A Comparative Analysis of Lesson Plans Generated by Various AI Tools

Öz

This study aims to compare lesson plans generated by different artificial intelligence (AI) tools (ChatGPT, Microsoft Copilot, DeepSeek, Google Gemini, and Claude) based on prompts developed for the same mathematical learning objective and to evaluate these lesson plans from a multidimensional perspective. This study focuses on a learning objective included in the sixth-grade mathematics curriculum that requires students to move from known to unknown quantities and employ mathematical reasoning skills. A qualitative research approach based on document analysis was used. Data were obtained from the selected AI tools using structured prompts developed by the researchers. Following the content analysis of the generated lesson plans, a set of codes and themes was established and subsequently used to develop an evaluation rubric for the lesson plans. The lesson plans were evaluated using an AI-Generated Lesson Plan Evaluation Rubric. The evaluation results are tabulated and reported. Overall, the findings indicate that AI tools have considerable potential to serve as powerful assistive resources for teachers and preservice teachers during lesson planning. However, the generated content requires careful teacher oversight, particularly regarding the pedagogical quality and accuracy and appropriateness of assessment and evaluation components. The developed rubric provides a systematic framework for critically examining AI-generated lesson plans and offers a practical means of evaluating their pedagogical qualities.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Artificial Intelligence
• Document Analysis
• Evaluation Rubric
• Lesson Plan

Farklı Yapay Zeka Araçlarıyla Hazırlanan Ders Planlarının Karşılaştırılmalı İncelenmesi

Öz

Bu araştırmanın temel amacı; farklı yapay zeka araçları (ChatGPT, Microsoft Copilot, DeepSeek, Google Gemini ve Claude) tarafından aynı matematik kazanımı doğrultusunda hazırlanan istemler (prompt) temel alınarak üretilen ders planlarını çeşitli açılardan karşılaştırmak ve çok boyutlu bir bakış açısıyla değerlendirmektir. Çalışmada, 6. sınıf matematik dersi öğretim programında yer alan, öğrencilerin bilinen niceliklerden hareketle bilinmeyen niceliklere ulaşmalarını ve muhakeme becerilerini kullanmalarını gerektiren kazanım temel alınmıştır. Araştırmada nitel araştırma yöntemlerinden doküman incelemesi deseni benimsenmiştir. Veriler, araştırmacılar tarafından geliştirilen yapılandırılmış promptlar kullanılarak belirlenen yapay zeka araçlarından elde edilmiştir. Bu ders planlarının içerik analizi ile incelenmesi sonucu oluşan kod ve temalarla bir değerlendirme rubriği hazırlanmıştır. Oluşturulan YZ-Destekli Oluşturulan Ders Planı Değerlendirme Rubriği aracılığıyla ders planları değerlendirilmiştir. Değerlendirme sonuçları tablolaştırılarak raporlanmıştır. Sonuç olarak, yapay zekâ araçlarının ders planlama sürecinde öğretmenler ve öğretmen adayları için güçlü bir yardımcı asistan olma potansiyeli taşıdığı, ancak üretilen içeriklerin pedagojik nitelik ve ölçme-değerlendirme doğruluğu açısından mutlaka öğretmen denetiminden geçmesi gerektiği ortaya konulmuştur. Çalışmada sunulan bu rubrik aracılığıyla, üretilen ders planlarının eleştirel bir bakış açısıyla incelenebilmesi için bir yol haritası sunulmuştur.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Değerlendirme Rubriği
• Ders Planı
• Doküman Analizi
• Yapay Zeka

Kaynakça

1. Baidoo-Anu, D ve Owusu Ansah, L., (2023). Education in the era of generative artificial intelligence (AI ): Understanding the potential benefits of ChatGPT in promoting teaching and learning, Journal of AI 7, 1, 52–62. https://doi.org/10.61969/jai.1337500.
2. Baskara, F. R., (2025). Conceptualizing digital literacy for the AI era: A framework for preparing students in an AI-driven world, Data and Metadata 4, 530, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.56294/dm2025530
3. Boydak, H. A. (2015). Öğrenme stilleri. Beyaz Yayınları.
4. Chassignol, M., Khoroshavin, A., Klimova, A. & Bilyatdinova, A. (2018). Artificial Intelligence trends in education: a narrative overview. Procedia Computer Science, 136, 16-24.
5. Choi, K. (2026). A case study exploring the relationship between instruction types and prompt levels in preservice mathematics teachers' chatgpt-based lesson design. Communications of the Korean Mathematical Society, 41(3), 697-722.
6. Dumlu, B. Ö., Gezer, E., & Yıldız, B. (2024). Eşitsizlik Konusunda ChatGPT ile Hazırlanan Ders Planlarının İncelenmesi. Türk Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 22(1), 337-358. https://doi.org/10.37217/tebd.1338959
7. Fennema, E., & Franke, M. (1992). Teachers' knowledge and its impact. In Grouws, D. (Eds.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 147–164). New York: Macmillan Publishing Company. https://doi.org/10.1108/978-1-60752-874-620251011
8. Grossman, P.L., & McDonald, M. (2008). Back to the future: Directions for research in teaching and teacher education. American Educational Research Journal, 45(1), 184–205. https://doi.org/10.3102/000283120731290

9. Halaweh, M. (2023). ChatGPT in education: Strategies for responsible implementation. Contemporary educational technology, 15(2).
10. Han, L. (2018, December). Analysis of new advances in the application of artificial intelligence to education. In 2018 3rd International Conference on Education, E-learning and Management Technology (EEMT 2018) (pp. 608-611). Atlantis Press.
11. Hiebert, J., ve Grouws, D. A., (2007). The effects of classroom mathematics teaching on students’ learning, Second Handbook of Research on Mathematics Teaching and Learning, F. K. Lester Jr. (Ed.), 371–404, Information Age Publishing, 2007.
12. Hwang, G. J., Xie, H., Wah, B. W., & Gašević, D. (2020). Vision, challenges, roles and research issues of Artificial Intelligence in Education. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 1, 100001. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2020.100001
13. Khalil, M., ve Er, E. Will, (2023). ChatGPT get you caught? Rethinking of plagiarism detection, Learning and Collaboration Technologies, P. Zaphiris and A. Ioannou (Eds.), 475–487, Springer, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-34411-4_32
14. Korucu, A. T., & Biçer, H. (2022). Eğitimde yapay zekanın rolleri ve eğitsel yapay zeka uygulamaları. Eğitimde yapay zeka, kuramdan uygulamaya (38-56) içinde. Pegem Akademi.
15. Labadze, L., Grigolia, M. & Machaidze, L. (2023). Role of AI chatbots in education: systematic literature review. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 20(1), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00426-1
16. Lee, D., ve Palmer, E., (2025). Prompt engineering in higher education: A systematic review to help inform curricula, International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 22 , 1, 7. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-025-00503-7
17. 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
18. MEB,(2023). Matematik Dersi Öğretim Programı https://tymm.meb.gov.tr/ogretim-programlari/ortaokul-matematik-dersi/7 sayfasından erişilmiştir.
19. McCarthy, J. (2007). What is artificial intelligence?. Erişim adresi (11 Ocak 2019): http://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/whatisai/.
20. Mishra, P., Warr, M., & Islam, R. (2023). TPACK in the age of ChatGPT and Generative AI. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 39(4), 235-251. https://doi.org/10.1080/21532974.2023.2247480
21. Mollick, E., & Mollick, L. (2023). Assigning AI: Seven approaches for students, with prompts. arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.10052.
22. Nabiyev, V. V. (2012). Yapay zeka: insan-bilgisayar etkileşimi. Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.
23. Nabiyev V. & Erümit, A. K. (2022). Yapay zekanın temelleri. İçinde V. Nabiyev ve A. K. Erümit (Ed.), Eğitimde yapay zeka: Kuramdan uygulamaya (s. 1-35). Ankara: Pegem Yayınları.
24. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
25. Nilsson, N. (1990). The mathematical foundations of learning machines. San Mateo: Morgan Kaufmann.
26. Osetskyi, V., Vitrenko, A., Tatomyr, I., Bilan, S. & Hirnyk, Y. (2020). Artificial intelligence application in education: Financial implications and prospects. Financial and Credit Activity: Problems of Theory and Practice, 2(33), 574-584. https://doi.org/10.18371/fcaptp.v2i33.207246
27. Panasuk, R., Stone, W., & Todd, J. (2002). Lesson planning strategy for effective mathematics teaching. Education, 122(4), 808-827.
28. Stein, M. K., Engle, R. A., Smith, M. S., & Hughes, E. K. (2008). Orchestrating productive mathematical discussions: Five practices for helping teachers move beyond show and tell. Mathematical thinking and learning, 10(4), 313-340. https://doi.org/10.1080/10986060802229675
29. Tlili, A., Shehata, B., Adarkwah, M. A., Bozkurt, A., Hickey, D. T., Huang, R., & Agyemang, B. (2023). What if the devil is my guardian angel: ChatGPT as a case study of using chatbots in education. Smart learning environments, 10(1), 15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-023-00237-x.
30. Van den Berg, G., ve Du Plessis, E., (2023). ChatGPT and generative AI: Possibilities for its contribution to lesson planning, critical thinking and openness in teacher education, Education Sciences 13, 10, 998. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13100998
31. Zhai, X., Chu, X., Chai, C. S., Jong, M. S. Y., Istenic, A., Spector, M., ... & Li, Y. (2021). A Review of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Education from 2010 to 2020. Complexity, 2021(1), 8812542. https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/8812542.