{"title":"Is use of ChatGPT cheating? Students of health professions perceptions.","authors":"Abby Swanson Kazley, Christine Andresen, Angela Mund, Clint Blankenship, Rick Segal","doi":"10.1080/0142159X.2024.2385667","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The purpose of this study is to explore student perceptions of generative AI use and cheating in health professions education. The authors sought to understand how students believe generative AI is acceptable to use in coursework.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Five faculty members surveyed students across health professions graduate programs using an updated, validated survey instrument. Students anonymously completed the survey online, which took 10-20 min. Data were then tabulated and reported in aggregate form.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Nearly 400 students from twelve academic programs including health and rehabilitation science, occupational therapy, physical therapy, physician assistant studies, speech-language pathology, health administration and health informatics, undergraduate healthcare studies, nurse anesthesiology, and cardiovascular perfusion. The majority of students identify the threat of generative AI to graded assignments such as tests and papers, but many believe it is acceptable to use these tools to learn and study outside of graded assignments.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Generative AI tools provide new options for students to study and learn. Graduate students in the health professions are currently using generative AI applications but are not universally aware or in agreement of how its use threatens academic integrity. Faculty should provide specific guidance on how generative AI applications may be used.</p>","PeriodicalId":18643,"journal":{"name":"Medical Teacher","volume":" ","pages":"894-898"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Teacher","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159X.2024.2385667","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/8/4 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this study is to explore student perceptions of generative AI use and cheating in health professions education. The authors sought to understand how students believe generative AI is acceptable to use in coursework.
Materials and methods: Five faculty members surveyed students across health professions graduate programs using an updated, validated survey instrument. Students anonymously completed the survey online, which took 10-20 min. Data were then tabulated and reported in aggregate form.
Results: Nearly 400 students from twelve academic programs including health and rehabilitation science, occupational therapy, physical therapy, physician assistant studies, speech-language pathology, health administration and health informatics, undergraduate healthcare studies, nurse anesthesiology, and cardiovascular perfusion. The majority of students identify the threat of generative AI to graded assignments such as tests and papers, but many believe it is acceptable to use these tools to learn and study outside of graded assignments.
Conclusions: Generative AI tools provide new options for students to study and learn. Graduate students in the health professions are currently using generative AI applications but are not universally aware or in agreement of how its use threatens academic integrity. Faculty should provide specific guidance on how generative AI applications may be used.
期刊介绍:
Medical Teacher provides accounts of new teaching methods, guidance on structuring courses and assessing achievement, and serves as a forum for communication between medical teachers and those involved in general education. In particular, the journal recognizes the problems teachers have in keeping up-to-date with the developments in educational methods that lead to more effective teaching and learning at a time when the content of the curriculum—from medical procedures to policy changes in health care provision—is also changing. The journal features reports of innovation and research in medical education, case studies, survey articles, practical guidelines, reviews of current literature and book reviews. All articles are peer reviewed.