HELP ME CHATGPT! WHAT WAYS DOES CHATGPT INFLUENCE STUDENTS' PRODUCTIVITY AND CREATIVITY IN ENGLISH ACADEMIC WRITING?
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.59165/educatum.v2i2.65Keywords:
ChatGPT, OpenAI, Students Productivity, Students Creativity, Academic WritingAbstract
. This study explores the influence of ChatGPT, an AI-powered writing tool, on academic writing among Indonesian university students. Utilizing survey data from 120 participants and qualitative insights from interviews, it examines students' perspectives on ChatGPT's impact on writing productivity, quality, and creativity. Findings indicate that ChatGPT is widely used for organizing ideas and accelerating the drafting process. However, opinions differ regarding its effectiveness in reducing wordiness and maintaining originality. Ethical considerations surrounding plagiarism and the integration of AI in education are scrutinized. While some students appreciate the efficiency and structure ChatGPT provides, others express concerns about over-reliance and diminished personal input. The study highlights the importance of balanced AI integration in education to enhance learning outcomes while fostering critical thinking and ethical reasoning. Recommendations include incorporating discussions on ethical AI use into curricula and conducting further research on long-term impacts and strategies to optimize AI’s educational utility. This research contributes to the understanding of AI's role in academic writing, suggesting pathways to leverage its benefits while mitigating potential drawbacks. By promoting a nuanced approach, it aims to maximize AI’s positive impact on education, ensuring that students not only improve their writing skills but also develop essential critical thinking and ethical awareness. Overall, the study underscores the need for thoughtful integration of AI tools like ChatGPT in academic settings, balancing technological advancements with the cultivation of independent thinking and originality in student work.
References
V. Boži? and I. Poola, “Chat GPT and education,” Preprint, 2023.
A. Rahma and R. Fithriani, “THE POTENTIAL IMPACT OF USING CHAT GPT ON EFL STUDENTS’WRITING: EFL TEACHERS’PERSPECTIVE,” Indones. EFL J., vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 11–20, 2024.
A. Yusuf, N. Pervin, and M. Román-González, “Generative AI and the future of higher education: a threat to academic integrity or reformation? Evidence from multicultural perspectives,” Int. J. Educ. Technol. High. Educ., vol. 21, no. 1, p. 21, 2024.
E. Weyant, “Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches: by John W. Creswell and J. David Creswell, Los Angeles, CA: SAGE, 2018, $38.34, 304pp., ISBN: 978-1506386706.” Taylor & Francis, 2022.
H. Wahyuni Anggraini, R. Hayati, and N. Lingga Pitaloka, “Students’ Perceptions in a Diverse Language Classroom: The Case of One Public University in Indonesia,” Indones. Res. J. Educ. |IRJE|, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 433–447, 2021, doi: 10.22437/irje.v4i2.10846.
J. W. Willis and C. Edwards, Action research: Models, methods, and examples. IAP, 2014.
A. Syakur, W. Sudrajad, S. Winurati, and S. A. Tilwani, “The Motivation of Students and Their Exposure to Learning Loss After the Pandemic,” Stud. Learn. Teach., vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 622–633, 2023.
B. Graefen and N. Fazal, “From Chat bots to Virtual Tutors: An Overview of Chat GPT’s Role in the Future of Education,” Arch. Pharm. Pract., vol. 15, no. 2–2024, pp. 43–52, 2024.
E. Shalevska, “AI LANGUAGE MODELS, STANDARDIZED TESTS, AND ACADEMIC INTEGRITY: A CHAT (GPT),” Int. J. Educ. Teach., vol. 26, pp. 17–25, 2023.
E. Fadilah, “Willingness To Communicate in L2 By Using,” Jeels, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 23–48, 2018.
M. Huberman and M. B. Miles, The qualitative researcher’s companion, 2nd ed. california: sage, 2002. [Online]. Available: https://books.google.co.id/books?hl=id&lr=&id=U4lU_-wJ5QEC&oi=fnd&pg=PR12&dq=miles+and+huberman&ots=kGSA5DOYWP&sig=52H_F7Su42euPXyn_wz6x2C_JpU&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=miles and huberman&f=false
S. A. Jackson and R. C. Eklund, “Assessing flow in physical activity: The flow state scale–2 and dispositional flow scale–2,” J. Sport Exerc. Psychol., vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 133–150, 2002.
M. L. Mchugh, “Lessons in biostatistics Interrater reliability?: the kappa statistic,” pp. 276–282, 2012.
?. ?. ?????? and ?. ?. ????, “CHAT GPT AS AN ASSISTANT IN STUDENTS’RESEARCH,” 2023.
S. Sharma and R. Yadav, “Chat GPT–A technological remedy or challenge for education system,” Glob. J. Enterp. Inf. Syst., vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 46–51, 2022.
E. Amini-Salehi et al., “Do You Really Want to Use Chat-GPT for Paraphrasing Your Texts?,” Available SSRN 4514430.
D. Dalalah and O. M. A. Dalalah, “The false positives and false negatives of generative AI detection tools in education and academic research: The case of ChatGPT,” Int. J. Manag. Educ., vol. 21, no. 2, p. 100822, 2023.
N. A. Dahri et al., “Investigating AI-based academic support acceptance and its impact on students’ performance in Malaysian and Pakistani higher education institutions,” Educ. Inf. Technol., pp. 1–50, 2024.
