CoChat
Sign Up
PreprintCited by 24Artificial Intelligence in EducationArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationIntelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive Learning

ChatGPT in the Classroom: Boon or Bane for Physics Students' Academic Performance?

Open access
Forero, Manuel G., Herrera-Suárez, H. J.·2023·arXiv
DOI 10.48550/arxiv.2312.02422arXiv 2312.02422
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

This study investigates the influence of ChatGPT, an AI-based language model, on student performance in a physics course. We conducted an experimental analysis with two cohorts of students in a second-semester engineering physics course. The control group (Physics 2 2022B) used traditional teaching methods, while the experimental group (Physics 2 2023A) integrated ChatGPT as a learning tool. Our results indicate that the use of ChatGPT led to a significant decrease in student performance, as evidenced by lower grades and negative Hake factors compared to the control group. In addition, a survey of students revealed conflicting perceptions of the usefulness of ChatGPT in teaching physics. While most recognized its usefulness in understanding concepts and providing information, concerns were raised about its potential to reduce critical thinking and independent learning. These findings suggest that while ChatGPT can be a useful tool, it should be used with caution and as a supplement to traditional teaching methods, rather than as a stand-alone solution. The study underlines the importance of critical and reflective use of AI tools in educational settings and highlights the irreplaceable role of teachers in providing comprehensive educational support.

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.2312.02422

Cites

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?

Cites

Still being checked.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Forero, M. G., & Herrera-Suárez, H. J.
Affiliations
Universidad de Ibagué (CO)
ORCID
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2023
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.48550/arxiv.2312.02422
arXiv
2312.02422
OpenAlex
W4389421270
Cited by
4
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 1
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Licence
arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
Locations
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › 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, large language models in education, physics education, engineering physics, academic performance, critical thinking, self-directed learning, student perceptions of AI

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