, chemistry education

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review