Perspectives, Practices, and Challenges of ChatGPT Utilization at Eastern Visayas State University Teacher Education Department

Perspectives, Practices, and Challenges of ChatGPT Utilization at Eastern Visayas State University Teacher Education Department

Gemma Rose Guarin, Gena O. Jugar, Joseph T. Gudelos*, Nica Anaiza O. Boco, Mercy P. Cantal, Maui April Jane P. Durano, Erika Mae P. Robel, Trisha May F. Tundag & Beatrice D. Mabitad

Eastern Visayas State University, Ormoc City, Philippines

*Corresponding Author

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.9010325

Received: 15 January 2025; Accepted: 17 January 2025; Published: 21 February 2025

ABSTRACT

This study examined the utilization of ChatGPT among students and teachers at Eastern Visayas State University Ormoc Campus, specifically the Education Department. The study aimed to fill the gap in the literature on the practical uses and challenges of implementing AI tools such as ChatGPT in an educational setting, particularly in teacher education programs. Utilizing both quantitative and qualitative methods, the researchers surveyed 285 students from the population of 1,120 and 13 teachers from the total of 16, using stratified random sampling and qualitative interviews. Results reveal that while both students and teachers acknowledge the worth of ChatGPT in education, students more frequently and regularly use the tool, with a higher average utilization score and less variability. In contrast, teachers had more diverse patterns of usage and a greater range of opinions on its effectiveness. Identified challenges include concerns about the accuracy and reliability of information generated by ChatGPT and the overreliance of students on the tool, which can negatively affect students’ independent thinking and academic integrity. The results of this study provide insights relevant to integrating AI tools into education, guiding future implementations, appropriate methodological approaches, and policy decisions for maximizing the benefits of AI technologies and mitigating possible challenges.

Keywords: ChatGPT utilization, Teacher education programs, I tool in education, academic integrity challenges

INTRODUCTION

ChatGPT has an extremely high level of intellect and complexity, which can possibly lead students to dependency. Educators has already made a lot of strides to improve teaching and learning, such as the use of Facebook group (Gudelos, 2023a), inquiry-based learning (Gudelos, 2023b) but the AI inventions specifically ChatGPT in education could make a significant impact or a controversial mark.

The rapid advancements in artificial intelligence (AI) have introduced novel opportunities and challenges in education. Among these innovations, the Generative Pre-Trained Transformer (GPT) model, exemplified by ChatGPT, has emerged as a groundbreaking language processing tool capable of producing human-like text responses (Goralski & Tan, 2020; Ali, 2023). Despite its potential to transform educational practices, its integration into primary and tertiary education raises several unresolved issues. These include concerns about the reliability of AI-generated content, its implications for academic integrity, and the ethical dilemmas surrounding data security and privacy (Zhai, 2023). Additionally, while ChatGPT has been acknowledged for providing personalized learning experiences and facilitating student-teacher interactions, significant gaps persist regarding its practical application in education, particularly within teacher education programs. The over-reliance on AI, challenges with scalability, and potential disparities in access underscore the need for a comprehensive exploration of its educational utility.

ChatGPT demonstrates considerable promise in enhancing learning experiences through individualized feedback, resource generation, and accessibility features (Dwivedi et al., 2023). Research highlights its ability to foster inclusivity by providing alternative formats, such as text-to-speech and translations for non-native speakers (Buhalis & Karatay, 2022). Additionally, it can serve as a valuable writing assistant, offering suggestions for grammar, syntax, and style to help students improve their writing skills. For educators, ChatGPT streamlines content creation, enabling more efficient lesson planning and resource allocation (Goldms, 2022).

However, these advancements are tempered by critical limitations. Concerns about the accuracy of AI-generated content persist, as ChatGPT occasionally produces biased or incorrect information (Zhai, 2023). Studies indicate that over-reliance on such tools may hinder students’ development of critical thinking, creativity, and problem-solving skills. Furthermore, ethical considerations, such as data security, privacy, and potential misuse of AI-generated content, remain pressing issues (Victor et al., 2023). Global discussions emphasize the necessity for AI-driven tools like ChatGPT to be implemented responsibly to ensure equitable and secure usage across diverse educational contexts (Kim et al., 2023).

While prior research has recognized ChatGPT’s potential to revolutionize education, several limitations in these studies are evident. Much of the literature focuses on the theoretical benefits of AI without addressing the practical challenges faced by students and educators in diverse educational settings. For example, the global discourse on academic dishonesty linked to AI-generated content underscores the need for empirical studies to examine its prevalence and impact on teaching methodologies (Butson & Smith, 2024). Moreover, despite promising findings on ChatGPT’s capabilities in providing personalized health education and emergency remote teaching, these studies often lack depth in analyzing regional variations and cultural contexts that influence its adoption and efficacy (Tülübas et al., 2023; Klayklung et al., 2023).

Research Objectives

The present study seeks to address these gaps by investigating the perspectives, practices, and challenges associated with ChatGPT utilization in the Teacher Education Department of Eastern Visayas State University. Specifically, it aims to answer the following subsidiary problems:

1. What are the perspectives of the students and teachers regarding the utilization of ChatGPT in the academic pursuit within the Teacher Education Departments?
2. What are the students and teachers’ practices on ChatGPT in their academic activities in terms of:

2.1. Students:

2.1.1. learning activities

2.1.2. assignments

2.2. Teachers:

2.2.1. teaching methodologies

3.Describe statistically the differences or commonalities of the perspectives and practices of students and teachers regarding ChatGPT utilization?

4.What challenges do teachers and students face in utilizing ChatGPT in their academic activities?

The study further aims to contribute valuable insights into the responsible and effective integration of ChatGPT into educational frameworks, balancing its potential benefits with the ethical and practical challenges it presents.

Literature and Related Studies Review

The 21st-century education focuses on equipping students with skills to thrive in a data-driven world, emphasizing the ability to interpret, share, and use information wisely. While technology integration is vital, it should be employed strategically to support students’ learning (KnowingTech, 2021). The introduction of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in classrooms promises significant transformation, yet it also presents challenges in implementation (Melo, 2023). ChatGPT, released by OpenAI in late 2022, is one such AI tool, with its high intelligence and versatility attracting millions of users within the first month, sparking discussions about its potential to rival search engines like Google (Farhi et al., 2023). As a powerful language model, ChatGPT can generate human-like text and function as an effective search engine, offering precise answers to user queries (Aljanabi, 2023).

While previous studies have explored AI’s potential, there is a notable gap in understanding how educators and students perceive and practically integrate tools like ChatGPT into educational settings. The literature emphasizes AI’s transformative potential but lacks in-depth analysis of real-world implementation challenges, particularly in terms of pedagogical strategies and classroom dynamics. My research seeks to fill this gap by investigating the perspectives and practices of educators in using ChatGPT, aiming to provide a more comprehensive understanding of its role in modern education.

Understanding the Utilization of ChatGPT in an Educational Setting

ChatGPT has emerged as a prominent tool in educational settings, offering a range of applications that enhance learning experiences and support instructional activities. Its capacity to provide personalized assistance has been particularly noted for improving writing skills. Montenegro-Rueda et al. (2023) emphasize that ChatGPT assists students by offering grammatical corrections, feedback, and tailored suggestions, fostering improved written communication. This ability to customize responses makes it a versatile tool for tasks such as essay writing, homework assistance, test preparation, language learning, and even career development and decision-making processes.

Mogavi et al. (2024) explore ChatGPT’s potential to enhance self-efficacy and motivation, especially for students with special needs. The tool’s ability to deliver quick feedback and create personalized learning experiences makes it a valuable resource for fostering engagement and accommodating diverse learning requirements. Kim and Adlof (2024) further discuss the transformative role of ChatGPT in education, advocating for its integration into constructivist learning environments. They outline strategies to harness ChatGPT’s capabilities, such as using it to facilitate inquiry-based learning, collaboration, and active problem-solving, aligning with the principles of constructivism.

However, despite these promising findings, significant limitations and gaps persist in the existing literature. While studies like those by Kim and Adlof (2024) highlight potential integration techniques, they fall short of examining educators’ real-world perceptions and challenges when using ChatGPT. The practical application of AI tools in classrooms, particularly within constructivist frameworks, remains underexplored. Additionally, much of the research emphasizes theoretical benefits, often overlooking the nuanced barriers educators face, such as adapting teaching practices, addressing ethical concerns, and ensuring equitable access to AI technologies.

This gap in understanding educators’ experiences underscores the need for more empirical investigations. For example, while ChatGPT is touted as a valuable resource for personalized and inclusive education, there is limited research on how its adoption affects classroom dynamics, teacher-student interactions, and learning outcomes. Furthermore, questions about the reliability of AI-generated content, its potential to foster dependency among students, and its implications for academic integrity remain under-addressed in current studies.

By focusing on educators’ perspectives and practices, this research aims to address these limitations, offering deeper insights into the practical utilization of ChatGPT in educational settings. Such investigations are crucial for informing best practices, supporting teacher development, and guiding policy recommendations to ensure that AI tools like ChatGPT are effectively and ethically integrated into education.

Understanding the Perspectives of ChatGPT Utilization in Education

The integration of ChatGPT into educational settings has sparked diverse perspectives regarding its benefits and challenges. Tossell et al. (2024) found that while students in an engineering course acknowledged ChatGPT’s potential to enhance learning, they raised concerns about its accuracy and limited feedback capabilities. Similarly, Ulla et al. (2023) reported generally positive perceptions among EFL instructors, who appreciated ChatGPT’s utility but cautioned against its potential to foster student dependency. Ding et al. (2023) highlighted undergraduate students’ trust in ChatGPT as a virtual physics instructor, though these students emphasized the importance of AI literacy education to mitigate its limitations. Collectively, these studies suggest that while ChatGPT is seen as a valuable educational tool, its successful integration requires addressing its shortcomings.

Despite these promising insights, a significant research gap exists in comprehensively understanding the perspectives of both students and educators across various academic disciplines and educational levels. Most existing studies focus narrowly on specific contexts or isolated viewpoints, limiting their generalizability. This gap underscores the need for research that explores diverse perspectives, practices, and challenges associated with ChatGPT’s use in education.

Additional studies offer valuable contributions to understanding educators’ perceptions. Ulla et al. (2023) examined EFL instructors in Thailand, who recognized ChatGPT’s potential to aid language instruction but raised concerns about reliability and the need for tailored AI training. Galindo-Domínguez et al. (2024) similarly noted the tool’s usefulness in Spanish classrooms while emphasizing the necessity of equipping educators with the skills to navigate its limitations. Kaplan-Rakowski et al. (2023) found that instructors with more experience using AI tools were more optimistic about ChatGPT’s capacity to enhance professional development and student engagement. However, these studies often neglect discipline-specific challenges, such as those encountered in language instruction, which remains underexplored in AI-related educational research.

From the students’ perspective, Kalk et al. (2019) investigated postgraduate students in East China and found a heightened awareness of ChatGPT’s limitations, particularly concerning data security and academic integrity. This study underscores the critical need for ethical guidelines when integrating ChatGPT into learning environments. In the domain of argumentative writing, unnamed research (2023) revealed that while students acknowledged ChatGPT’s support in completing writing tasks, they expressed concerns about accuracy, over-reliance, and risks of plagiarism. These findings highlight the need for further exploration into how ChatGPT influences students’ writing practices and how educators can provide effective guidance to mitigate these risks.

While the existing body of research provides valuable insights into ChatGPT’s potential in education, it is constrained by several limitations. Many studies concentrate on specific contexts, such as EFL instruction or STEM education, without addressing broader applications across disciplines and educational levels. Research often highlights student views while providing insufficient attention to educators’ real-world challenges, such as adapting teaching practices and managing ethical concerns related to ChatGPT’s use. Although ethical concerns like data security and academic integrity are acknowledged, few studies propose concrete frameworks or guidelines for addressing these issues effectively. There is a lack of in-depth investigation into how ChatGPT can be integrated into subject-specific applications, such as writing instruction, or how it influences critical skills like argumentation and creativity. To address these gaps, the current study investigates the perspectives and practices of both students and educators across various academic disciplines and educational levels. This research emphasizes the practical challenges, ethical concerns, and pedagogical opportunities associated with ChatGPT.

Understanding the Practices of ChatGPT Utilization in Education

The application of generative AI tools like ChatGPT has gained significant traction in academic settings, with increasing interest in understanding how students and educators utilize these technologies. Abbas et al. (2024) conducted two studies that provide valuable insights into ChatGPT usage. The first study developed a scale to assess how students use ChatGPT, while the second explored the influence of academic workload, time pressure, and reward sensitivity on its adoption. Their findings revealed that heightened academic strain and time pressure correlate with increased ChatGPT usage, while greater reward sensitivity tends to reduce reliance on the tool. However, the study also highlighted negative consequences of extensive ChatGPT use, including academic procrastination, memory loss, and diminished academic performance.

Despite these contributions, several gaps in the existing literature remain. Current studies primarily focus on university students in general, with limited attention to specialized populations such as pre-service teachers in programs like the Bachelor of Elementary Education (BEED). This gap restricts understanding of how future educators interact with and perceive AI tools in the context of teacher training. Furthermore, little research has been conducted on how ChatGPT practices differ across disciplines or educational levels, leaving a need for a more nuanced examination of its role in specific academic and professional contexts. Another limitation is the minimal exploration of practical strategies for integrating ChatGPT into pedagogical frameworks, especially in teacher education programs where AI could be a valuable resource. Additionally, the literature often lacks comprehensive ethical guidelines and digital literacy training recommendations, which are essential for ensuring the responsible use of AI tools by future educators.

To address these limitations, this study will focus on investigating the practices of BEED students regarding ChatGPT usage. It will explore their perceptions of the tool, the ways they incorporate it into their academic and teaching preparation activities, and the challenges they face in doing so.

Understanding the Challenges of ChatGPT Utilization in Education

The literature on ChatGPT in educational settings highlights significant challenges despite its potential benefits. Tossell et al. (2024) identified concerns about ChatGPT’s accuracy and limited feedback in an engineering course but failed to explore educators’ perspectives or the long-term implications for learning. Ulla et al. (2023) reported positive views from EFL instructors while cautioning against dependency, though their findings are limited to language instruction, restricting broader applicability. Ding et al. (2023) emphasized the need for AI literacy, showing that students trusted ChatGPT as a virtual physics instructor, but did not examine how AI literacy training could address its limitations. Collectively, these studies underscore the necessity of addressing ChatGPT’s challenges, yet they lack a cross-disciplinary perspective to understand its impact comprehensively.

Further studies, such as Zeb et al. (2024), raised ethical concerns, particularly regarding academic dishonesty, but overlooked practical strategies for integrating ChatGPT in classrooms. Similarly, Kılınç (2023) acknowledged ChatGPT’s potential in distance education but did not explore how students and educators navigate its integration in practice. Sok and Heng’s (2023) literature review identified gaps in empirical research on ChatGPT use in higher education, emphasizing the need for detailed data on its real-world application. These findings collectively reveal issues of accuracy, dependency, ethics, and insufficient training. To address these gaps, this research will investigate the practical challenges educators and students face across disciplines, offering actionable recommendations for the responsible and effective integration of ChatGPT in education

METHODS

Research Design

This study employed a mixed methods design, integrating quantitative and qualitative approaches to comprehensively address the research problem (Almalki, 2016; Gudelos, 2023a, 2023b). Using a concurrent mixed methods strategy (Green, Caracelli, & Graham, 1989; Tashakkori & Teddlie, 1998), data collection was conducted simultaneously to explore complex issues, such as doctoral students’ persistence in distributed learning environments. Quantitative methods, grounded in post-positivism, relied on surveys with reliable instruments to identify statistical trends and patterns (Maksimović & Evtimov, 2023), while descriptive statistics provided a broad understanding of the topic. Complementing this, qualitative methods involved semi-structured interviews, analyzed through thematic analysis and coding, to uncover recurring themes and contextual values (Creswell, 2013; Guba & Lincoln, 1982; Mertens, 2003). Guided by pragmatism, these mixed methods approach triangulated findings to enhance validity (Creswell & Maxcy, 2003; Howe, 1988). The study, combined surveys, interviews, and observations, offering a multidimensional perspective. By integrating numerical trends with in-depth qualitative insights, the research provides a nuanced analysis of ChatGPT usage, ensuring a robust exploration of the participants’ perspectives, practices, and challenge.

 Figure 1. Research Design

Participants and Sampling Method

The study respondents include students from the College Education Department, which consists of five courses: Bachelor of Elementary Education (BEED), Bachelor of Secondary Education Major in Mathematics (BSED Mathematics), Bachelor of Secondary Education Major in Science (BSED Science), Bachelor of Physical Education (BPED), and Bachelor of Technical-Vocational Teacher Education Major in Food & Service Management (BTVTED).

Stratified random sampling was used to select student participants, ensuring that different subgroups within the Education Department were represented. Convenience sampling was used for teachers. According to Fleetwood (2023), stratified random sampling helps improve validity by ensuring each subgroup is included, making the findings more reliable. To identify the percentage of each section the researchers use a stratified random formula: (sample size/population size) x strata size.

Data were collected through surveys and interviews from participants enrolled in the Education Department, specifically from 1st to 3rd-year students in the mentioned programs.

Teacher Education Department includes different programs: BEED, BPED, BSed Mathematics, BSed Science, and BTVTED. Each program consists of 2-3 sections from the first to the third year. The total population in the Education Department is 1120, and the researchers used the Krejcie and Morgan table to arrive at a sample size of 285. A total of 13 regular professors in the Teacher Education Department from a population of 16 were surveyed, securing 2-3 representative teacher per program contributing to the study.

Table 1. Number of Participants

The Likert scale will consist of a 5-point scale ranging from “Strongly Disagree” to “Strongly Agree,” with corresponding numerical values assigned as follows to determine the Perception and Practices of ChatGPT utilization.

Table 2. Five-Point Rating Scale

Research Procedure and Instruments

This study utilized a mixed-method survey tool, which incorporated both quantitative methods such as questionnaires, and qualitative interviews. The questionnaire used in this study was designed to obtain information on the perspectives, practices of ChatGPT utilization in Eastern Visayas State University – Ormoc City Campus. These questions were carefully crafted to ensure that the collected data were relevant to the research or study being conducted. The questionnaire consisted of closed-ended and open-ended questions. The closed-ended questions provided quantitative data which could be analyzed using statistical methods. On the other hand, the open-ended questions provided qualitative data that offered rich and detailed insights into participants’ perspectives and experiences. The researchers analyzed the responses to these questions by identifying common themes, recurring ideas, and unique perspectives expressed by the participants.

There are 10 items in each section focusing on the study addressing the perspectives, practices, and challenges of ChatGPT utilization. The researchers used a survey questionnaire to gather data on the effectiveness and reliability of the practices and perspectives in utilizing ChatGPT. In regards to gathering data on the challenges in utilizing ChatGPT, the researchers used an interview questionnaire to ask precise questions and extract desired information from the participants.

This study’s survey and interview questionnaire went through validation process. During this phase, the questionnaire was reviewed by three qualified experts for feedback, suggestions, and corrections. This was done to ensure the relevance and comprehensiveness of the questions.

 The survey questionnaire was pilot tested with 30 students from five different Education programs to identify any potential issues with the questionnaire and make necessary adjustments for clarity and relevance.  The research instrument was subjected to reliability testing through Cronbach’s alpha. According to Gay et al. (2003), reliability is defined as the degree to which a test consistently measures whatever it is measuring.  In this study, the researcher used Cronbach’s alpha to test the reliability of the instruments. The section on perspectives achieved Cronbach’s alpha values of 0.89 and 0.92, indicating very high internal consistency and excellent reliability in the measurement of the items (Sekaran, 2023). This suggests that the survey items within this section are highly correlated and measure the intended construct effectively, ensuring confidence in the reliability of the data collected.

Data Gathering Procedure

Upon the approval of the research instrument, the researchers formally wrote a formal letter of request addressed to the Campus Director and Department Head of the Education Unit at Eastern Visayas State University Ormoc Campus. This letter sought permission to conduct the study within the university premises. The researchers outlined the purpose, objectives, and methodology of the study in the letter, emphasizing the importance and potential benefits of the research. The researchers also assured the university authorities of the confidentiality and ethical considerations that would be followed throughout the study.

After the request was granted, the researchers personally administered the survey questionnaire and conducted a one-hour in-depth interviews with the targeted participants on the same day. The researchers were present during the survey to provide explanations and clarifications to the respondents, ensuring that they understood the questions and could provide accurate and meaningful responses. This personal interaction helped in minimizing any potential confusion or misunderstanding that the participants might have had while completing the questionnaire. After the respondents answered the questionnaire, the researchers collected the answered questionnaires on the same day.

Once the questionnaires were retrieved, the researchers began the process of tabulating the data. This involved organizing and summarizing the responses obtained from the participants. The collected data were then subjected to appropriate statistical procedures for analysis and interpretation.

Ethical Issues and Considerations

Ethical considerations were a priority in this study to ensure participants’ well-being and protect their rights. Before data collection, the research proposal was reviewed by a panel of experts and approved by the Campus Director to ensure compliance with ethical standards. Participants were fully briefed on the study’s purpose and provided informed consent, making participation voluntary. They were informed of their right to withdraw at any time without consequence, with any data collected up to that point excluded from the analysis. All data were kept confidential, stored securely in password-protected files, and used exclusively for academic purposes. Only authorized researchers had access to the data, ensuring privacy and protection in line with RA 10173 (Data Privacy Act).

Data Analysis

The survey responses were analyzed using statistical methods, with a focus on descriptive statistics such as weighted mean, standard deviation, and variance to evaluate the perspectives and practices of students and teachers. The weighted mean was employed to account for the magnitude of agreement or disagreement on Likert scale items, providing an accurate measure of average responses. Standard deviation was used to describe the variability of responses, offering insights into the consistency of participants’ views. These methods were chosen for their ability to effectively summarize and compare data, highlighting differences and similarities between the perspectives and practices of students and teachers in a straightforward and interpretable manner.

Scope and Limitations of Research

The scope of this study entitled “Bridging the Gap: Understanding the Perspectives, Practices, and Challenges of ChatGPT Utilization among Students and Teachers at Eastern Visayas State University-Ormoc Campus, Teacher Education Department” explores how ChatGPT, an AI-powered conversational agent, is utilized into EVSU-OCC educational system. Concentrating on EVSU-OCC aims to offer a localized perspective on the benefits and difficulties of utilizing cutting-edge AI technology in all program settings. The study looks at new approaches and techniques for integrating ChatGPT into EVSU-OCC programs/courses. The research aims to offer a thorough grasp of the challenges associated with ChatGPT utilization in EVSU educational institutions using a combination of qualitative and quantitative data analysis methodologies.

The study is limited to EVSU-OCC as a geographical environment. The research focuses on EVSU-OCC to provide a nuanced knowledge of ChatGPT utilization within a particular local context. The investigation primarily focuses on the perspectives of the College Education Department at EVSU-OCC.  This delimitation allows a more focused exploration of the unique challenges and opportunities in all course environments. The study might not fully address all new approaches or difficulties related to ChatGPT utilization in Leyte’s University settings because of resource limitations. The study aims to increase knowledge of the challenges of ChatGPT utilization at EVSU-OCC rather than offering prescription solutions or remedies. The research seeks to provide insight into these issues so that future attempts to use AI technology to improve education will be more informed.

This study is focused on collecting data from students and teachers who have engaged and used ChatGPT in an academic environment. For this study, students are characterized as individuals currently understanding different education programs, including BEED, BSEd major in Science, BSEd major in Mathematics, BSEd major in TLE, BPEd, and BTVTED FHM. The term using ChatGPT in academic settings is applied in a wide range, referring to any instances where ChatGPT is used in a way that relates to the study environment. This can be any activity ranging from lecturing assistance in academic assignments to utilizing the tool for knowledge enhancement.

The delimitation ensures a concentrated examination of the perspectives, practices, and challenges of using ChatGPT within the confines of an educational setting.

“Bridging the Gap: Understanding the Perspectives, Practices, and Challenges of ChatGPT Utilization among Students and Teachers at Eastern Visayas State University-Ormoc City Campus, Teacher Education Department” explores ChatGPT, an artificial intelligence (AI) conversational agent, in Leyte, Philippine educational system. The goal of the study is to offer detailed, localized insights into the advantages and difficulties of implementing cutting-edge AI technology in various program settings. With an emphasis on creative ways to include ChatGPT in Teacher Education programs in EVSU-OCC, the study combines qualitative and quantitative methods to fully understand the difficulties in incorporating it in educational settings. The study’s limitations, which include its geographical confinement and its primary focus on the opinions of the College Teacher Education Department, may limit the finding’s applicability to other university departments or larger contexts. Limited resources could also prevent a thorough investigation of all viable strategies and difficulties associated with the use of ChatGPT.

Notwithstanding these drawbacks, the study intends to expand on knowledge regarding ChatGPT utilization at the Eastern Visayas State University-Ormoc City Campus and offer insightful information to guide future initiatives utilizing AI technology to improve education. The study focuses on gathering data from students and teachers using ChatGPT in different academic settings and guarantees a targeted analysis of the viewpoints, behaviors, and difficulties related to its use in learning environments. This adds to the sophistication of its effect.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

The growing global interest in ChatGPT, particularly for its ability to manage complex language tasks (Miller, 2023), has been accompanied by concerns about its implementation in academic settings (Barrot, 2023). The rapid generation of scholarly responses by ChatGPT has led to calls for universities to reassess their assessment procedures (Kim et al., 2023), as AI-generated text presents new challenges for maintaining academic integrity (Birks & Clare, 2023). This study aims to explore the perspectives, practices, and challenges associated with ChatGPT use among learners and teachers in the Teacher Education Department at Eastern Visayas State University. Through a combination of qualitative and quantitative methods, the research provides localized insights into the advantages and difficulties of integrating AI technology into educational settings, specifically within the Teacher Education program at EVSU-OCC. The following section presents the results and discussions based on the data collected, addressing these key issues.

Perspectives on ChatGPT Utilization

The findings on students’ perspectives, with a grand mean of 3.73, indicate a generally positive attitude toward using ChatGPT, suggesting that students are inclined to integrate it into their study routines. However, the data reveals that most students do not rely heavily on ChatGPT during class hours but use it as a supplementary tool for academic purposes. This finding aligns with Luckin and Holmes’ (2016) insights on AI’s potential to personalize education, where AI tools like ChatGPT can enhance learning by adapting to individual needs, but should not replace traditional study methods. Caratiquit and Caratiquit (2023) further emphasize AI’s capacity to cater to diverse learning styles and improve accessibility and efficiency, reinforcing the idea that ChatGPT serves as an additional resource to enrich students’ learning experiences. For students, this suggests that ChatGPT can be a valuable complement to traditional learning methods, enhancing their study routines without replacing foundational educational practices.

For educators, these findings imply that ChatGPT can be a powerful tool to support students’ learning, as long as its use remains balanced and complementary. Educators can leverage ChatGPT to cater to diverse learning needs, promoting personalized learning while ensuring that critical thinking and core educational practices are not undermined. Kvartalnyi and Kvartalnyi (2023) highlight how AI can automate administrative tasks, thereby freeing up educators’ time to focus on more interactive, personalized teaching. This moderate approach to ChatGPT’s use in academic settings suggests that educators should develop strategies to integrate AI tools in a way that enhances, rather than disrupts, traditional teaching methods. By encouraging students to use ChatGPT as a supplementary aid, educators can foster an environment where AI serves to enrich the learning experience, promoting responsible and effective use of technology in education.

Table 3. Student’s Perspective on ChatGPT Utilization

The teachers’ perspectives on the utilization of ChatGPT, as shown in Table 4 with a grand mean of 3.75, reveal a generally positive sentiment toward its use in educational settings. Teachers recognize the value of ChatGPT in enhancing various aspects of teaching, such as providing quick information, offering additional resources, assisting with personalized student support, and facilitating administrative tasks. This positive outlook suggests that educators view ChatGPT as a useful tool for improving their efficiency and supporting student learning. However, the score does not reach the highest end of the scale, indicating that while teachers acknowledge its potential, they may have reservations or concerns about its application in the classroom. Issues such as concerns about the accuracy of AI-generated information and the possibility of students becoming overly reliant on ChatGPT, leading to diminished academic effort, could explain the more cautious approach. Kooli (2023) explores these challenges, emphasizing the need for educators to carefully integrate AI tools like ChatGPT into teaching practices to maximize benefits while mitigating potential drawbacks.

For educators, these findings imply that while ChatGPT can enhance teaching practices and support student learning, its implementation must be done thoughtfully to address potential challenges. Educators can leverage ChatGPT to provide quick answers, assist with writing, and manage administrative tasks, but they should also be mindful of the limitations, such as the risk of students relying too heavily on the tool. Kooli’s (2023) work underscores the importance of balancing AI use with traditional teaching methods to avoid diminishing critical thinking skills and academic effort. Teachers might also need to develop strategies to ensure that students engage with the material independently, even when using AI tools like ChatGPT. This balanced approach can help educators maximize the positive aspects of ChatGPT, while also fostering an environment where students remain accountable for their learning.

Table 4. Teachers’ Perspective on ChatGPT Utilization

Practices on ChatGPT Utilization

The students’ practices regarding the utilization of ChatGPT, as reflected in Table 5 with a mean score of 3.71, indicate that students actively use the tool and incorporate it into their study routines and academic tasks. This high mean score suggests that students find ChatGPT valuable, viewing it as a useful resource for enhancing their learning experience. Students are likely utilizing ChatGPT for a variety of academic purposes, such as answering questions, seeking information, generating ideas, and summarizing content. This positive engagement reflects a general satisfaction with ChatGPT’s ability to support students in understanding complex topics and completing assignments. Moreover, students may also use ChatGPT to practice new concepts and language skills, indicating its broad applicability in different aspects of their learning.

These findings have significant implications for both students and educators. For students, the consistent use of ChatGPT suggests that AI tools can serve as an effective supplement to traditional study methods, offering additional support in academic tasks. However, continuous improvements to the tool, as suggested by the findings, could further enhance its usefulness and user satisfaction. For educators, these results indicate that ChatGPT has the potential to support students in a variety of learning activities. Educators might consider integrating ChatGPT into their teaching practices, encouraging students to use it as a supplemental resource for reinforcing lessons or generating ideas. At the same time, educators should be mindful of balancing AI use with traditional methods to ensure that students do not become overly dependent on the tool. Mollick’s (2023) research further underscores the value of AI tools like ChatGPT in enhancing the learning experience by providing diverse applications that can help students achieve academic success.

Table 5. Students’ Practices on ChatGPT Utilization

Table 6 reveals that teachers have a moderate level of familiarity and usage of ChatGPT in their teaching practices, with a grand mean of 3.02. This score indicates a cautious, balanced approach to the tool’s integration, where teachers neither extensively incorporate it into their routines nor completely avoid it. While teachers recognize the potential benefits of ChatGPT, such as assisting with work tasks, providing additional resources, and facilitating student engagement, they are also mindful of its limitations. Teachers express concerns about the tool’s accuracy and the need for supervision, alongside apprehensions regarding its potential impact on students’ critical thinking skills and the risk of over-reliance on AI. This cautious stance reflects a recognition that while ChatGPT offers valuable support, it should be used judiciously to avoid undermining core educational objectives.

These findings have important implications for both students and educators. For students, teachers’ cautious approach to using ChatGPT highlights the need for guidance and balanced integration of AI tools into the learning process. While ChatGPT can support students, it should not replace traditional learning methods or foster dependency. For educators, the data suggests the necessity of more targeted support and training to maximize the effective use of ChatGPT in teaching. As Mollick (2022) and Waters (2023) indicate, AI tools like ChatGPT can be valuable for enhancing classroom engagement and streamlining administrative tasks, but educators must be equipped with strategies to navigate its potential drawbacks. McNulty (2024) also emphasizes that AI can be an asset in generating ideas and supporting student learning, provided that teachers make informed decisions about its use. The findings suggest that professional development and evidence-based practices are critical to helping educators integrate ChatGPT effectively while maintaining academic rigor.

Table 6. Teachers’ Practices on ChatGPT Utilization

Differences or Commonalities on the Perspectives and Practices of Students and Teachers in ChatGPT Utilization

Table 7 highlights the perspectives of students and teachers on the utilization of ChatGPT in education, with 285 students and 13 teachers participating in the study. Students rated ChatGPT positively, with an average score of 3.73, showing that most found it valuable for their learning, although there was moderate variability in their opinions (standard deviation of 0.68). Teachers had a slightly higher average rating of 3.75, reflecting a similarly favorable view, but with greater variability in their responses (standard deviation of 0.81), suggesting differing levels of comfort and familiarity with the technology. Despite the differing sample sizes, both groups recognized the tool’s benefits, though teachers expressed a broader range of opinions, possibly due to variations in teaching styles, subject areas, and experience with the technology. As Roose (2023) discusses, some educators view AI tools like ChatGPT as valuable classroom assistants, while others express concerns about their impact on traditional teaching methods and critical thinking. Stokel-Walker (2023) highlights teachers’ mixed responses to AI, noting enthusiasm for administrative and personalized learning tasks but concerns about dependency. Crompton and Burke (2023) and Heilweil (2023) similarly observe that teachers’ opinions vary depending on their teaching styles and comfort with technology, while Noonoo (2023) addresses the skepticism some teachers feel regarding the tool’s reliability and potential misuse by students.

For educators, the findings emphasize the need for targeted training and support to help them integrate ChatGPT effectively into their teaching practices while addressing concerns about dependency, critical thinking, and privacy. Understanding the diverse perspectives of students and the varied experiences among teachers can guide educational strategies that balance the benefits of AI tools with the preservation of traditional pedagogical methods. For students, these insights suggest that ChatGPT can be a valuable tool to complement their learning, but they should be mindful of over-reliance and ensure it serves as an aid rather than a replacement for critical thinking and active engagement with course material. These discussions underline the importance of fostering a balanced, informed approach to AI utilization in education, ensuring that both students and teachers can maximize its potential without compromising educational integrity.

Table 7. The Perspectives between Students and Teachers

Table 8 reveals significant differences between students and teachers in their use of ChatGPT, based on a sample of 285 students and 13 teachers. Students showed a higher average utilization score of 3.71, with a standard deviation of 0.87 and variance of 0.78, indicating consistent use of the tool. This suggests that students rely on ChatGPT for tasks such as studying, homework assistance, and information retrieval, using it in a relatively uniform manner. In contrast, teachers had a lower average score of 3.02, with a much higher standard deviation of 1.32 and variance of 1.75, signifying greater variability in how frequently and effectively they used the tool. Some teachers used ChatGPT more regularly, while others did so less often, possibly reflecting differences in teaching style, familiarity with technology, or perceived usefulness of the tool (Roose, 2023; Stokel-Walker, 2023; Crompton & Burke, 2023).

For educators, these findings suggest the need for targeted professional development to enhance their comfort and consistency in using ChatGPT as an educational tool. Given the higher variability in teachers’ use, they may benefit from structured training that aligns ChatGPT with their teaching objectives and styles. For students, the results imply that ChatGPT is an increasingly integral part of their learning practices, offering consistent support for academic tasks. However, educators should ensure that students use the tool responsibly, encouraging independent thinking and preventing over-reliance on AI (Heilweil, 2023; Noonoo, 2023). These patterns underscore the importance of fostering a balanced approach to AI in education, where both students and teachers can effectively engage with technology to enhance learning outcomes.

Table 8. The practices between Students and Teachers

Challenges on ChatGPT Utilization

Challenges of Students

The one-on-one interviews conducted with informants revealed two recurring themes, each reflecting a different aspect of their experiences with ChatGPT. Each interview lasted approximately one hour and was audio and video recorded, then transcribed for analysis.

Theme 1: Accuracy and Reliability of Information

The first theme that emerged from the interviews highlights the challenges respondents faced regarding the accuracy and reliability of information provided by ChatGPT. While some informants acknowledged that the tool could offer accurate responses, others experienced difficulties with the credibility of the information, particularly when seeking historical or specific data. Participants noted that the responses generated by ChatGPT could sometimes be outdated or imprecise, with some mentioning that the tool often provided answers that were not directly relevant to their queries. For example, respondents struggled with ChatGPT’s inability to provide accurate information from specific time periods or certain historical contexts. Despite these challenges, several participants appreciated the tool’s ability to create new content, which they found useful in their studies. The following vignettes highlight the various challenges faced by the respondents:

“What I observed in ChatGPT is that when you want information from late 1980, it doesn’t give the information that you need. The generated information that ChatGPT gives is from the 20’s. ChatGPT doesn’t give information from B.C. or in the 1980’s.” (R4)

“Yes, I have faced difficulties in ensuring the coherence and relevance of generated content by ChatGPT as what I’ve said earlier that not all the information is accurate and correct…” (R8)

The accuracy and reliability of information generated by ChatGPT emerged as a significant concern among students using the AI tool for academic purposes. Several respondents noted that while ChatGPT could provide helpful information, there were frequent issues with credibility and relevance. For example, one student remarked that ChatGPT struggles to provide accurate historical information from specific periods, such as the late 1980s, likely due to its knowledge cutoff in 2021 (R4). This limitation is particularly problematic for students researching specific timeframes or seeking up-to-date academic resources. Furthermore, another student highlighted challenges with the coherence and relevance of the AI-generated content, pointing out that not all information produced was accurate or aligned with their academic needs (R8). Such inconsistencies raise concerns about the overall reliability of ChatGPT, as it may not always meet the rigorous standards required for academic work.

These challenges underscore the broader issue of AI’s limitations in providing accurate and reliable information, as pointed out by Gao et al. (2023), who noted that biases in AI data and the potential for fabricated content can undermine the trustworthiness of AI-generated outputs. For students, the reliance on potentially inaccurate information may lead to misconceptions or the inclusion of unreliable sources in their academic work. Educators must therefore emphasize the importance of critical thinking and verification when using AI tools. Students should be encouraged to cross-check the information provided by ChatGPT with credible academic sources to ensure its accuracy and applicability. This approach would help mitigate the risks associated with over-reliance on AI-generated content and promote a more thorough, responsible use of technology in academic settings.

Theme 2: Over-Reliance on AI and Its Impact on Originality

Respondents expressed concerns about the over-reliance on ChatGPT and its impact on their ability to produce original work. Some noted that teachers could easily identify AI-generated essays, raising concerns about the lack of personal input and originality in such assignments. Others highlighted how their dependency on ChatGPT affected their creative process, suggesting that without the tool, they would have been more likely to generate ideas and complete tasks independently. These insights suggest that while ChatGPT can be a useful academic aid, its frequent use may hinder students’ critical thinking and the development of their own ideas.

“When you use the essay constructed in ChatGPT your teacher will easily identify that it is AI-generated.” (R8)

“For me, the challenge is that sometimes I depend on ChatGPT unlike if this AI hadn’t been introduced to me maybe I would have done my work or formulated ideas on my own.” (R4)

The theme of over-reliance on AI and its impact on originality reveals concerns about students’ dependence on ChatGPT for academic tasks. Students noted that AI-generated content often lacks nuance, making it easily identifiable as non-human. One respondent remarked, “In academic output, there are a lot of challenges; first is the construction of sentences… your teacher will easily identify that it is AI-generated” (R8). This highlights how excessive reliance on ChatGPT may undermine the development of personal writing skills and originality. Additionally, students acknowledged that over-dependence on AI tools can stifle independent thought. One respondent shared, “If this AI hadn’t been introduced to me, maybe I would have done my work or formulated ideas on my own” (R4), suggesting that ChatGPT may hinder creativity and critical thinking. These concerns emphasize the importance of balancing AI use with independent learning to foster originality. Educators need to encourage critical engagement with AI, ensuring that students can use it as a tool while maintaining academic integrity and developing their own ideas (Gao et al., 2023; Kılınç et al., 2024).

Challenges of the Teachers

There were two common themes derived from the one-on-one interview. Each respondent was interviewed for about one hour. Interviews were audio-taped and transcribed. Validation was conducted together with the respondents.

Theme 1: Reliability of Data Retrieved

The theme of the reliability of data retrieved from ChatGPT emerges from respondents’ concerns about the accuracy and authenticity of the information provided. One student expressed skepticism about trusting ChatGPT, noting that as an AI tool, much of the information it offers may not be accurate or reliable. Another respondent highlighted issues with AI-generated citations, stating that they often cannot be traced to credible sources or online journals, which undermines their reliability. These concerns underscore the importance of verifying AI-generated content and citations to ensure academic integrity.

“… But in terms of them trusting it hmm, because it is only artificial intelligence so perhaps hmm most of the information provided by ChatGPT is not that accurate or not that reliable…” (R9)

“I am not sure that citations in AI are real. I trace most of them…they are not traceable on the online journals.” (R5)

The use of artificial intelligence (AI) tools in education has raised significant concerns about the reliability of the data they provide. While AI can offer quick access to information and support learning, students often question the accuracy of the content generated, particularly when it comes to citations and source credibility. Some respondents highlighted that AI-generated content is not always verifiable, with sources sometimes being untraceable or unreliable. This lack of reliability poses risks for students who might unknowingly use incorrect or misleading information in their academic work (Gao et al., 2023). The potential for cognitive laziness, where students become overly reliant on AI, further exacerbates the challenge of ensuring data reliability, as students may fail to critically evaluate the information provided (Ahmad et al., 2023). To address these issues, educators must emphasize the importance of verifying AI-generated content and promote critical engagement with AI tools to maintain academic integrity and foster independent learning (Ocaña-Fernández et al., 2024; Bühler et al., 2022).

Theme 2: Dependence to the AI

Some students expressed a growing reliance on ChatGPT, indicating that they have become so accustomed to using the tool that they find it difficult to complete tasks without it. One student noted that they now rely on AI to such an extent that they struggle to write independently without its assistance. Another respondent described the absence of ChatGPT as leaving them without a “buddy,” making it exhausting to think and work without its support. These insights reflect a deeper dependence on AI tools, raising concerns about the impact on students’ ability to engage in independent cognitive work.

“I rely too much now on AI that I cannot write alone without it.”  (R3)

“It seems that I lack a buddy when there is no ChatGPT. It will be tiring to think on my own.” (R5)

This increasing dependence on AI in academic work may diminish students’ critical thinking and problem-solving abilities, as students may rely more heavily on AI for guidance and content creation rather than engaging in independent thought (Ahmad et al., 2023). Research on the Dependence on Artificial Intelligence (DAI) scale emphasizes that such over-reliance can inhibit students’ cognitive engagement and hinder the development of their own analytical skills (Ocaña-Fernández et al., 2024). For educators, these findings highlight the importance of fostering a balanced approach to AI tool use—encouraging students to leverage AI for support while simultaneously promoting independent learning strategies to ensure academic integrity and intellectual growth (Bühler et al., 2022).

CONCLUSIONS

ChatGPT’s ability to provide immediate, personalized assistance and generate diverse educational materials makes it an effective supplementary tool in education. It can significantly enhance learning experiences by offering support outside regular classroom hours and addressing individual student needs. However, the interviews also highlight concerns about over-reliance on ChatGPT. Excessive dependence on this technology could undermine students’ critical thinking and problem-solving skills. Additionally, while generally reliable, ChatGPT is not infallible, and instances of incorrect information can occur. This necessitates a balanced approach to its use and robust verification mechanisms to ensure the accuracy of the information provided. The future potential of ChatGPT in education is massive. Teachers foresee its utilization into curriculum to aid personalized learning paths and tailored educational experiences. Its capability to analyze large datasets can also significantly benefit academic research, offering valuable insights and identifying trends. Continuous research and development are essential to enhance its capabilities and educational value.

The utilization of ChatGPT in education offers significant benefits, including enhanced learning experiences through personalized support and diverse resources. However, it is crucial to address the risks associated with over-reliance and ensure the accuracy of information provided by the AI. A balanced approach, where ChatGPT is used as a supplementary tool while maintaining traditional teaching methods, is essential to foster critical thinking and problem-solving skills. Furthermore, investing in continuous research and development to enhance ChatGPT’s capabilities will be crucial in realizing its full potential in transforming educational methodologies and outcomes. Future research should focus on optimizing ChatGPT’s use in educational settings, ensuring it remains a reliable and effective tool for both teaching and learning

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

 This research would not have been possible without the guidance, support, and contributions of numerous individuals. We extend our deepest gratitude research adviser for the technical and moral support; to our campus director, Dr. Jeffry V. Ocay, and the head of the education department, for their approval and assistance in facilitating our research. We are especially thankful to our respondents for their trust and participation, and to the faculties of the Education Department at Eastern Visayas State University, Ormoc Campus, for their involvement. Above all, we thank Almighty God for the strength, guidance, and perseverance to complete this study. This work stands as a testament to the invaluable support we have received from all these individuals.

REFERENCES

1. Abbas, M., Jam, F. A., & Khan, T. I. (2024). Is it harmful or helpful? Examining the causes and consequences of generative AI usage among university students. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 21(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-024-00444-7
2. Ahmad, A., Kaur, S., & Ranjan, P. (2023). Ethical implications of AI in education: Risks and opportunities. Frontiers in Education. Available at: Frontiers
3. Aljanabi, M., Yaseen, M. G., Ali, A. H., & Abed, S. A. (2023). ChatGPT: Open possibilities. Iraqi Journal for Computer Science and Mathematics, 4(1). https://doi.org/10.52866/20ijcsm.2023.01.01.0018
4. Al-Khresheh, M. H. (2024). Bridging technology and pedagogy from a global lens: Teachers’ perspectives on integrating ChatGPT in English language teaching. Computers and Education Artificial Intelligence, 6, 100218. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100218
5. Almalki, S. (2016). Integrating quantitative and qualitative data in mixed methods research—Challenges and benefits. Journal of Education and Learning, 5(3), 288-296. https://doi.org/10.5539/jel.v5n3p288
6. Austal, A. M. A., Massang, B., Efendi, M., Nofirman, N., & Riady, Y. (2023). Can ChatGPT replace the role of the teacher in the classroom: A fundamental analysis. Journal on Education, 5(4), 16100-16106.
7. Barrot, J. S. (2023). ChatGPT as a Language Learning Tool: An Emerging Technology report. Technology Knowledge and Learning, 29(2), 1151–1156. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-023-09711-4
8. Bender, E. M., Gebru, T., McMillan-Major, A., & Mitchell, S. (2021). On the dangers of Birks, D., & Clare, J. (2023). Linking artificial intelligence facilitated academic misconduct to existing prevention frameworks. International Journal for Educational Integrity, 19(1). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40979-023-00142-3
9. Buhalis, D & Karatay, N. (2022). Mixed Reality (MR) for Generation Z in Cultural Heritage Tourism Towards Metaverse Information and Communication Technologies in Tourism 2022: Proceedings of the ENTER 2022 eTourism conference, Springer International Publishing (2022), pp. 16-27
10. Bühler, M., Alam, S., & Mohanty, P. (2022). Artificial intelligence in education: implications for academic integrity and assessment strategies. ResearchGate. Available at: ResearchGate
11. Bühler, M., Alam, S., & Mohanty, P. (2022). Artificial intelligence in education: implications for academic integrity and assessment strategies. ResearchGate. Available at: ResearchGate
12. Butson, R., & Spronken-Smith, R. (2024). AI and its implications for research in higher education: A critical dialogue. Higher Education Research & Development, 43(3), 563-577. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2023.2280200
13. Caratiquit, K. D., & Caratiquit, L. J. (2023). ChatGPT as an academic support tool on the academic performance among students: The mediating role of learning motivation. Journal of Social Humanity and Education, 4(1), 21-33. https://doi.org/10.35912/jshe.v4i1.1558
14. Creswell, J. W. & Maxcy, S. J. (2003). Pragmatic threads in mixed methods research in the social sciences: The search for multiple modes of inquiry and the end of the philosophy of formalism. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
15. Creswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications. http://www.ceil-conicet.gov.ar/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/CRESWELL-Qualitative-Inquary-and-Research-Design-Creswell.pdf
16. Creswell, J.W., & Miller, D.L., (2000). Determining validity in qualitative inquiry. I italic Theory into Practice. 39. 124-130. https://doi: 10.1207/s15430421tip3903_2
17. Crompton, H., & Burke, D. (2023). Artificial intelligence in higher education: The state of the field. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 20(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00392-8
18. Ding, L., Li, T., Jiang, S., & Gapud, A. (2023). Students’ Perceptions of Using ChatGPT in a Physics Class as a Virtual Tutor. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher
19. Dwivedi, Y. K., Kshetri, N., Hughes, L., Slade, E. L., Jeyaraj, A., Kar, A. K., … and Wright, R., 2023a, “So what if ChatGPT wrote it?” Multidisciplinary perspectives on opportunities, challenges and implications of generative conversational AI for research, practice and policy”, International Journal of Information Management, Vol. 71, pp. 102642
20. (2023). The Utility of ChatGPT in Educational Research—Potential Opportunities and Pitfalls. Retrieved from https://edupij.com/index/arsiv/58/296/the-utility-of-chatgpt-in-educational-researchpotential-opportunities-and-pitfalls
21. (2023). The Utility of ChatGPT in Educational Research—Potential Opportunities and Pitfalls. Retrieved from https://edupij.com/index/arsiv/58/296/the-utility-of-chatgpt-in-educational-researchpotential-opportunities-and-pitfalls
22. Elmaoğlu, E., Coşkun, A. B., & Alsaç, S. Y. (2023). Digital Transformation: The Role, Potential, and Limitations of ChatGPT in Child Health Education. American Journal of Health Education, 55(1), 69–72. https://doi.org/10.1080/19325037.2023.2277937
23. Farhi, F., Jeljeli, R., Aburezeq, I., Dweikat, F. F., Al-Shami, S. A., & Slamene, R. (2023). Analyzing the students’ views, concerns, and perceived ethics about chat GPT usage. Computers and Education. Artificial Intelligence, 5, 100180. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2023.100180
24. Fleetwood, D. (2023, August 30). Stratified Random Sampling: Definition, Method, and Examples. Questioner. https://www.questionpro.com/blog/stratified-random-sampling/
25. Frontiers in Education. (2024). The use of ChatGPT in teaching and learning: a systematic review. Retrieved from https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/education/articles/10.3389/feduc.2024.1328769/full
26. Galindo-Domínguez, H., Delgado, N., Losada, D., & Etxabe, J. M. (2024). An Analysis of the Use of Artificial Intelligence in Education in Spain: The In-Service Teacher’s Perspective. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 40(1), 41-56.
27. Gao, C., et al. (2023). How ChatGPT and similar AI will disrupt education. Science News. Retrieved from https://www.sciencenews.org/article/chatgpt-ai-artificial-intelligence-education-cheating-accuracy
28. García-Peñalvo, F. J., Chatterjee, P., & Dethlefs, J. (2023). Ethical considerations in using AI technologies in education. Journal of Educational Technology & Society. Retrievedfrom https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1389448.pdf
29. Gay, L. R., & Airasian, P. (2003). Educational research: Competencies for analysis and applications (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill.
30. Goldms, M. (2022). The impact of ChatGPT on higher education. Frontiers in Education, 8, Article 1206936. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2023.1206936
31. Goralski, M. A., & Tan, T. K. (2020). Artificial intelligence and sustainable development. The International Journal of Management Education, 18(1), 100330. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme.2019.100330
32. Greene, J. C., Caracelli, V. J., & Graham, W. F. (1989). Toward a conceptual framework for mixed-method evaluation designs. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 11, 255-274
33. Greene, J. C., Caracelli, V. J., & Graham, W. F. (1989). Toward a conceptual framework for mixed-method evaluation designs. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 11(3), 255–274.
34. Guba, E. G., 8: Lincoln, Y. S. (1982). Epistemological and methodological bases for naturalistic inquiry. Educational Communications and Technology journal, 31, 233-252.
35. Gudelos, J. (2023a). Perception of 12th Grade students on Facebook group as a supplement in learning quantitative research in Nemesio-Epifania Taneo Memorial Senior High School. International Scientific Research and Researchers Association (ISRRA), 17(1), 19–30. https://ijsscfrtjournal.isrra.org/index.php/Social_Science_Journal/article/view/1242
36. Gudelos, J. (2023b). Inquiry-based reading comprehension activities in science to improve academic performance. International Journal of Innovation and Research in Educational Sciences, 10(1), 13–22. https://ssrn.com/abstract=4771592
37. Guo, A. (2022, June 14). Pearson vs. Spearman Correlation: What’s the difference? Medium. https://anyi-guo.medium.com/correlation-pearson-vs-spearman-c15e581c12ce
38. Hasanein, A. M., & Sobaih, A. E. E. (2023). Drivers and Consequences of ChatGPT Use in Higher Education: Key Stakeholder Perspectives. European Journal of Investigation in Health Psychology and Education, 13(11), 2599–2614. https://doi.org/10.3390/ejihpe13110181
39. Heilweil, R. (2023, January 5). What is generative AI, and why is it suddenly everywhere? Vox. https://www.vox.com/recode/2023/1/5/23539055/generative-ai-chatgpt-stable-diffusion-lensa dalle?fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR2Dg1yJmzvO5E1w465Z3NsfF7d5LSdnLj6RdkV9gaaGFWon2iH3Jipnmeg_aem_1B7GctUAv5qNULPLUVrkNw
40. Howe, K. R. (1988). Against the quantitative-qualitative incompatibility theses, or dogmas die hard. Educational Researcher, 17, 10-16.
41. Jaishankar, K. (2024, March 11). Will Artificial Intelligence (AI) create a Society of “Educated Illiterates”? – Prof. K. Jaishankar. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/artificial-intelligence-ai-create-society-educated-prof-jaishankar-ylu2c
42. Journal of Higher Education Theory and Practice. (2024). ChatGPT and Higher Education: A Pathway to Unprecedented Progress. https://doi.org/10.33423/jhetp.v24i5.7004
43. Kalk, K., Luik, P., & Taimalu, M. (2019). The characteristics of students, blog groups and blogging that predict reflection in blogs during teaching practice and induction year. Teaching and Teacher Education, 38, 102900. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2019.102900
44. Kaplan-Rakowski, R., Grotewold, K., Hartwick, P., & Papin, K. (2023). Generative AI and Teachers’ Perspectives on Its Implementation in Education. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 34(2), 313-338.
45. Kasneci, E., Sessler, K., Küchemann, S., Bannert, M., Dementieva, D., Fischer, F., Gasser, U., Groh, G., Günnemann, S., Hüllermeier, E., Krusche, S., Kutyniok, G., Michaeli, T., Nerdel, C., Pfeffer, J., Poquet, O., Sailer, M., Schmidt, A., Seidel, T., & Kasneci, G. (2023). ChatGPT for good? On opportunities and challenges of large language models for education. Learning and Individual Differences, 103, Article 102274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2023.102274
46. Kayalı, B., Yavuz, M., Balat, Ş., & Çalışan, M. (2023). Investigation of student experiences with ChatGPT-supported online learning applications in higher education. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology. https://ajet.org.au/index.php/AJET/article/download/8915/2050/30314
47. Kılınç, S. (2023, April 24). Embracing the future of Distance Science Education: Opportunities and Challenges of CHATGPT integration. https://www.asianjde.com/ojs/index.php/AsianJDE/article/view/721
48. Kılınç, S., Yavuz, M., Balat, Ş., & Çalışan, M. (2024). Challenges and coping strategies in using AI tools in education: A qualitative study. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-024-00345-3
49. Kılınç, S., Yavuz, M., Balat, Ş., & Çalışan, M. (2024). Drivers and consequences of ChatGPT use in higher education. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education (IJERE). https://doi.org/10.11591/ijere.v13i5.29467
50. Kim, D.-K., Chen, J., Ming, H., & Lu, L. (2023). Assessment of ChatGPT’s proficiency in software development. In Proceedings of the 2023 International Conference on Computational Science and Engineering. Oakland University, Department of Computer Science and Engineering. https://www.american-cse.org/csce2023-ieee/pdfs/CSCE2023 5LlpKs7cpb4k2UysbLCuOx/275900c637/275900c637.pdf
51. Kim, M., & Adlof, L. (2024). Adapting to the Future: ChatGPT as a Means for Supporting Constructivist Learning Environments. Tech Trends: Linking Research and Practice to Improve Learning, 68(1), 37-46.
52. Klayklung, P., Chocksathaporn, P., Limna, P., & Jangjarat, K. (2023). Revolutionizing Education with ChatGPT: Enhancing Learning Through Conversational AI. ResearchGate. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/373980793_Revolutionizing_Education_with_ChatGPT_Enhancing_Learning_Through_Conversational_AI
53. (2021, January 28). Why technology is essential to a 21st century education? Knowing Technologies. https://knowingtechnologies.com/21st-century-education-technology/
54. Kooli, C. (2023). Chatbots in Education and Research: A Critical Examination of ethical implications and solutions. Sustainability, 15(7), 5614. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15075614
55. Krejcie, R.V., & Morgan, D.W., (1970). Determining Sample Size for Research Activities. Educational and Psychological Measurement.
56. Kvartalnyi, N., & Kvartalnyi, N. (2023, November 23). AI Use Cases in Education: Examples & Benefits. Inoxoft |. https://inoxoft.com/blog/exploring-ai-use-cases-in-education/
57. Liu et al. (2024). ChatGPT in higher education: factors influencing user experience and satisfaction. Frontiers in Education. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2024.1354929
58. Lo, C. K. (2023). What Is the Impact of ChatGPT on Education? A Rapid Review of the Literature. Education Sciences, 13(4), 410. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13040410
59. Luckin, R., & Holmes, W. (2016). Intelligence Unleashed: An argument for AI in Education. ResearchGate. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/299561597_Intelligence_Unleashed_An_argument_for_AI_in_Education
60. Lund, B. D., & Wang, T. (2023). Chatting about ChatGPT: How may AI and GPT impact academia and libraries? *Library Hi Tech News, 40*(3), 26-29. https://doi.org/10.1108/LHTN-01-2023-0009
61. Maksimović, J., & Evtimov, J. (2023). Positivism and post-positivism as the basis of quantitative research in pedagogy. Research in Pedagogy, 13(1), 208–218. https://doi.org/10.5937/istrped2301208m
62. Mastery Coding. (2024). The pros and cons of using ChatGPT in K-12 education. Retrieved from https://www.masterycoding.com/blog/chatgpt-in-classroom
63. McGee, R. W. (2023). How would history be different if Karl Marx had never been born? *A ChatGPT essay*. Computers in Human Behavior Advances, 3, Article 100022. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbah.2023.100022
64. McNulty, N. (2024, February 14). ChatGPT for Teachers – Niall McNulty – medium. Medium. https://medium.com/@niall.mcnulty/chatgpt-for-teachers-fd0240730731
65. Melo, N. (2023, February 14). Incorporating Artificial Intelligence into The Classroom: An Examination Of Benefits, Challenges, And Best Practices. eLearning Industry. https://elearningindustry.com/incorporating-artificial-intelligence-into-classroom-examination-benefits-challenges-and-best-practices
66. Mertens, D. M. (2003). Mixed methods and the politics of human research: The transformative-emancipatory per- spective. InA. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
67. Mertens, D. M. (2003). Mixed methods and the politics of human research: The transformative-emancipatory perspective. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research (pp. 135-164). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
68. Miller, M. (2023, July 27). ChatGPT, Chatbots and artificial intelligence in education. Ditch That Textbook. https://ditchthattextbook.com/ai/?fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR3U-JwldQBt3J9kjVOcl2Dm2xv7jLjxfeSpsXSz_RB8jzdXqq25CHXImcE_aem_9fPyc0xuy3TyVRAuxuYDcQ
69. Mogavi, R. H., Deng, C., Kim, J. J., Zhou, P., Kwon, Y. D., Metwally, A. H. S., Tlili, A., Bassanelli, S., Bucchiarone, A., Gujar, S., Nacke, L. E., & Hui, P. (2024). ChatGPT in education: A blessing or a curse? A qualitative study exploring early adopters’ utilization and perceptions. Computers in Human Behavior Artificial Humans, 2(1), 100027. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbah.2023.100027
70. Mollick, E. (2023, June 12). Assigning AI: Seven ways of Using AI in Class. One Useful Thing. https://www.oneusefulthing.org/p/assigning-ai-seven-ways-of-using?utm_source=post-emailtitle&publication_id=1180644&post_id=127669714&isFreemail=true&utm_medium=email
71. Montenegro-Rueda, M., Fernández-Cerero, J., Fernández-Batanero, J. M., & López-Meneses, E. (2023). Impact of the implementation of ChatGPT in education: A systematic review. Computers, 12(8), 153. https://doi.org/10.3390/computers12080153
72. Nguyen, S. (2023, December 22). AI in Schools: 4 Transformative Ways AI Can Improve Education. Www.classpoint.io. https://www.classpoint.io/blog/ai-in-schools-4-ways-ai-can-improve-education
73. Noonoo, S. (2023, October 6). Setting ground rules around original writing and ChatGPT. Edutopia.https://www.edutopia.org/article/ground-rules-plagiarism-original-writing-chatgpt/
74. Ocaña-Fernández, A., López-Esteban, M., & Almaraz-Menéndez, J. (2024). Development and validation of a scale for dependence on artificial intelligence in university students. International Journal of Information and Education Technology. Available at: Frontiers
75. Perez, J. (2023, January 27). Artificial Intelligence (AI) in education: Impact & Examples. Questioner. https://www.questionpro.com/blog/ai-in-education/
76. Roose, K. (2023, January 12). Don’t ban ChatGPT in schools. Teach with it. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/12/technology/chatgpt-schools-teachers.html
77. Rueda, M. M., Fernández-Cerero, J., Fernández-Batanero, J. M., & López-Meneses, E. (2023). Impact of the implementation of ChatGPT in education: A systematic review. Computers, 12(8), 153. https://doi.org/10.3390/computers12080153
78. Šedlbauer, J., et al. (2024). Students’ reflections on their experience with ChatGPT. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12967
79. Šedlbauer, J., et al. (2024). Students’ reflections on their experience with ChatGPT. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12967
80. Sekaran, U. (2003). Research methods for business: A skill building approach (4th ed.). New York, NY: John Willey & Sons.
81. Sexton, J. (2023, December 14). Weighted Average Calculator. Inch Calculator. https://www.inchcalculator.com/weighted-average-calculator/
82. Shiri, A. (2023). ChatGPT and academic integrity. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4360052
83. Sok, S., & Heng, K. (2023, December 15). Opportunities, Challenges, and Strategies for Using ChaTGPT in Higher Education: A literature review. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4666349
84. Sok, S., & Heng, K. (2024). Opportunities, challenges, and strategies for using ChatGPT in higher education: A literature review. Journal of Digital Educational Technology. https://doi.org/10.30935/jdet/14027
85. Stokel-Walker, C. (2023). ChatGPT listed as author on research papers: many scientists disapprove. Nature 613, 620–621.https://www. doi: 10.1038/d41586-023-00107-z
86. Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (1998). Mixed methodology: Combining qualitative and quantitative approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
87. Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (2003a). The past and future of mixed methods research: From data triangulation to mixed model designs. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of mixed method research in social and behavioral research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
88. Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (Eds.). (2003b). Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research. Thou- sand Oaks, CA: Sage.
89. Tijen Tülübaş, Tuncay Yavuz Ozdemir, Tuncay Yavuz Ozdemir, Polat, H., Turgut Karakose, & Ramazan Yirci. (2023). An Interview with ChatGPT on Emergency Remote Teaching: A Comparative Analysis Based on Human–AI Collaboration. Educational Process: International Journal, 12(2). https://doi.org/10.22521/edupij.2023.122.6
90. Tossell, C. C., Tenhundfeld, N. L., Momen, A., Cooley, K., & de Visser, E. J. (2024). Student Perceptions of ChatGPT Use in a College Essay Assignment: Implications for Learning, Grading, and Trust in Artificial Intelligence. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 17, 1069-1081.
91. Ulla, M. B., Perales, W. F., & Busbus, S. O. (2023). ‘To Generate or Stop Generating Response’: Exploring EFL Teachers’ Perspectives on “ChatGPT” in English Language Teaching in Thailand. Learning: Research and Practice, 9(2), 168-182.
92. (2023). How generative AI is reshaping education in Asia-Pacific. Unesco.org. https://www.unesco.org/en/articles/how-generative-ai-reshaping-education-asia-pacific
93. Victor, J. O., Alyasiri, O. M., Akhtom, D., & Johnson, O. E. (2023). Image analysis through the lens of ChatGPT-4. Journal of Applied Artificial Intelligence, 4(2), 32-46. https://doi.org/10.48185/jaai.v4i2.870
94. Zeb, A., Ullah, R., & Karim, R. (2024). Exploring the Role of ChatGPT in Higher Education: Opportunities, Challenges and Ethical Considerations. International Journal of Information and Learning Technology, 41(1), 99-111.
95. Zhai, Xiaoming, ChatGPT and AI: The Game Changer for Education (March 15, 2023). Zhai, X. (2023). ChatGPT: Reforming Education on Five Aspects. Shanghai Education. 16-17., Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4389098