Is use of ChatGPT cheating? Students of health professions perceptions.

IF 3.3 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES
Medical Teacher Pub Date : 2025-05-01 Epub Date: 2024-08-04 DOI:10.1080/0142159X.2024.2385667
Abby Swanson Kazley, Christine Andresen, Angela Mund, Clint Blankenship, Rick Segal
{"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.

使用 ChatGPT 是否作弊?健康专业学生的看法。
目的:本研究旨在探讨学生对在卫生专业教育中使用生成式人工智能和作弊的看法。作者试图了解学生认为在课程作业中使用生成式人工智能的可接受性:五位教师使用最新的、经过验证的调查工具对健康专业研究生课程的学生进行了调查。学生匿名在线完成调查,耗时 10-20 分钟。然后将数据制成表格,并以汇总的形式进行报告:来自健康与康复科学、职业治疗、物理治疗、医生助理研究、言语病理学、健康管理与健康信息学、本科医疗保健研究、麻醉学护士和心血管灌注等 12 个学术项目的近 400 名学生参与了调查。大多数学生认为,生成式人工智能对考试和论文等分级作业构成威胁,但许多学生认为,在分级作业之外使用这些工具进行学习和研究是可以接受的:生成式人工智能工具为学生的学习和研究提供了新的选择。健康专业的研究生目前正在使用生成式人工智能应用程序,但他们并没有普遍意识到或同意使用这些工具会威胁学术诚信。教师应就如何使用生成式人工智能应用程序提供具体指导。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Medical Teacher
Medical Teacher 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
8.50%
发文量
396
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
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.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信