Cited by 33Artificial Intelligence in EducationIntelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive LearningArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education

Q-Module-Bot: A Generative AI-Based Question and Answer Bot for Module Teaching Support

Open access
Allen, Mia, Naeem, Usman, Gill, Sukhpal Singh·2024·IEEE Transactions on Education

Abstract

Contributions: In this article, a generative artificial intelligence (AI)-based Q&A system has been developed by integrating information retrieval and natural language processing techniques, using course materials as a knowledge base and facilitating real-time student interaction through a chat interface. Background: The rise of advanced AI exemplified by ChatGPT developed by OpenAI, has sparked interest in its application within higher education. AI has the potential to reshape education delivery through chatbots and related tools, improving remote learning and mitigating challenges, such as student isolation and educator administrative burdens. Yet, ChatGPT’s practical applications in education remain uncertain, potentially due to its novel and enigmatic nature. Additionally, current e-learning chatbot systems often suffer from development complexity and a lack of input from key stakeholders, leading to developer-focused solutions rather than user-centered ones. Intended Outcomes: In this manuscript, we introduce a practical implementation of AI in education by creating a system called Q-Module-Bot that is accessible for both technical and nontechnical educators to harness e-learning benefits and demystify generative pretraining transformer (GPT). Application Design: The proposed Q-Module-Bot system has utilized pretrained large language models (LLMs) to build a Q&A system that helps students with their queries and supports education delivery using content extracted from a virtual learning environment (VLE). Findings: The prototype and system evaluation confirm the effectiveness of a scalable cross-departmental tool featuring source attribution and real-time responses. While successful in encouraging wider acceptance of GPT use cases in higher education, refinements are needed for full integration into the VLE and expansion to other modules/courses.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/te.2024.3435427

Cites

3 of 3 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?

  • Usability barriers hinder adoption, with 50% of users finding Q-Module-Bot's interface non-intuitive, while Fermat's confusing spatial canvas frustrates students.

    “Usability barriers further hinder adoption, with 50% of users finding Q-Module-Bot's interface non-intuitive (Allen et al., 2024), while Fermat's confusing spatial canvas frustrates students (Cummings et al., 2024).”
  • Technical issues, such as unreliable query handling and system glitches, affect tools like Q-Module-Bot and Fermat, while self-made RAG chatbots often generate inaccurate content.

    “Technical issues, such as unreliable query handling and system glitches, affect tools like Q-Module-Bot (Allen et al., 2024) and Fermat (Cummings et al., 2024), while self-made RAG chatbots often generate inaccurate content (Guo et al., 2024).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Allen, M., Naeem, U., & Gill, S. S.
Affiliations
Queen Mary University of London (GB)
Venue
IEEE Transactions on Education
Published
2024-10
Volume
67
Issue
5
Pages
793-802
ISSN
  • 0018-9359 (ISSN-L)
  • 1557-9638
OpenAlex
W4401387983
Cited by
33
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 20 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 1
FWCI
12.45
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • IEEE Transactions on Education (publishedVersion)
  • Queen Mary Research Online (Queen Mary University of London) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Artificial Intelligence in Education
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Intelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive Learning
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
Keywords
generative AI in education, chatbots, large language models, GPT, information retrieval, virtual learning environments, online learning, student interaction, source attribution, higher education teaching support

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