Cited by 137Artificial Intelligence in EducationStatistics Education and MethodologiesArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education

A New Era of Learning: Considerations for ChatGPT as a Tool to Enhance Statistics and Data Science Education

Open access
Ellis, Amanda R., Slade, Emily·2023·Journal of Statistics and Data Science Education

Abstract

ChatGPT is one of many generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools that has emerged recently, creating controversy in the education community with concerns about its potential to be used for plagiarism and to undermine students' ability to think independently. Recent publications have criticized the use of ChatGPT and other generative AI tools in the classroom, with little focus on the potential benefits. This article focuses on the potential of ChatGPT as an educational tool for statistics and data science. It encourages readers to consider the history of trepidation surrounding introducing new technology in the classroom, such as the calculator. We explore the possibility of leveraging ChatGPT's capabilities in statistics and data science education, providing examples of how ChatGPT can aid in developing course materials and suggestions for how educators can prompt students to interact with ChatGPT responsibly. As educators, we can guide the use of generative AI tools in statistics and data science classrooms so that students and educators can leverage the benefits of this technology.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/26939169.2023.2223609

Cites

13 of 13 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Most of the work on large language models for teaching data science has centered on the use of ChatGPT in the classroom.

    “Most of this work has centered on the use of ChatGPT in the classroom (see, e.g., Ellis & Slade 2023, and references therein).”

    From Generative AI for Data Science 101: Coding Without Learning to Code (2025) · cites this paper as Ellis & Slade 2023

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Zhou, T. Y., Huang, Y., Chen, C., and Xing, Z. (2023), "Exploring AI Ethics of ChatGPT: A Diagnostic Analysis, " arXiv preprint arXiv:2301.12867. · arXiv

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ellis, A. R., & Slade, E.
Affiliations
University of Kentucky (US)
Corresponding author
Ellis, Amanda R.
Venue
Journal of Statistics and Data Science Education
Published
2023-05-04
Volume
31
Issue
2
Pages
128-133
ISSN
2693-9169 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4380083162
Cited by
137
References
11
Citations by year
2026: 29 · 2025: 60 · 2024: 39 · 2023: 9
FWCI
32.16
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Statistics and Data Science Education (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Artificial Intelligence in Education
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistics Education and Methodologies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
Keywords
ChatGPT, generative AI, statistics education, data science education, AI in the classroom, course materials development, responsible AI use, plagiarism concerns, student independent thinking

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