Cited by 1,048Artificial Intelligence in EducationArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationEthics and Social Impacts of AI

Shaping the Future of Education: Exploring the Potential and Consequences of AI and ChatGPT in Educational Settings

Open access
Grassini, Simone·2023·Education Sciences

Abstract

Over the last decade, technological advancements, especially artificial intelligence (AI), have significantly transformed educational practices. Recently, the development and adoption of Generative Pre-trained Transformers (GPT), particularly OpenAI’s ChatGPT, has sparked considerable interest. The unprecedented capabilities of these models, such as generating humanlike text and facilitating automated conversations, have broad implications in various sectors, including education and health. Despite their immense potential, concerns regarding their widespread use and opacity have been raised within the scientific community. ChatGPT, the latest version of the GPT series, has displayed remarkable proficiency, passed the US bar law exam, and amassed over a million subscribers shortly after its launch. However, its impact on the education sector has elicited mixed reactions, with some educators heralding it as a progressive step and others raising alarms over its potential to reduce analytical skills and promote misconduct. This paper aims to delve into these discussions, exploring the potential and problems associated with applying advanced AI models in education. It builds on extant literature and contributes to understanding how these technologies reshape educational norms in the “new AI gold rush” era.

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 · 10.3390/educsci13070692

Cites

91 of 92 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?

  • AI-driven language learning tools can adapt to different learning paces, preferences, and abilities, ensuring that all students have the opportunity to succeed.

    “AI-driven language learning tools, however, can adapt to different learning paces, preferences, and abilities, ensuring that all students have the opportunity to succeed (Grassini, 2023).”

    From Generative AI in Language Education: Bridging Divide and Fostering Inclusivity (2025) · cites this paper as Grassini, 2023

    Section 2 says AI tutoring can adapt to students’ learning styles, progress, abilities, and interests. It does not establish this specifically for language-learning tools or say that adaptation ensures every student can succeed. Section 5 cautions that unequal access to technology could widen the digital divide. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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: 16

  1. Zhang, C.; Zhang, C.; Li, C.; Qiao, Y.; Zheng, S.; Dam, S.K.; Zhang, M.; Kim, J.U.; Kim, S.T.; Choi, J. One small step for generative ai, one giant leap for agi: A complete survey on chatgpt in aigc era. arXiv 2023, arXiv:2304.06488. · arXiv
  2. Rivas, P.; Zhao, L. Marketing with chatgpt: Navigating the ethical terrain of gpt-based chatbot technology. AI 2023, 4, 375-384.
  3. Babitha, M.M.; Sushma, C. Trends of Artificial Intelligence for online exams in education. Int. J. Early Child. Spec. Educ. 2022, 14, 2457-2463.
  4. Schlippe, T.; Stierstorfer, Q.; Koppel, M.T.; Libbrecht, P. Explainability in Automatic Short Answer Grading. In Artificial Intelligence in Education Technologies: New Development and Innovative Practices: Proceedings of 2022 3rd International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education Technology; Springer: Berlin, Germany, 2023; pp. 69-87.
  5. Jiao, W.X.; Wang, W.X.; Huang, J.T.; Wang, X.; Tu, Z.P. Is ChatGPT a good translator? Yes with GPT-4 as the engine. arXiv 2023, arXiv:2301.08745. · arXiv
  6. Grossman, J.; Lin, Z.; Sheng, H.; Wei, J.T.Z.; Williams, J.J.; Goel, S.M. Transforming Online Resources for Learning Math into Conversational Interactions. AAAI. 2019. Available online: http://logical.ai/story/papers/mathbot.pdf (accessed on 15 April 2023).
  7. Whalen, J.; Mouza, C. ChatGPT: Challenges, Opportunities, and Implications for Teacher Education. Contemp. Issues Technol. Teach. Educ. 2023, 23, 1-23.
  8. Chan, C.K.Y.; Tsi, L.H. The AI Revolution in Education: Will AI Replace or Assist Teachers in Higher Education? arXiv 2023, arXiv:2305.01185. · arXiv
  9. Pegoraro, A.; Kumari, K.; Fereidooni, H.; Sadeghi, A.R. To ChatGPT, or not to ChatGPT. arXiv 2023, arXiv:2304.01487. · arXiv
  10. Iansiti, M.; Lakhani, K.R. Competing in the Age of AI: Strategy and Leadership When Algorithms and Networks Run the World; Harvard Business Press: Brighton, MA, USA, 2020.
  11. Elgammal, A.; Liu, B.; Elhoseiny, M.; Mazzone, M. Can: Creative adversarial networks, generating "art" by learning about styles and deviating from style norms. arXiv 2017, arXiv:1706.07068. · arXiv
  12. Susnjak, T. ChatGPT: The End of Online Exam Integrity? arXiv 2022, arXiv:2212.09292. · arXiv
  13. Newton, P.M. ChatGPT Performance on MCQ-Based Exams. 2023. Available online: https://edarxiv.org/sytu3 (accessed on 15 April 2023).
  14. Yang, K.B.; Echeverria, V.; Lu, Z.; Mao, H.; Holstein, K.; Rummel, N.; Aleven, V. Pair-Up: Prototyping Human-AI Co-orchestration of Dynamic Transitions between Individual and Collaborative Learning in the Classroom. In Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Hamburg, Germany, 23-28 April 2023; Association for Computing Machinery: New York, NY, USA, 2023; pp. 1-17.
  15. Sun, Y.; Zheng, Y.; Hao, C.; Qiu, H. NSP-BERT: A Prompt-based Zero-Shot Learner Through an Original Pre-training Task-Next Sentence Prediction. arXiv 2021, arXiv:2109.03564. 105. Verma, V.; Fleisig, E.; Tomlin, N.; Klein, D. Ghostbuster: Detecting Text Ghostwritten by Large Language Models. arXiv 2023, arXiv:2305.15047. 106. Elsen-Rooney, M. NYC Education Department Blocks ChatGPT on School Devices, Networks %U. Chalkbeat New York. 2023. Available online: https://ny.chalkbeat.org/2023/1/3/23537987/nyc-schools-ban-chatgpt-writing-artificial-intelligence (accessed on 15 April 2023). 107. Castillo, E. These Schools and Colleges Have Banned Chat GPT and Similar AI Tools. 2023. Available online: https://www. Bestcolleges.com (accessed on 15 April 2023). 108. Myklebust, J.P. Universities adjust to ChatGPT, but the 'real AI' Lies Ahead. 2023. Available online: www.universityworldnews. com (accessed on 15 April 2023). 109. · arXiv
  16. Earl, L.M. Assessment as Learning: Using Classroom Assessment to Maximize Student Learning; Corwin Press: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2012. 115.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Grassini, S.
Affiliations
University of Bergen (NO)
Corresponding author
Grassini, Simone
Venue
Education Sciences
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2023-07-07
Volume
13
Issue
7
Pages
692
ISSN
2227-7102 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4383818129
Cited by
1,048
References
88
Citations by year
2026: 241 · 2025: 337 · 2024: 403 · 2023: 66 · 2020: 1
FWCI
245.71
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Education Sciences (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • NORA - Norwegian Open Research Archives (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
University of Bergen
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Artificial Intelligence in Education
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
Keywords
ChatGPT, generative AI in education, large language models, AI ethics, academic misconduct, critical thinking skills, educational technology, AI adoption in education, future of education

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