Developing Massive Open Online Course Style Assessments Using Generative AI Tools
Abstract
Since 2022, there are plenty of discussion on generative AI tools such as OpenAI's GPT (Generative Pretrained Transformer), large language models (LLMs), and Google's Bard. These tools rapidly have gained worldwide attention, and several users have attracted by the power of these tools. In this paper, the generative AI used to develop types of assessments which are widely used in Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) is discussed. The main focus of this paper is to test the power of Generative AI tools used to generate assessments which can be used by MOOC developers. The prompts mentioned in this paper can be used by any educators while developing assessments, and not just limited to MOOC developers. Moreover, learners can use the same methods to generate various types of assessments to self-evaluate the progress in their study. As a case study, to test the power of these tools, we have considered how the assessments can be generated while teaching a foreign language course.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Cites
Lim, W. M., Gunasekara, A., Pallant, J. L., Pallant, J. I., & Pechenkina, E. (2023) · The International Journal of Management Education · doi:10.1016/j.ijme.2023.100790 · Cited by 1,261 · see citing works
Engineering Education in the Era of ChatGPT: Promise and Pitfalls of Generative AI for Education
Qadir, J. (2023) · 2023 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON) · doi:10.1109/educon54358.2023.10125121 · Cited by 707 · cited 1× · see citing works
“In [10], the authors studied the importance of understanding the implications of these technologies in engineering education.”
BackgroundUnlocking the Power of ChatGPT: A Framework for Applying Generative AI in Education
Su (苏嘉红), J., & Yang (杨伟鹏), W. (2023) · ECNU Review of Education · doi:10.1177/20965311231168423 · Cited by 625 · cited 1× · see citing works
“In [9], the authors viewed that AI in education has the power to provide highly personalized and interactive learning experiences.”
BackgroundExploring Students’ Perceptions of ChatGPT: Thematic Analysis and Follow-Up Survey
Shoufan, A. (2023) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2023.3268224 · Cited by 499 · cited 1× · see citing works
“In [11], the ways of making best use of ChatGPT in education is explored.”
BackgroundInfluencing Factors of Success and Failure in MOOC and General Analysis of Learner Behavior
Rai, L., & Deng, C. (2015) · International Journal of Information and Education Technology · doi:10.7763/ijiet.2016.v6.697 · Cited by 121 · see citing works
Self-citationThe Rise of Generative Artificial Intelligence and Its Impact on Education: The Promises and Perils
Murugesan, S., & Cherukuri, A. K. (2023) · Computer · doi:10.1109/mc.2023.3253292 · Cited by 92 · see citing works
Generative AI: Implications and Applications for EducationPreprint
Olga, A., Tzirides, A. O., Saini, A., Zapata, G. C., Searsmith, D., Cope, B., Kalantzis, M., de Castro, V. C., Kourkoulou, T., Jones, J., et al. (2023) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2305.07605 · Cited by 60 · see citing works
Can GPT-3 write an academic paper on itself, with minimal human input?Preprint
Transformer, G. G. P., Thunström, A. O., & Steingrímsson, S. (2022) · HAL (Le Centre pour la Communication Scientifique Directe) · Cited by 51 · see citing works
Successful Learning Through Massive Open Online Courses
Rai, L. (2019) · IEEE Potentials · doi:10.1109/mpot.2018.2869076 · Cited by 12 · see citing works
Self-citationGeneral impact of MOOC assessment methods on learner engagement and performance
Rai, L., Yue, Z., Yang, T., et al. (2017) · International Conference on Ubi-Media Computing and Workshops (Ubi-Media) · doi:10.1109/umedia.2017.8074135 · Cited by 7 · see citing works
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Generative AI in Higher Education: Balancing Innovation and Integrity
Francis, N. J., Jones, S., & Smith, D. P. (2025) · British Journal of Biomedical Science · doi:10.3389/bjbs.2024.14048 · Cited by 295 · see citing works
“Students can employ the same methods to generate a variety of assessments for self-evaluating their progress in their studies [34].”
Morales-Chan, M., Amado-Salvatierra, H. R., Medina, J. A., Barchino, R., Hernández-Rizzardini, R., & Teixeira, A. M. (2024) · Electronics · doi:10.3390/electronics13101960 · Cited by 35 · see citing works
- Authors
- Rai, L., Deng, C., & Liu, F.
- Affiliations
- Shandong University of Science and Technology (CN)
- Hong Kong Polytechnic University (HK)
- Shandong Vocational University of Foreign Affairs (CN)
- Venue
- 2023 IEEE 6th International Conference on Electronic Information and Communication Technology (ICEICT)
- Publisher
- IEEE
- Published
- 2023-07-21
- Pages
- 1292-1294
- OpenAlex
- W4386921545
- Cited by
- 15
- References
- 10
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 7
- FWCI
- 3.86
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- IEEE International Conference on Electronic Information and Communication Technology (ICEICT) (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Artificial Intelligence in Education
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Science Applications › Online Learning and Analytics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Natural Language Processing Techniques
- Keywords
- generative AI, large language models, prompt engineering, GPT, Google Bard, foreign language teaching, self-assessment, online learning
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
