Chat GPT
Chat GPT
Chat GPT
net/publication/374949974
CITATIONS READS
3 1,222
1 author:
SEE PROFILE
All content following this page was uploaded by Zanyar Nathir Ghafar on 25 October 2023.
ARTICLEINFO ABSTRACT
Keywords: Education Models, Concerns about the future of education have been
Language Reproduction, amplified in recent years as a result of the introduction of
Instruction in Second the innovative online application ChatGPT. Because they
Languages, Educational depend so much on written assessments, teachers of
Environments, Customized foreign languages experienced increased levels of worry,
Instruction, Formative which were further made worse by the extensive publicity
Evaluation the topic received in the media.The current topic is
centered on the significant debate that has taken place
Received : 02 August regarding the highly idealized capabilities of the chatbot.
Revised : 03September Therefore, the first thing that is going to be done in this
Accepted: 05 October article is to provide a complete explanation of the
mechanics, functions, and common misconceptions about
©2023 Ghafar: This is an
ChatGPT. This review paper aims to focus on positives
open-access article
and negatives that are associated with the employment of
distributed under the terms
chatbots are the first topic that is investigated in this
of the Creative Commons
research. After that, a thorough investigation into the
Atribusi 4.0 Internasional.
ways in which students and teachers may most efficiently
make use of the chatbot is carried out. Some people
believe that ChatGPT offers substantial opportunities for
teachers and educational institutions to improve the ways
in which they teach and evaluate second and foreign
languages. In addition to this, it has provided academics
with a number of new research paths to investigate, most
notably in the field of customized education.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.59890/ijarss.v1i2.392 73
( https://journal.multitechpublisher.com/index.php/ijarss/index
Ghafar
INTRODUCTION
In the rapidly evolving realm of technology, it is a rarity for a novel
advancement to get attention and impact as swiftly as ChatGPT has managed to
do. In a span of just over four months, this language model, driven by Artificial
Intelligence (AI), has garnered significant attention worldwide. Its capabilities
have sparked interest among many groups, ranging from academics to casual
internet users. While those with a strong understanding and proficiency in
technology express their admiration for its remarkable capabilities, the area of
education has seen this advancement with a mixture of awe and concern.
Numerous instances of cheating and misbehavior have garnered significant
attention in the media (Muskat, 2023; Peritz, 2022).
In response to concerns over the use and potential abuse of ChatGPT,
some educational institutions have sequentially declared prohibitions on the
utilization of this recently developed conversational AI system (Reuters, 2023).
Educators and school officials see ChatGPT as a potential catalyst for negative
consequences, since it may impede students' progress in cultivating essential
skills such as analytical thinking and written proficiency.
Nevertheless, when analyzing the historical progression of technological
development, educators have consistently expressed apprehensions regarding
the adoption of novel technologies. These concerns range from claims that
Google search engines impede cognitive functioning and diminish intellectual
capacity (Carr, 2008), to anxieties surrounding students' dependence on the
perceived unreliability of information sourced from Wikipedia (Meishar-Tal,
2015), to the notion that smartphones have hindered students' ability to
construct coherent and comprehensive sentences (Strain-Moritz, 2016). It is
common for first studies on emerging technologies to have a mostly negative
perspective (Kahn, 2011). However, historical evidence consistently reveals
positive narratives around each technological advancement (Kaufman &
McNay, 2017). The misalignment between anticipation and reality has been
ascribed by psychologists to the inherent inclination of human beings to
perceive the unfamiliar as a threat (Karlin, 2013, p. 217). Alternatively, it has
been suggested that individuals and organizations exhibit a reluctance to
embrace significant changes, a phenomenon commonly referred to as the
"innovator's dilemma" (Christensen, 2011, p. ix). It should be acknowledged
that educators' worries are really valid, as supported by Alhumaid (2019).
Nevertheless, prematurely experiencing anxiety over the emergence of the new
wave might perhaps lead to the disregard of the novel prospects and mindset it
brings forth. In the context of second or foreign language instruction and
acquisition, there is a prevailing notion based on anecdotal evidence that
instructors express significant apprehension over the issue of unoriginal writing
that eludes detection by current software solutions (Molly, 2022). This
observation is consistent with the findings at my own educational institution,
where English writing is a fundamental component of the curriculum. The
faculty members at our institute universally express their disapproval of
students relying on ChatGPT for their writing tasks. However, in order to have
a comprehensive grasp of the potential risks and advantages, it is crucial to
74
International Journal of Applied Research and Sustainable Sciences (IJARSS)
Vol. 1 No. 2, 2023:73 - 86
LITERATURE REVIEW
An Analysis of ChatGPT: Defining its Capabilities and Limitations
ChatGPT is an advanced chatbot that utilizes OpenAI's Generative Pre-
trained Transformer-3 (GPT3) models, which are renowned for their huge
linguistic capacity. The chatbot has undergone refinement using a combination
of supervised and reinforcement learning methods, as described by Radford et
al. (2018). Supervised fine-tuning involves training a model using labeled
datasets, as described by Lee et al. (2018). On the other hand, reinforcement
learning is a methodology that enables a machine to interact with its
environment in order to maximize rewards, while autonomously exploring
many alternatives, as discussed by Verma and Diamantidis (2021). According to
King and ChatGPT (2023), ChatGPT has the ability to participate in
conversations with users in a manner that is both natural and responsive. The
language model's neural network, which utilizes extensive datasets to establish
diverse connection strengths, enables ChatGPT to generate text responses that
closely resemble human language (MacNeil et al., 2022). Additionally, it allows
ChatGPT to address follow-up questions, acknowledge errors, question
incorrect assumptions, and decline inappropriate requests. Moreover, ChatGPT
has the capability to produce content in several formats, including essays,
humor, and poetry. By receiving ongoing feedback from users, ChatGPT is
capable of improving its performance in comparable tasks, such as providing
responses to similar inquiries.
In contrast to commonly held and idealized notions, it should be noted
that ChatGPT does not engage in reasoning or emotional reactions while
addressing user inquiries. Rather, it relies on the process of comparing available
data in order to provide the most probable replies, often based on frequency
and relevance. Therefore, the input provided by the end-user is crucial for
ensuring the future precision of the system. Due to its underlying process,
ChatGPT lacks the ability to comprehend the text it produces or the contextual
information, leading to the generation of replies that may seem reasonable but
are frequently inaccurate or incomprehensible (Thorp, 2023, p. 313). Previous
studies and media outlets have raised concerns regarding the veracity of the
information generated by ChatGPT (van Dis et al., 2023; Graham, 2022).
Instances have been reported where ChatGPT has been observed to generate
content in the absence of relevant knowledge and even fabricate fictitious
sources (King & ChatGPT, 2023; Rudolph et al., 2023). According to van Dis et
al. (2023), scholars have observed that chatbots possess a notable capacity for
synthesis, but their skill is limited to learning statistical connections among
words rather than comprehending their semantic significance (p. 615).
75
Ghafar
METHODOLOGY
The phenomenon of major changes
ChatGPT has been identified as a significant disruptor in both the
industry (Grant & Metz, 2022) and the realm of education. Nevertheless, the
presence of disruptors is needed in order to instigate significant
transformations inside the resistant education system. Ferster (2014) posited the
hypothesis that if a student from the 19th century were to be placed in a
contemporary classroom, they would have a notable sense of familiarity.
Regrettably, a significant portion of the aforementioned observations continues
to hold true throughout second language/foreign language classes in the
present day.
76
International Journal of Applied Research and Sustainable Sciences (IJARSS)
Vol. 1 No. 2, 2023:73 - 86
77
Ghafar
78
International Journal of Applied Research and Sustainable Sciences (IJARSS)
Vol. 1 No. 2, 2023:73 - 86
79
Ghafar
RESEARCH RESULT
The utilization of ChatGPT as an educational instrument
Researchers have the ability to investigate the experiences and
perspectives of individuals who are learning a language by utilizing language
learning applications. In the aforementioned portrayal, I presented a
predominantly optimistic scenario wherein students engage in cheerful
conversations with chatbots. However, it is important to acknowledge that
language learners of varying competence levels may have diverse perceptions
and experiences about the utilization of ChatGPT, hence yielding distinct
advantages. Furthermore, learners may exhibit varying levels of receptiveness
towards the novel technology and innovative learning approach. Furthermore,
this study aims to examine the impact of engaging in conversations with
ChatGPT on learners' proficiency in the four language skills: speaking,
listening, reading, and writing. Additionally, it seeks to investigate the
enhancements in grammatical accuracy, expansion of vocabulary, including the
use of formulaic sequences (Hong, 2015), and changes in learner motivation,
particularly in the affective domain.
The potential of ChatGPT to significantly advance personalized learning
(PL) and personal learning environments (PLEs) is noteworthy, as these
educational approaches have frequently faced criticism for their inability to
customize content based on the specific requirements of individuals (Xu et al.,
2023).
One of the primary rationales is that the development of Personal
Learning and Personal Learning Environments necessitates a foundation
grounded in extensive data and input from students. Nevertheless, several
current systems lack these functions, rendering them indistinguishable from
conventional online learning platforms. In contrast, chatbots possess a notable
proficiency in both aspects, owing to their extensive repositories of data and
continuous acquisition of knowledge through user feedback. Therefore,
scholars have the opportunity to investigate the potential effects of chatbots on
personal learning and personal learning environments.
Utilizing ChatGPT for pedagogical purposes
According to Rudolph et al. (2023), ChatGPT possesses the capability to
assess student writing, provide recommendations, develop lesson plans, and
produce various assignments, questions, and scenarios. Therefore, it is possible
for researchers to examine the perspectives of instructors regarding ChatGPT as
a tool for instruction, the potential for its use in reducing teacher burden, and
the ways in which teachers are effectively utilizing the platform. Furthermore, it
is crucial to engage in comprehensive dialogue and conduct thorough study
into the ethical concerns and the impact on teacher professionalism that arise
from the utilization of such technology. The question at hand is to the ethical
implications of teachers utilizing curriculum ideas and materials generated by
ChatGPT, given its reliance on pre-existing sources without regard for
copyright considerations. What are the potential consequences for other
stakeholders, such as educational institutions and materials software
developers?
80
International Journal of Applied Research and Sustainable Sciences (IJARSS)
Vol. 1 No. 2, 2023:73 - 86
CONCLUSION
In summary, it can be inferred that the aforementioned points
collectively support the notion that. This article provides an in-depth analysis of
the functionalities and common misconceptions surrounding ChatGPT, a
widely discussed language model. Despite possessing significant skills,
ChatGPT falls short of the cognitive and linguistic talents exhibited by human
beings in their known form. Educators are advised to engage in conversations
regarding the operational functions and underlying mechanisms of the chatbot,
alongside addressing the constraints and challenges related with its utilization.
The following are the fundamental principles upon which the establishment of
guidelines for utilizing the application is founded. The prohibition of the
application is currently feasible within the campus environment. Nevertheless,
implementing measures to restrict students from utilizing the chatbot beyond
the confines of the university proves to be a challenging task. In light of the
unavoidable integration of technology, educators and educational institutions
are urged to alter their mindset and modify their instructional methods and
evaluation practices. It is firmly held that, subsequent to the initial surge of
trepidation, educators would gradually recognize the favorable aspects of the
modifications, so enabling them to wholeheartedly adopt the advantages and
prospects presented by emerging technologies. In a similar vein, ChatGPT has
provided researchers with a wide range of subjects to explore. The limitless
potential of chatbot technology in the realms of education and research is
undeniable.
81
Ghafar
REFERENCE
Adesso, G. (2023). Towards The Ultimate Brain: Exploring Scientific Discovery
with ChatGPT AI, Authorea Preprints. https://
doi.org/10.22541/au.167701309.98216987/v1
Alhumaid, K. (2019). Four ways technology has negatively changed education.
Journal of Educational and Social Research, 9(4), 10.
https://www.mcser.org/journal/index.php/jesr/article/view/10526
Amit, S., Karim, R., & Kafy, A. A. (2022). Mapping emerging massive open
online course (MOOC) markets before and after COVID 19: A
comparative perspective from Bangladesh and India. Spatial Information
Research, 30(5), 655-663. https:// doi.org/10.1007/s41324-022-00463-4
Bettiol, S., Psereckis, R., & MacIntyre, K. (2022). A perspective of massive
open online courses (MOOCs) and public health. Frontiers in Public
Health, 10, 1-8. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2022.1058383
Bunk, J., Li, R., Smidt, E., Bidetti, C., & Malize, B. (2015). Understanding
Faculty Attitudes About Distance Education: The Importance of
Excitement and Fear. Online Learning, 19(4), n4.
https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1079611
Business Insider. (2023, Feb 20). ChatGPT creator Sam Altman says the world
may not be ―that far away from potentially scary‖ AI and feels
―regulation will be critical.‖ https://www.businessinsider.com/openai-
chatgpt-sam-altman-world-notfar-potentially-scary-ai-2023-2
Carr, N. (2008). Is Google making us stupid?. Teachers College Record,
110(14), 89-94. http://www.theatlantic.com/ doc/200807/google
Chia, O. (2023, January 6). Teachers v ChatGPT: Schools face new challenge in
fight against plagiarism. The Straits Times,
https://www.straitstimes.com/tech/teachers-v-chatgpt-schools-face-
new-challenge-in-fight-against-plagiarism
Chilingaryan, K., & Zvereva, E. (2017). Methodology of flipped classroom as a
learning technology in foreign language teaching. Procedia-Social and
Behavioral Sciences, 237, 1500-1504.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2017.02.236
Christensen, C. M. (2011). The innovator's dilemma: When new technologies
cause great firms to fail. Harvard Business Review Press.
Dixson, D. D., & Worrell, F. C. (2016). Formative and summative assessment
in the classroom. Theory into practice, 55(2), 153-159.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2016.1148989
Ferster, B. (2014). Teaching machines: Learning from the intersection of
education and technology. Johns Hopkins University Press.
82
International Journal of Applied Research and Sustainable Sciences (IJARSS)
Vol. 1 No. 2, 2023:73 - 86
Graham, F. (2022). Daily briefing: Will ChatGPT kill the essay assignment?.
Nature. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-022- 04437-2
Grant, N. and Metz, C. (2022, December 21). A new chat bot is a ‗code red‘ for
Google‘s search business. New York Times,
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/21/technology/ai-chatgpt-google-
search.html
Hong, W. C. H. (2015). Collocations and Word Combinations in Writing:
Challenges of and Suggestions for Teaching and Learning. In E. Doman
(Ed.), Reframing English Education in Asia (pp. 63-74). Salt Lake City,
MI: American Academic Press.
Hong, W. C. H. (2016). Assessing Explicit Phonological Knowledge—
Preliminary Evidence and Implications. In E. Doman (Ed.), Departing
from Tradition: Innovations in English Language Teaching (pp. 208-223).
Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Hong, W. C. H. (2018). The Effect of Absence of Explicit Knowledge on
ESL/EFL Stress-Placement Accuracy: A quasiexperiment. Asian EFL
Journal, 20(2), 262-279. https://www.asian-efl-journal.com/wp-
content/uploads/AEFLJ-Volume20-Issue-2-2018.pdf#page=262
Hong, W. C. H. (2021a). Improving English as a foreign language learners‘
writing using a minimal grammar approach of teaching dependent
clauses: A case study of Macao secondary school students. In B.
Reynolds & M. Teng (Ed.), Innovative Approaches in Teaching English
Writing to Chinese Speakers (pp. 67-90). Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter
Mouton. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781501512643-004
Hong, W. C. H. (2021b). Macao Secondary School EFL Teachers‘ Perspectives
on Written Corrective Feedback: Rationales and Constraints. Journal of
Educational Technology and Innovation, 1(04), 1-13.
https://jeti.thewsu.org/index.php/cieti/ article/view/17
Impey, C., & Formanek, M. (2021). MOOCS and 100 Days of COVID:
Enrollment surges in massive open online astronomy classes during the
coronavirus pandemic. Social Sciences & Humanities Open, 4(1), 100177.
https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.ssaho.2021.100177
Kahn, P. H., Jr. (2011). Technological nature: Adaptation and the future of
human life. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Karlin, B. (2013). Technology and Psychology-Natural enemies or just plain
natural. Ecopsychology, 5(4), 217-218. https://
doi.org/10.1089/eco.2013.0081
Kaufman, J. A., & McNay, G. D. (2017). At the intersection of technology and
nature: The potential for a bright green future. Ecopsychology, 9(4), 253-
259. https://doi.org/10.1089/eco.2017.0022
83
Ghafar
84
International Journal of Applied Research and Sustainable Sciences (IJARSS)
Vol. 1 No. 2, 2023:73 - 86
Commentator. https://yucommentator.org/2023/01/students-caught-
cheating-using-ai-on-finalacademic-integrity-policy-updated/
Ohio University. (2023). ChatGPT and Teaching and Learning.
https://www.ohio.edu/center-teaching-learning/resources/ chatgpt
Pavlik, J.V. (2023). Collaborating with ChatGPT: considering the implications
of generative artificial intelligence for journalism and media education.
Journalism & Mass Communication Educator, 78(1), 84–93. https://doi.
org/10.1177/10776958221149577
Peritz, A. (2022, September 6). A Fun, Easy New Way for Students to Cheat.
Slate Magazine. https://slate.com/ technology/2022/09/ai-students-
writing-cheating-sudowrite.html
Radford, A., Narasimhan, K., Salimans, T., & Sutskever, I. (2018). Improving
language understanding by generative pretraining.
http://www.cs.ubc.ca/amuham01/LING530/papers/radford2018impr
oving.pdf
Reuters. (2023, January 27). Top French university bans use of ChatGPT to
prevent plagiarism. https://www.reuters.com/ technology/top-french-
university-bans-use-chatgpt-prevent-plagiarism-2023-01-27/
Rudolph, J. (2014). Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) as a disruptive
innovation in higher education? [M.Ed. dissertation, University of
Adelaide].
Rudolph, J., Tan, S., & Tan, S. (2023). ChatGPT: Bullshit spewer or the end of
traditional assessments in higher education?. Journal of Applied
Learning and Teaching, 6(1). https://doi.org/10.37074/jalt.2023.6.1.9
Skehan, P. (2013). Language aptitude. In M. Bigelow & Watson, J. (Eds.), The
Routledge handbook of second language acquisition, pp. 399-413.
Routledge.
Sravat, N., & Pathranarakul, P. (2022). Flipped learning pedagogy: modelling
the challenges for higher education in India. International Journal of
Learning and Change, 14(2), 221-240.
https://doi.org/10.1504/IJLC.2022.121137
Strain-Moritz, T. (2016). Perceptions of Technology Use and Its Effects on
Student Writing. (Master's Thesis). https://
digitalcommons.brockport.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=https://w
ww.google.com.eg/&httpsredir=1&article=1399&co ntext=ehd_theses
TESOL International association. (2023). AI for Language Learning: ChatGPT
and the Future of ELT. http://blog.tesol.org/aifor-language-learning-
chatgpt-and-the-future-of-elt/
Thorp, H. H. (2023). ChatGPT is fun, but not an author. Science, 379(6630),
313-313. https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/ science.adg7879
85
Ghafar
86