TY - JOUR
T1 - ChatGPT, Copilot, Gemini, SciSpace and Wolfram versus higher education assessments
T2 - an updated multi-institutional study of the academic integrity impacts of Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) on assessment, teaching and learning in engineering
AU - Nikolic, Sasha
AU - Sandison, Carolyn
AU - Haque, Rezwanul
AU - Daniel, Scott
AU - Grundy, Sarah
AU - Belkina, Marina
AU - Lyden, Sarah
AU - Hassan, Ghulam M.
AU - Neal, Peter
N1 - Publisher Copyright: © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.
PY - 2024
Y1 - 2024
N2 - More than a year has passed since reports of ChatGPT-3.5's capability to pass exams sent shockwaves through education circles. These initial concerns led to a multi-institutional and multi-disciplinary study to assess the performance of Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) against assessment tasks used across 10 engineering subjects, showcasing the capability of GenAI. Assessment types included online quiz, numerical, oral, visual, programming and writing (experimentation, project, reflection and critical thinking, and research). Twelve months later, the study was repeated using new and updated tools ChatGPT-4, Copilot, Gemini, SciSpace and Wolfram. The updated study investigated the performance and capability differences, identifying the best tool for each assessment type. The findings show that increased performance and features can only heighten academic integrity concerns. While cheating concerns are central, opportunities to integrate GenAI to enhance teaching and learning are possible. While each GenAI tool had specific strengths and weaknesses, ChatGPT-4 was well-rounded. A GenAI Assessment Security and Opportunity Matrix is presented to provide the community practical guidance on managing assessment integrity risks and integration opportunities to enhance learning.
AB - More than a year has passed since reports of ChatGPT-3.5's capability to pass exams sent shockwaves through education circles. These initial concerns led to a multi-institutional and multi-disciplinary study to assess the performance of Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) against assessment tasks used across 10 engineering subjects, showcasing the capability of GenAI. Assessment types included online quiz, numerical, oral, visual, programming and writing (experimentation, project, reflection and critical thinking, and research). Twelve months later, the study was repeated using new and updated tools ChatGPT-4, Copilot, Gemini, SciSpace and Wolfram. The updated study investigated the performance and capability differences, identifying the best tool for each assessment type. The findings show that increased performance and features can only heighten academic integrity concerns. While cheating concerns are central, opportunities to integrate GenAI to enhance teaching and learning are possible. While each GenAI tool had specific strengths and weaknesses, ChatGPT-4 was well-rounded. A GenAI Assessment Security and Opportunity Matrix is presented to provide the community practical guidance on managing assessment integrity risks and integration opportunities to enhance learning.
KW - academic integrity
KW - Assessment
KW - chatGPT
KW - cheating
KW - education
KW - Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI)
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85198053539&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1080/22054952.2024.2372154
DO - 10.1080/22054952.2024.2372154
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85198053539
SN - 1324-5821
VL - 29
SP - 126
EP - 153
JO - Australasian Journal of Engineering Education
JF - Australasian Journal of Engineering Education
IS - 2
ER -