ChatGPT, Copilot, Gemini, SciSpace and Wolfram versus higher education assessments: an updated multi-institutional study of the academic integrity impacts of Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) on assessment, teaching and learning in engineering
- Publisher:
- Taylor & Francis
- Publication Type:
- Journal Article
- Citation:
- Australasian Journal of Engineering Education, 2024, ahead-of-print, (ahead-of-print), pp. 1-28
- Issue Date:
- 2024-01-01
Embargoed
Copyright Clearance Process
- Recently Added
- In Progress
- Open Access
This item is currently unavailable due to the publisher's embargo.
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.
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: