Kemian oppimisen tehostaminen ChatGPT:llä, Bing Chatilla, Bardilla ja Claudella ajatteluagentteina

Vertaileva tapaustutkimus


  • Renato P. dos Santos CIAGE – Centre for Generative Artificial Intelligence in Cognition and Education and ULBRA – Lutheran University of Brazil, Brasilia


kemian opetus, ChatGPT, Bing Chat, Bard, Claude, AI opetuksessa, ajatteluagentit


Artikkeli englanniksi.

 This research delves into the comparative advantages of Generative AI chatbots (GenAIbots) -- ChatGPT, Bing Chat, Bard, and Claude -- in the context of Chemistry education, framed within a constructivist perspective. Our primary objective was to identify which of these four AI tools is more effective for enhancing Chemistry learning. Employing a single-case study approach, we scrutinised interaction logs between the AI systems and a simulated student persona during Chemistry learning simulations, incorporating Content Analysis methodology to delve deeper into the discourse. Our findings underscore these tools' potential as "agents-to-think-with", enhancing critical thinking, problem-solving, comprehension, creativity, and tailored learning. Especially noteworthy is their ability to stimulate learners through Socratic-like questioning, aligning with constructionist principles. The research emphasises the pivotal role of prompt crafting to coax desired responses from GenAIbots, engendering iterative reflections. It also highlights the need for robust educator training to infuse these technologies into educational settings. Conclusively, while ChatGPT, Bing Chat, Bard, and Claude are poised to enrich Chemistry education by fostering dynamic, inclusive learning experiences, ChatGPT stood out, decisively surpassing Bing Chat in its performance. Bard and Claude trailed closely, with all three showcasing a more in-depth, precise, and nuanced understanding, underscoring ChatGPT's adeptness at contextual comprehension.

Viittaaminen: Santos, R. P. dos. (2023). Enhancing Chemistry Learning with ChatGPT, Bing Chat, Bard, and Claude as Agents-to-Think-With: A Comparative Case Study (arXiv:2311.00709). arXiv.