ChatGPT in the classroom. Exploring its potential and limitations in a Functional Programming course

AI-generated keywords: OpenAI ChatGPT generative AI tools coding assignments education

AI-generated Key Points

  • OpenAI introduced ChatGPT in November 2022
  • ChatGPT is based on supervised and reinforcement learning
  • ChatGPT can answer questions with human-like responses and generate code from scratch or complete coding templates
  • A survey at POLITEHNICA University of Bucharest (UPB) found over 40% of students had been using generative AI tools like ChatGPT for at least six months for coding assignments
  • ChatGPT provided correct answers in 68% of cases, but only around half were deemed legible solutions beneficial to students
  • ChatGPT excelled in performing code reviews on student programming homework
  • ChatGPT scored approximately 7 out of 10 for correctness in a study on 72 programming tasks from the Functional Programming course at UPB, but struggled with efficiency and comprehensibility
  • The evaluation highlighted that errors pointed out by students could improve ChatGPT's score to 8.6, requiring a certain level of expertise from students
  • Generating tests for solutions proved challenging as only 70% were accurate, potentially causing confusion when tests failed for students
  • Generative AI tools like ChatGPT are commonly used by students for homework and exams according to survey results
  • Further assessment is needed to determine the accuracy and practicality of these tools in education, especially regarding providing correct and useful results for students
  • The dataset used for evaluation consisted of exercises from the Functional Programming course at UPB categorized into easy, medium, and hard levels based on teaching experience
  • While promising in assisting with coding assignments and providing feedback on student work, limitations exist regarding efficiency and comprehension that need addressing for optimal educational use
  • Further research is necessary to explore effective integration of generative AI tools like ChatGPT into programming-focused lectures while ensuring they enhance learning outcomes
Also access our AI generated: Comprehensive summary, Lay summary, Blog-like article; or ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant.

Authors: Dan-Matei Popovici

International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 2023
License: CC BY 4.0

Abstract: In November 2022, OpenAI has introduced ChatGPT, a chatbot based on supervised and reinforcement learning. Not only can it answer questions emulating human-like responses, but it can also generate code from scratch or complete coding templates provided by the user. ChatGPT can generate unique responses which render any traditional anti-plagiarism tool useless. Its release has ignited a heated debate about its usage in academia, especially by students. We have found, to our surprise, that our students at POLITEHNICA University of Bucharest (UPB) have been using generative AI tools (ChatGPT and its predecessors) for solving homework, for at least 6 months. We therefore set out to explore the capabilities of ChatGPT and assess its value for educational purposes. We solved all our coding assignments for the semester from our UPB Functional Programming course. We discovered that, although ChatGPT provides correct answers in 68% of the cases, only around half of those are legible solutions which can benefit students in some form. On the other hand, ChatGPT has a very good ability to perform code review on student programming homework. Based on these findings, we discuss the pros and cons of ChatGPT in education.

Submitted to arXiv on 20 Jan. 2024

Ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant

You can also chat with multiple papers at once here.

AI assistant instructions?

Results of the summarizing process for the arXiv paper: 2401.11166v1

In November 2022, OpenAI introduced ChatGPT, a chatbot based on supervised and reinforcement learning that can answer questions with human-like responses and generate code from scratch or complete coding templates. The release of ChatGPT sparked a debate about its use in academia, particularly by students. Surprisingly, a survey conducted at POLITEHNICA University of Bucharest (UPB) revealed that over 40% of students had been using generative AI tools like ChatGPT for at least six months for coding assignments. Further exploration into the tool's capabilities showed that ChatGPT provided correct answers in 68% of cases but only around half were deemed legible solutions beneficial to students. However, ChatGPT excelled in performing code reviews on student programming homework. A study on 72 programming tasks from the Functional Programming course at UPB found that ChatGPT scored approximately 7 out of 10 for correctness but struggled with efficiency and comprehensibility. Additionally, the evaluation highlighted that ChatGPT could improve its score to 8.6 when errors were pointed out, although this required a certain level of expertise from students. Generating tests for solutions also proved challenging as only 70% were accurate, leading to potential confusion for students when tests failed. The survey results indicated that generative AI tools like ChatGPT are commonly used by students for homework and exams. To gain a better understanding of their accuracy and practicality in education, further assessment is needed to determine how these tools can provide correct and useful results for students. The dataset used for evaluation consisted of exercises from the Functional Programming course at UPB categorized into easy, medium, and hard levels based on teaching experience. Overall, while ChatGPT shows promise in assisting with coding assignments and providing feedback on student work, there are limitations regarding efficiency and comprehension that need to be addressed for optimal educational use. Further research is necessary to explore ways to effectively integrate generative AI tools like ChatGPT into programming-focused lectures while ensuring they enhance learning outcomes for students.
Created on 19 Mar. 2024

Assess the quality of the AI-generated content by voting

Score: 0

Why do we need votes?

Votes are used to determine whether we need to re-run our summarizing tools. If the count reaches -10, our tools can be restarted.

Look for similar papers (in beta version)

By clicking on the button above, our algorithm will scan all papers in our database to find the closest based on the contents of the full papers and not just on metadata. Please note that it only works for papers that we have generated summaries for and you can rerun it from time to time to get a more accurate result while our database grows.

Disclaimer: The AI-based summarization tool and virtual assistant provided on this website may not always provide accurate and complete summaries or responses. We encourage you to carefully review and evaluate the generated content to ensure its quality and relevance to your needs.