Misconceptions, Pragmatism, and Value Tensions: Evaluating Students' Understanding and Perception of Generative AI for Education
In this research paper we examine undergraduate students' use of and perceptions of generative AI (GenAI). Students are early adopters of the technology, utilizing it in atypical ways and forming a range of perceptions and aspirations about it. To understand where and how students are using the...
Gespeichert in:
Hauptverfasser: | , , |
---|---|
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext bestellen |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | In this research paper we examine undergraduate students' use of and
perceptions of generative AI (GenAI). Students are early adopters of the
technology, utilizing it in atypical ways and forming a range of perceptions
and aspirations about it. To understand where and how students are using these
tools and how they view them, we present findings from an open-ended survey
response study with undergraduate students pursuing information technology
degrees. Students were asked to describe 1) their understanding of GenAI; 2)
their use of GenAI; 3) their opinions on the benefits, downsides, and ethical
issues pertaining to its use in education; and 4) how they envision GenAI could
ideally help them with their education. Findings show that students'
definitions of GenAI differed substantially and included many misconceptions -
some highlight it as a technique, an application, or a tool, while others
described it as a type of AI. There was a wide variation in the use of GenAI by
students, with two common uses being writing and coding. They identified the
ability of GenAI to summarize information and its potential to personalize
learning as an advantage. Students identified two primary ethical concerns with
using GenAI: plagiarism and dependency, which means that students do not learn
independently. They also cautioned that responses from GenAI applications are
often untrustworthy and need verification. Overall, they appreciated that they
could do things quickly with GenAI but were cautious as using the technology
was not necessarily in their best long-term as it interfered with the learning
process. In terms of aspirations for GenAI, students expressed both practical
advantages and idealistic and improbable visions. They said it could serve as a
tutor or coach and allow them to understand the material better. We discuss the
implications of the findings for student learning and instruction. |
---|---|
DOI: | 10.48550/arxiv.2410.22289 |