Grand challenges for ChatGPT usage in education: psychological theories, perspectives and opportunities

Abstract

The integration of conversational artificial intelligence (AI) systems like ChatGPT into educational settings presents significant opportunities and challenges. This paper examines the potential impacts of ChatGPT usage in academics through the lens of established psychological theories and perspectives, including constructivist learning theory, cognitive load theory, sociocultural learning theory, and human-AI collaboration theory. It explores the benefits of ChatGPT as a personalized, interactive, and responsive educational aid, capable of fostering engagement, writing skill development, and accessibility. However, concerns are raised regarding academic integrity, factual accuracy, critical thinking development, plagiarism, equity, privacy, and bias mitigation. The paper emphasizes the need for proactive risk management and evidence-based guidelines to responsibly leverage ChatGPT's advantages while safeguarding student well-being and learning outcomes. It advocates for maintaining teacher and learner agency, fostering appropriate trust calibration, and defining supplemental roles for ChatGPT that enhance rather than replace human teaching and knowledge construction. Ultimately, the paper calls for further research to develop optimal design principles and policy frameworks that uplift both educators and learners through ethical, compassionate human-AI partnerships in education.

Keywords

• ChatGPT
• conversational AI
• educational technology
• human-AI collaboration

References

1. Amershi, S., Weld, D., Vorvoreanu, M., Fourney, A., Nushi, B., Collisson, P., Suh, J., Iqbal, S., Bennett, P., Inkpen, K., Teevan, J., Kikin-Gil, R& Horvitz, E. (2019). Guidelines for human-AI interaction. CHI '19: Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, (3), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1145/3290605.3300233
2. ‏Bai, L., Liu, X., & Su, J. (2023). ChatGPT: The cognitive effects on learning and memory. Brain‐X, 1(3), Article e30.‏ https://doi.org/10.1002/brx2.30
3. Bawden, D. (2008). Origins and concepts of digital literacy. Digital literacies: Concepts, policies and practices, 30(2008), 17-32.‏
4. Chen, T. (2023, March 5). Schools should embrace the use of ChatGPT. Rubiconline. Retrieved March 14, 2024, from https://www.rubiconline.com/schools-should-embrace-the-use-of-chatgpt/
5. Daniel, J. (2023). Reducing Extraneous Cognitive Load: Learners Describe Learning Strategy Changes When Solving Problems (Publication No. 30815849) [Doctoral dissertation, Grand Canyon University].
6. Darling-Hammond, L., Flook, L., Cook-Harvey, C., Barron, B., & Osher, D. (2020). Implications for educational practice of the science of learning and development. Applied developmental science, 24(2), 97-140.‏ https://doi.org/10.1080/10888691.2018.1537791
7. Hashem, R., Ali, N., El Zein, F., Fidalgo, P., & Khurma, O. (2024). AI to the rescue: Exploring the potential of ChatGPT as a teacher ally for workload relief and burnout prevention. Research & Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 19, Article 23. http://dx.doi.org/10.58459/rptel.2024.19023
8. Hassani, H., & Silva, E. S. (2023). The role of ChatGPT in data science: how ai-assisted conversational interfaces are revolutionizing the field. Big data and cognitive computing, 7(2), 62.‏ https://doi.org/10.3390/bdcc7020062

9. Hill, R., Betts, L., & Gardner, S. (2015). Older adults’ experiences and perceptions of digital technology:(Dis) empowerment, wellbeing, and inclusion. Computers in Human Behavior, 48, 415-423.‏ https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.01.062
10. Hua, S., Jin, S., & Jiang, S. (2023). The limitations and ethical considerations of ChatGPT. Data Intelligence, 1-38.‏ https://doi.org/10.1162/dint_a_00243
11. Javaid, M., Haleem, A., Singh, R., Khan, S., & Khan, I. (2023). Unlocking the opportunities through ChatGPT Tool towards ameliorating the education system. BenchCouncil Transactions on Benchmarks, Standards and Evaluations, 3(2), Article 100115.‏ https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tbench.2023.100115
12. Joshi, I., Budhiraja, R., Tanna, P. D., Jain, L., Deshpande, M., Srivastava, A., ... & Kumar, D. (2023). From" Let's Google" to" Let's ChatGPT": Student and Instructor Perspectives on the influence of LLMs on Undergraduate Engineering Education. arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.10694.‏ https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2309.10694
13. Kocoń, J., Cichecki, I., Kaszyca, O., Kochanek, M., Szydło, D., Baran, J., ... & Kazienko, P. (2023). ChatGPT: Jack of all trades, master of none. Information Fusion, 99, Article 101861.‏ https://doi.org/10.1016/j.inffus.2023.101861
14. Lancaster, T. (2023). Artificial intelligence, text generation tools and ChatGPT–does digital watermarking offer a solution? International Journal for Educational Integrity, 19(1), Article 10.‏ https://doi.org/10.1007/s40979-023-00131-6
15. Lin, X. (2023). Exploring the Role of ChatGPT as a Facilitator for Motivating Self-Directed Learning Among Adult Learners. Adult Learning, Article 10451595231184928.‏ https://doi.org/10.1177/10451595231184928
16. Mhlanga, D. (2023). Digital transformation education, opportunities, and challenges of the application of ChatGPT to emerging economies. Education Research International, 2023, Article 7605075. https://doi.org/10.1155/2023/7605075
17. Mosaiyebzadeh, F., Pouriyeh, S., Parizi, R., Dehbozorgi, N., Dorodchi, M., & Macêdo Batista, D. (2023, October). Exploring the Role of ChatGPT in Education: Applications and Challenges. In Proceedings of the 24th Annual Conference on Information Technology Education (pp. 84-89).‏ https://doi.org/10.1145/3585059.3611445
18. Okey, O., Udo, E., Rosa, R., Rodríguez, D., & Kleinschmidt, J. (2023). Investigating ChatGPT and cybersecurity: A perspective on topic modeling and sentiment analysis. Computers & Security, 135, Article 103476.‏ https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cose.2023.103476
19. Paas, F., Renkl, A., & Sweller, J. (2003). Cognitive load theory and instructional design: Recent developments. Educational psychologist, 38(1), 1-4.‏ https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3801_1
20. Rane, N., Choudhary, S., Tawde, A., & Rane, J. (2023). ChatGPT is not capable of serving as an author: ethical concerns and challenges of large language models in education. International Research Journal of Modernization in Engineering Technology and Science, 5(10), 851-874.‏
21. Rasul, T., Nair, S., Kalendra, D., Robin, M., de Oliveira Santini, F., Ladeira, W. J., ... & Heathcote, L. (2023). The role of ChatGPT in higher education: Benefits, challenges, and future research directions. Journal of Applied Learning and Teaching, 6(1), 851- 874. https://www.doi.org/10.56726/IRJMETS45212
22. Roose, K. (2022). The brilliance and weirdness of ChatGPT. The New York Times.‏ Schmidt, P., Biessmann, F., & Teubner, T. (2020). Transparency and trust in artificial intelligence systems. Journal of Decision Systems, 29(4), 260-278.‏ https://doi.org/10.1080/12460125.2020.1819094
23. Song, C., & Song, Y. (2023). Enhancing academic writing skills and motivation: assessing the efficacy of ChatGPT in AI-assisted language learning for EFL students. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, Article 1260843.‏ https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1260843 ‏ Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive science, 12(2), 257-285.‏ https://doi.org/10.1016/0364-0213(88)90023-7
24. Vygotsky, L., & Cole, M. (1978). Mind in society: Development of higher psychological processes. Harvard university press.‏
25. Wach, K., Duong, C., Ejdys, J., Kazlauskaitė, R., Korzynski, P., Mazurek, G., Paliszkiewicz, J., & Ziemba, E. (2023). The dark side of generative artificial intelligence: A critical analysis of controversies and risks of ChatGPT. Uniwersytet Ekonomiczny w Krakowie.
26. Zerilli, J., Bhatt, U., & Weller, A. (2022). How transparency modulates trust in artificial intelligence. Patterns Review, 3. 1-10.‏ https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patter.2022.100455