The DOI matches its Crossref record; 44 of the 44 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
ChatGPT: A revolutionary tool for teaching and learning mathematics
Open accessAbstract
This study aims to examine the perspectives of various stakeholders, such as students and educators, on the use of artificial intelligence in teaching mathematics, specifically after the launch of ChatGPT. The study adopts a qualitative case study approach consisting of two stages: content analysis of interviews and investigation of user experience. The first stage of the study shows that ChatGPT is recognized for its improved math capabilities and ability to increase educational success by providing users with basic knowledge of mathematics and various topics. ChatGPT can offer comprehensive instruction and assistance in the study of geometry, and the public discourse on social media is generally positive, with enthusiasm for the use of ChatGPT in teaching mathematics and educational settings. However, there are also voices that approach using ChatGPT in educational settings with caution. In the second stage of the study, the investigation of user experiences through three educational scenarios revealed various issues. ChatGPT lacks a deep understanding of geometry and cannot effectively correct misconceptions. The accuracy and effectiveness of ChatGPT solutions may depend on the complexity of the equation, input data, and the instructions given to ChatGPT. ChatGPT is expected to become more efficient in resolving increasingly complex mathematical problems. The results of this investigation propose a number of avenues for research that ought to be explored in order to guarantee the secure and conscientious integration of chatbots, especially ChatGPT, into mathematics education and learning.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Language Models are Few-Shot Learners
Brown, T. B., Mann, B., Ryder, N., Subbiah, M., Kaplan, J., Dhariwal, P., Neelakantan, A., Shyam, P., Sastry, G., Askell, A., et al. (2020) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2005.14165 · Cited by 23,372
Kaugeranna, R., Kaugeranna, E., & Aion, (. S. 4. 6. (2023) · DROPS (Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz Center for Informatics) · doi:10.4230/lipics.giscience.2023.43 · Cited by 13,690
I.—COMPUTING MACHINERY AND INTELLIGENCE
TURING, A. M. (1950) · Mind · doi:10.1093/mind/lix.236.433 · Cited by 10,290
A hands-on guide to doing content analysis
Erlingsson, C., & Brysiewicz, P. (2017) · African Journal of Emergency Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.afjem.2017.08.001 · Cited by 2,358
ChatGPT: Bullshit spewer or the end of traditional assessments in higher education?
(2023) · Journal of Applied Learning & Teaching · doi:10.37074/jalt.2023.6.1.9 · Cited by 1,806 · cited 3×
“EURASIA J Math Sci Tech Ed, 2023, 19(7), em2286 3 / 18 can no longer distinguish between the synthetic and real content and the synthetic content is recognized as genuine (Rudolph et al., 2023).”
BackgroundArtificial hallucinations in ChatGPT: implications in scientific writing
Alkaissi, H., & McFarlane, S. I. (2023) · Cureus · doi:10.7759/cureus.35179 · Cited by 1,540
ChatGPT is fun, but not an author
Thorp, H. H. (2023) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.adg7879 · Cited by 1,437
Thurmond, V. A. (2001) · Journal of Nursing Scholarship · doi:10.1111/j.1547-5069.2001.00253.x · Cited by 1,335
A Review on Generative Adversarial Networks: Algorithms, Theory, and Applications
Gui, J., Sun, Z., Wen, Y., Tao, D., & Ye, J. (2023) · IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering · doi:10.1109/tkde.2021.3130191 · Cited by 1,231
ChatGPT User Experience: Implications for Education
Zhai, X. (2023) · doi:10.2139/ssrn.4312418 · Cited by 935 · cited 1×
“As documented in several other research (Firat, 2023; Susnjak, 2022; Zhai, 2022) the results showed that ChatGPT has the potential to alter education in a variety of ways.”
Result
Research works printed but not linked: 8
- Crust, G. (2023). ChatGPT employability study skills and curriculum development. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.35643.28960 · doi:10.13140/rg.2.2.35643.28960
- El-Azhari, K., Hilal, I., Daoudi, N., & Ajhoun, R. (2023). Chatbots in e-learning: Advantages and limitations. In Proceedings of the Symposium on Connected Objects and Systems.
- Flick, U. (2009). An introduction to qualitative research. SAGE.
- Singh, A., Tiwari, A. K., & Sharma, R. K. (2020). Artificial intelligence (AI) based educational tools: A review. Artificial Intelligence Review, 53(6), 3887-3919.
- Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research: Perspective in practice. SAGE.
- Tenhundfeld, N., & ChatGPT (2023). Two birds with one stone: Writing a paper entitled “ChatGPT as a tool for studying human-AI interaction in the wild” with ChatGPT. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.25319.73123 · doi:10.13140/rg.2.2.25319.73123
- Yin, R. K. (1984). Case study research: Design and methods. SAGE.
- Zhang, B. (2023). Preparing educators and students for ChatGPT and AI technology in higher education: Benefits, limitations, strategies, and implications of ChatGPT & AI technologies. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/367380845_Preparing_Educators_and_Students_for_ChatGPT_and_AI_Technology_in_Higher_EducationBenefits_Limitations_Strategies_and_Implications_of_ChatGPT_AI_Technologies
Cited by
Bahroun, Z., Anane, C., Ahmed, V., & Zacca, A. (2023) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su151712983 · Cited by 784
Exploring the potential of artificial intelligence tools in educational measurement and assessment
Owan, V. J., Abang, K. B., Idika, D. O., Etta, E. O., & Bassey, B. A. (2023) · Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education · doi:10.29333/ejmste/13428 · Cited by 448
The Influence of ChatGPT on Student Engagement: A Systematic Review and Future Research Agenda
Lo, C. K., Hew, K. F., & Jong, M. S.-Y. (2024) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2024.105100 · Cited by 392
Higher education students’ perceptions of ChatGPT: A global study of early reactions
Ravšelj, D., Keržič, D., Tomaževič, N., Umek, L., Brezovar, N., A. Iahad, N., Abdulla, A. A., Akopyan, A., Aldana Segura, M. W., AlHumaid, J., et al. (2025) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0315011 · Cited by 376
Using ChatGPT in academic writing is (not) a form of plagiarism: What does the literature say?
Jarrah, A. M., Wardat, Y., & Fidalgo, P. (2023) · Online Journal of Communication and Media Technologies · doi:10.30935/ojcmt/13572 · Cited by 220
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Wardat, Y., Tashtoush, M. A., AlAli, R., & Jarrah, A. M.
- Venue
- Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education
- Publisher
- Modestum Ltd
- Published
- 2023-07-01
- Volume
- 19
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- em2286
- ISSN
- 1305-8215 (ISSN-L)
- 1305-8223
- OpenAlex
- W4376626501
- Cited by
- 470
- References
- 44
- FWCI
- 110.44
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- diamond
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: ChatGPT: A revolutionary tool for teaching and learning mathematics. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.29333/ejmste/13272
- The paper
- Wardat, Y., Tashtoush, M. A., AlAli, R., & Jarrah, A. M. (2023). ChatGPT: A revolutionary tool for teaching and learning mathematics. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/13272
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
