Dies ist eine Übersichtsseite mit Metadaten zu dieser wissenschaftlichen Arbeit. Der vollständige Artikel ist beim Verlag verfügbar.
Human vs. AI
1
Zitationen
2
Autoren
2023
Jahr
Abstract
The current study seeks to investigate whether ChatGPT 3.5 can be used as an aid to help diminish the teachers' workload in assessing writing. To this aim, a mixed-methods research design was employed for the study. Randomly selected, 20 descriptive essays written by freshman student teachers of English Language Teaching were scored by an experienced human rater and ChatGPT 3.5. An adapted ‘descriptive essay rubric' by the researchers was used to assess the descriptive essays of the student teachers. The quantitative aspect of the study involved frequency and percentage analysis, while the qualitative dimension centered on analyzing the written feedback provided by both ChatGPT and the human rater. The findings showed that there is a disagreement between ChatGPT 3.5 and the human rater. Furthermore, there are some problems with the written feedback it provides. It is clear that it is rapid in terms of providing feedback. Thus, it is recommended that ChatGPT 3.5 can be employed as a tool under the supervision of teachers.
Ähnliche Arbeiten
Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI): Concepts, taxonomies, opportunities and challenges toward responsible AI
2019 · 8.260 Zit.
Stop explaining black box machine learning models for high stakes decisions and use interpretable models instead
2019 · 8.116 Zit.
High-performance medicine: the convergence of human and artificial intelligence
2018 · 7.493 Zit.
Proceedings of the 19th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence
2005 · 5.776 Zit.
Peeking Inside the Black-Box: A Survey on Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
2018 · 5.438 Zit.