Examination of Grade 7 Ratio Concept Tasks Designed by ChatGPT Based on Cognitive Demand Levels

Abstract

The process that enables students to achieve objectives while performing mathematical tasks is defined as an activity. The task creation process is a lengthy and challenging journey involving many complex stages. Artificial intelligence technologies can facilitate this process. For instance, ChatGPT can assist teachers on various issues and help them create tasks. This study aimed to evaluate the tasks prepared for the Grade 7 ratio concept using ChatGPT, focusing on cognitive demand levels. It employed a case study design to examine the cognitive demand levels of tasks created with ChatGPT 3.5 and ChatGPT 4, identifying any potential deficiencies. The content analysis was performed to analyze the data. It was concluded that the created tasks could be used with necessary improvements, allowing teachers to enrich their course content while saving time and energy.

Keywords

• Mathematical Task
• Activity
• Cognitive Demand Level
• Ratio
• ChatGPT

References

1. Almelweth, H. (2022). The effectiveness of a proposed strategy for teaching geography through artificial ıntelligence applications in developing secondary school students' higher-order thinking skills and achievement. Pegem Journal of Education and Instruction, 12(3), 169-176.
2. Arslan, K. Artificial intelligence and applications in education. The Western Anatolian Journal of Educational Sciences,11(1), 71-88.
3. Atara, S., Roberto, W. L., Woon, C. and Kamber, D. (2000). An implementation of active learning and its effect on the quality of student learning. Innovations in Education and Training International, 37(4), 381.
4. Barakina, E. (2021). Digital technologies and artificial technologies in education. European Journal of Contemporary Education, 10(2), 285- 296.
5. Breuss, M. (2023). Prompt engineering: A practical example. https://realpython.com/practical-prompt-engineering/
6. Çepni, S. (2012). Araştırma ve proje çalışmalarına giriş. Trabzon: Celepler.
7. Dede, Y., Doğan, M.F. and Aslan-Tutak, F. (Ed). (2020). Matematik eğitiminde etkinlikler ve uygulamaları (2nd Edition). Pegem Akademi: Ankara.
8. Denzin, N. K. & Lincoln, Y. S. (Ed) (1994). Handbook of Qualitative Research. Thousand Oas, CA: Sage Publications.

9. Doyle, W. (1983). Academic work. Review Of Educational Research, 159-199.
10. Dwivedi, V. & Joshi, Y. (2021). ICT perspectives of productive and sustainable development for 21st century higher education institutions. International Journal of Education and Development using Information and Communication Technology, 17(3), 81-96.
11. Ecemiş, Ü. (2017). An international comparison of the cognitive demand levels of tasks in Turkey’s 5th grade mathematics books (Master Thesis, Ankara University, Ankara).
12. Edwards, Benj (2023). "OpenAI's GPT-4 exhibits "human-level performance" on professional benchmarks". https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2023/03/openai-announces-gpt-4-its-next-generation-ai-language-model/
13. Engin, Ö. (2015). A comparison of the cognitive demand levels of tasks in 7th grade mathematics textbook in Turkey with those in the national curriculum and the textbooks of other countries (Master Thesis, Ankara University, Ankara).
14. Henningsen, M., & Stein, M. (1997). Mathematical tasks and student cognition: classroom-based factors that support and inhibit high-level mathematical thinking and reasoning. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 28(5), 542-549.
15. Jones, J. (2021). Integrating machine learning in mathematics classroom. Mathematics Teacher: Learning and Teaching PK-12, 114(8), 624-628.
16. Kelly, Samantha Murphy (5 Aralık 2022). "This AI chatbot is dominating social media with its frighteningly good essays | CNN Business". CNN (İngilizce). https://web.archive.org/web/20221210112243/https://www.cnn.com/2022/12/05/tech/chatgpt-trnd/index.html Erişim tarihi:
17. Korucu, A. & Biçer, H. (2022). Eğitimde yapay zeka uygulamaları (3rd ed.) Ankara: Pegem Publishing House.
18. Lugosi, E. ve Uribe, G. (2022). Active learning strategies with positive effects on students’ achievements in undergraduate mathematics education. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 53(2), 403-424.
19. Merriam, S. B. (1988). Case study research in education: A qualitative approach. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
20. Nayir, Ö. & Bulut, S. (2022). Etkinlik kavramının matematik öğretimindeki tarihsel gelişimi. Eğitimde yapay zeka uygulamaları (3rd ed.). Ankara: Pegem Yayınevi.
21. OpenAI (2023b). GPT 4 Technical Report. https://cdn.openai.com/papers/gpt-4.pdf
22. Özgen, K. (2017). Matematiksel öğrenme etkinliği türlerine yönelik kuramsal bir çalışma: Fonksiyon kavramı örneklemesi. Abant İzzet Baysal Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 17(3), 1437-1464.
23. Pressey, S. L. (1950). Development and appraisal of devices providing immediateautomatic scoring of objective tests and concomitant self-instruction.The Journal of Psychology, 29(2), 417-447.
24. Reçber, H. (2012). An international comparison of level of cognitive demands of the tasks in Turkey’s 8th grade mathematics curriculum and textbook. (Master Thesis, Ankara University, Ankara).
25. Sarpkaya, G. (2011). The investigation of mathematical tasks related to piimary school secondary level algebra learning field in terms of cogiitive demands: Mathematics course books and classroom implementations. (Master Thesis, Gazi University, Ankara).
26. Scharth, M. (2022). The ChatGPT chatbot is blowing people away with its writing skills. The University of Sydney. https://www.sydney. https://www.sydney.edu.au/news-opinion/news/2022/12/08/the-chatgpt-chatbot-is-blowing-people-away-with-its-writing-skil.html
27. Silver, E. A. ve Herbst, P. G. (2008). Theory in mathematics education scholarship. In F. K. Lester (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 39-68). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
28. Smith, M. S., and Stein, M. K. (1998). Selecting and creating mathematical tasks: from research to practice. Math. Teach. Middle Sch. 3, 344–350. doi: 10.5951/MTMS.3.5.0344
29. Stein, M. K., & Lane, S. (1996). Instructional tasks and the development of student capacity to think and reason: An analysis of the relationship between teaching and learning in a reform mathematics project. Educational Research and Evaluation, 2(1), 50-80.
30. Stein, M. K., Smith, M. S., Henningsen, M., and Silver, E. A. (2000). Implementing standards-based mathematics instruction: A casebook for professional development. New York: Teacher College.
31. Stojanov, A. (2023). Learning with ChatGPT 3.5 as a more knowledgeable other: An autoethnographic study. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 20(35), 1-17.
32. Terrasi, V. (2023). GPT 4: How is it differentfrom GPT 3.5?. Search Engine Journal. https://www.searchenginejournal.com/gpt-4-vs-gpt-3-5/482463/#close
33. Ubuz, B., Erbaş, A., Çetinkaya, B. and Özgeldi, M. (2010). Exploring the quality of the mathematical tasksin the new Turkish elementary school mathematics curriculum guidebook: the case of algebra. ZDM Mathematics Education, 5(42), 483-491.
34. Wakhata, R., Mutarutinya, V. and Balimuttajjo, S. (2023). Exploring the impact of Stein et al.’s levels of cognitive demand in supporting students’ mathematics heuristic problem-solving abilities. Frontiers in Education, 8(9499888), 1-13. doi: 10.3389/feduc.2023.949988.
35. Yeşildere, S. (2022). Matematiksel etkinliklerin tasarım ilkeleri. Eğitimde yapay zekâ uygulamaları (3rd ed) Ankara: Pegem Yayınevi.
36. Yıldırım, A. & Şimşek, H. (2013). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri (9th ed.). Ankara: Seçkin Publishing House.
37. Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, California: Sage.
38. Yuan, Y. (2022). Quantitative analysis of chinese classroom teaching activity under the background of artificial ıntelligence. Education and Information Technologies, 27(8), 11161-11177.