大学生使用AI大型语言模型1进行作业准备。

IF 1.7 4区 教育学 Q2 EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES
Advances in Physiology Education Pub Date : 2025-06-01 Epub Date: 2025-03-25 DOI:10.1152/advan.00181.2024
Hui Chen, David Van Reyk, Brian G Oliver
{"title":"大学生使用AI大型语言模型1进行作业准备。","authors":"Hui Chen, David Van Reyk, Brian G Oliver","doi":"10.1152/advan.00181.2024","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Using an opportunity where students were explicitly permitted to use artificial intelligence (AI) applications to prepare an assignment, we compared the practices and beliefs of two distinct student cohorts: second-year science students at a large metropolitan university in Australia and students at a partner institution in the People's Republic of China (PRC). Data from an anonymous survey revealed that over 50% of students employed AI tools, primarily for idea generation and initial drafting, instead of using these tools as a source of text they would use in the assignments without editing or attribution. Reasons for use showed differences between native English speakers, their nonnative speaking classmates, and their classmates attending the PRC campus. Across the cohorts, there was a measured engagement with AI tools when preparing assignments. Notably, all cohorts declared a greater willingness to use such tools if institutional licenses were made available. Most students believed that they would use AI in their future professional roles and that their institutions should be providing guidance on the proper use of AI tools. At the Australian campus, sanctioning the use of AI in preparing the class assignment was not associated with any change in the average assignment marks from those gained by a cohort from the previous year where no sanction was in place. At the same time, there was a significant improvement in the average mark for the PRC students, which was associated with the same sanction.<b>NEW & NOTEWORTHY</b> We compared second-year science students at an Australian university and a partner institution in China on their use of AI tools for assignments. Over 50% used AI for idea generation and drafting. Notably, PRC students showed improved grades when AI was permitted, while Australian students saw no change. Most students expressed a willingness to use AI in their future careers and called for institutional guidance on AI use, especially if official licenses were provided.</p>","PeriodicalId":50852,"journal":{"name":"Advances in Physiology Education","volume":" ","pages":"517-525"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The use of AI large language models by university students for assignment preparation.\",\"authors\":\"Hui Chen, David Van Reyk, Brian G Oliver\",\"doi\":\"10.1152/advan.00181.2024\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Using an opportunity where students were explicitly permitted to use artificial intelligence (AI) applications to prepare an assignment, we compared the practices and beliefs of two distinct student cohorts: second-year science students at a large metropolitan university in Australia and students at a partner institution in the People's Republic of China (PRC). Data from an anonymous survey revealed that over 50% of students employed AI tools, primarily for idea generation and initial drafting, instead of using these tools as a source of text they would use in the assignments without editing or attribution. Reasons for use showed differences between native English speakers, their nonnative speaking classmates, and their classmates attending the PRC campus. Across the cohorts, there was a measured engagement with AI tools when preparing assignments. Notably, all cohorts declared a greater willingness to use such tools if institutional licenses were made available. Most students believed that they would use AI in their future professional roles and that their institutions should be providing guidance on the proper use of AI tools. At the Australian campus, sanctioning the use of AI in preparing the class assignment was not associated with any change in the average assignment marks from those gained by a cohort from the previous year where no sanction was in place. At the same time, there was a significant improvement in the average mark for the PRC students, which was associated with the same sanction.<b>NEW & NOTEWORTHY</b> We compared second-year science students at an Australian university and a partner institution in China on their use of AI tools for assignments. Over 50% used AI for idea generation and drafting. Notably, PRC students showed improved grades when AI was permitted, while Australian students saw no change. Most students expressed a willingness to use AI in their future careers and called for institutional guidance on AI use, especially if official licenses were provided.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50852,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Advances in Physiology Education\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"517-525\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Advances in Physiology Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1152/advan.00181.2024\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/3/25 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in Physiology Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1152/advan.00181.2024","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/3/25 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

利用学生被明确允许使用人工智能(AI)应用程序准备作业的机会,我们比较了两个不同学生群体的实践和信念:澳大利亚一所大型城市大学的二年级理科学生和中华人民共和国合作机构的学生。一项匿名调查的数据显示,超过50%的学生使用人工智能工具,主要是为了产生想法和初步起草,而不是使用这些工具作为他们在作业中使用的文本来源,而不需要编辑或注明出处。使用原因在以英语为母语的同学、非英语为母语的同学和他们在中国校区的同学之间存在差异。在整个队列中,在准备作业时,有一个衡量人工智能工具的参与。值得注意的是,所有研究对象都表示,如果提供机构许可,他们更愿意使用这些工具。大多数学生认为,他们将在未来的职业角色中使用人工智能,他们的机构应该为正确使用人工智能工具提供指导。在澳大利亚校区,批准使用人工智能来准备课堂作业,与前一年没有批准的同组学生相比,他们的平均作业分数没有任何变化。与此同时,中国学生的平均分数有了显著的提高,这与同样的制裁有关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The use of AI large language models by university students for assignment preparation.

Using an opportunity where students were explicitly permitted to use artificial intelligence (AI) applications to prepare an assignment, we compared the practices and beliefs of two distinct student cohorts: second-year science students at a large metropolitan university in Australia and students at a partner institution in the People's Republic of China (PRC). Data from an anonymous survey revealed that over 50% of students employed AI tools, primarily for idea generation and initial drafting, instead of using these tools as a source of text they would use in the assignments without editing or attribution. Reasons for use showed differences between native English speakers, their nonnative speaking classmates, and their classmates attending the PRC campus. Across the cohorts, there was a measured engagement with AI tools when preparing assignments. Notably, all cohorts declared a greater willingness to use such tools if institutional licenses were made available. Most students believed that they would use AI in their future professional roles and that their institutions should be providing guidance on the proper use of AI tools. At the Australian campus, sanctioning the use of AI in preparing the class assignment was not associated with any change in the average assignment marks from those gained by a cohort from the previous year where no sanction was in place. At the same time, there was a significant improvement in the average mark for the PRC students, which was associated with the same sanction.NEW & NOTEWORTHY We compared second-year science students at an Australian university and a partner institution in China on their use of AI tools for assignments. Over 50% used AI for idea generation and drafting. Notably, PRC students showed improved grades when AI was permitted, while Australian students saw no change. Most students expressed a willingness to use AI in their future careers and called for institutional guidance on AI use, especially if official licenses were provided.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
19.00%
发文量
100
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Advances in Physiology Education promotes and disseminates educational scholarship in order to enhance teaching and learning of physiology, neuroscience and pathophysiology. The journal publishes peer-reviewed descriptions of innovations that improve teaching in the classroom and laboratory, essays on education, and review articles based on our current understanding of physiological mechanisms. Submissions that evaluate new technologies for teaching and research, and educational pedagogy, are especially welcome. The audience for the journal includes educators at all levels: K–12, undergraduate, graduate, and professional programs.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信