CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 502Artificial Intelligence in EducationArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationIntelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive Learning

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 36 of the 36 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Exploring Students’ Perceptions of ChatGPT: Thematic Analysis and Follow-Up Survey

Open access
Shoufan, Abdulhadi·2023·IEEE Access
DOI 10.1109/access.2023.3268224
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

ChatGPT has sparked both excitement and skepticism in education. To analyze its impact on teaching and learning it is crucial to understand how students perceive ChatGPT and assess its potential and challenges. Toward this, we conducted a two-stage study with senior students in a computer engineering program ( $n=56$ ). In the first stage, we asked the students to evaluate ChatGPT using their own words after they used it to complete one learning activity. The returned responses (3136 words) were analyzed by coding and theme building (36 codes and 15 themes). In the second stage, we used the derived codes and themes to create a 27-item questionnaire. The students responded to this questionnaire three weeks later after completing other activities with the help of ChatGPT. The results show that the students admire the capabilities of ChatGPT and find it interesting, motivating, and helpful for study and work. They find it easy to use and appreciate its human-like interface that provides well-structured responses and good explanations. However, many students feel that ChatGPT’s answers are not always accurate and most of them believe that it requires good background knowledge to work with since it does not replace human intelligence. So, most students think that ChatGPT needs to be improved but are optimistic that this will happen soon. When it comes to the negative impact of ChatGPT on learning, academic integrity, jobs, and life, the students are divided. We conclude that ChatGPT can and should be used for learning. However, students should be aware of its limitations. Educators should try using ChatGPT and guide students on effective prompting techniques and how to assess generated responses. The developers should improve their models to enhance the accuracy of given answers. The study provides insights into the capabilities and limitations of ChatGPT in education and informs future research and development.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/access.2023.3268224

Cites

36 of 36 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

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?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 34 references

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. 2023, Taguette the Free and Open-Source Qualitative Data Analysis Tool
  2. owens, 2023, How Nature Readers are Using ChatGPT—Nature com
  3. van dis, 2023, ChatGPT Five Priorities for Research—Nature com
  4. mcmurtrie, 2023, Teaching Experts are Worried About ChatGPT But Not for the Reasons you Think—chronicle com

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 301–400 of 502

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Shoufan, A.
Affiliations
Khalifa University of Science and Technology (AE)
Corresponding author
Shoufan, Abdulhadi
ORCID
Shoufan, Abdulhadi
Venue
IEEE Access
Publisher
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE)
Published
2023
Volume
11
Pages
38805-38818
ISSN
2169-3536 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1109/access.2023.3268224
OpenAlex
W4366377796
Semantic Scholar
587b50d31e99f37489e1a2b338d8ddb07026da0b
Cited by
499
References
34
Citations by year
2026: 91 · 2025: 138 · 2024: 211 · 2023: 59
FWCI
117.58
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • IEEE Access (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
Mohammed Bin Rashid Smart Learning Program, Ministry of Education, United Arab Emirates
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › 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
ChatGPT, student perceptions, large language models in education, computer engineering students, academic integrity, prompting techniques, response accuracy

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