ChatGPT in physics education: A pilot study on easy-to-implement activities

Abstract

Large language models, such as ChatGPT, have great potential to enhance learning and support teachers, but they must be used with care to tackle limitations and biases. This paper presents two easy-to-implement examples of how ChatGPT can be used in physics classrooms to foster critical thinking skills at the secondary school level. A pilot study (n=53) examining the implementation of these examples found that the intervention had a positive impact on students' perceptions of ChatGPT, with an increase in agreement with statements related to its benefits and incorporation into their daily lives.

Full text

Contemporary Educational Technology, 2023, 15(3), ep430
ISSN: 1309-517X (Online)
Copyright © 2023 by authors; licensee CEDTECH by Bastas, CY. This article is an open access article distributed under the
terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
OPEN ACCESS
ChatGPT in physics education: A pilot study on easy-to-
implement activities
Philipp Bitzenbauer 1*
0000-0001-5493-291X
1 Physics Education Research, Faculty of Physics and Earth Sciences, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, GERMANY
* Corresponding author: philipp.bitzenbauer@uni-leipzig.de
Citation: Bitzenbauer, P. (2023). ChatGPT in physics education: A pilot study on easy-to-implement activities. Contemporary
Educational Technology, 15(3), ep430. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/13176
ARTICLE INFO
ABSTRACT
Received: 3 Mar 2023
Accepted: 11 Apr 2023
Large language models, such as ChatGPT, have great potential to enhance learning and support
teachers, but they must be used with care to tackle limitations and biases. This paper presents
two easy-to-implement examples of how ChatGPT can be used in physics classrooms to foster
critical thinking skills at the secondary school level. A pilot study (n=53) examining the
implementation of these examples found that the intervention had a positive impact on
students’ perceptions of ChatGPT, with an increase in agreement with statements related to its
benefits and incorporation into their daily lives.
Keywords: ChatGPT, large language model, physics teaching, critical thinking
INTRODUCTION
The acronym ChatGPT stands for chat generative pre-trained transformer, a “general-purpose conversation
chatbot based on the GPT-3 language model developed by OpenAI” (Zhai, 2023, p. 2). Generative pre-trained
transformer (GPT) models, such as GPT-3 (Floridi & Chiriatti, 2020), use a “large amount of publicly available
digital content data” (Baidoo-Anu & Ansah, 2023, p. 3) to perform “a wide range of natural-language tasks
ranging from translation to question answering, writing coherent essays, and computer programs” (Kasneci
et al., 2023, p. 2). In just five days since its release on November 30, 2022, ChatGPT has reached the one million
user mark (Buchholz, 2023).
While the use of artificial intelligence (AI) and GPT models is already widespread in various industrial
applications (Ahuja, 2019; Veloso et al., 2021) research investigating the implementation of chatbots into
classroom practice is still in its infancy (Hwang & Chang, 2021), especially with respect to secondary schools
(Adiguzel et al., 2023; Salas-Pilco & Yang, 2022; Salas-Pilco et al., 2022; Halaweh, 2023). There are specific
barriers and risks associated with the use of large language models in an educational context (e.g., Farrokhnia
et al., 2023; Kasneci et al., 2023). For example, Floridi and Chiriatti (2020) warn that “fake news and
disinformation may [...] get a boost” (p. 692) by tools like ChatGPT considering that it becomes easier to
convincingly mislead with automatically generated texts (McGuffie & Newhouse, 2020). Floridi and Chiriatti
(2020) conclude that “humanity will need to be even more intelligent and critical” (p. 692). In the same
direction, Kasneci et al. (2023) suggest integrating large language models into classroom practice “in a way
that complements and enhances the learning experience” (p. 7), e.g., helping students’ developing critical
thinking skills (Gregorcic & Pendrill, 2023). In any case, the “physics education community is well-positioned
to investigate the use and capabilities of ChatGPT and other AI systems” (Wang, 2023).
One particularly relevant limitation of AI tools is the lack of higher-order thinking skills as outlined by
Farrokhnia et al. (2023). AI tools are highly dependent on the data they are trained on, and often lack a deep
understanding of the textual outputs produced (Bogost, 2022; Gao et al., 2023) or the content context, which
is essential for higher-order thinking (Dimitrov, 2023). Additionally, ChatGPT’s inability to assess the reliability
of its training data (Lecler et al., 2023) may hinder its effectiveness in evaluating the accuracy of generated
Research Article

Bitzenbauer
2 / 10 Contemporary Educational Technology, 15(3), ep430
information (Sallam, 2023). For learners, it hence, seems crucial to become aware of the responsibility to
critically evaluate the quality of ChatGPT outputs with regard to content and coherence. In the literature
scholars even warn that for learners the use of “ChatGPT can result in simplification of the process of obtaining
answers or information, which can have negative impact on students’ motivation to perform independent
research” (Farrokhnia et al., 2023, p. 9). However, despite and specifically because of the above raised issues,
using ChatGPT in classrooms can be a valuable opportunity to promote critical thinking skills among students.
Hence, we argue that educational research must bring forward suggestions for classroom practice such that
students can recognize the limitations of AI tools and appreciate the importance of higher-order thinking skills
that cannot be replicated by machines.
In this article, we present two easy-to-implement examples demonstrating how ChatGPT can be used in
classrooms to foster students’ critical thinking skills–although we contextualize these in the context of physics
teaching, we believe that these examples may guide classroom practice in any subject. In the next section, we
give an overview of research on critical thinking. Finally, we provide insights into the results of an initial
implementation of these examples in the field, analyzing secondary students’ opinions about AI in general
and ChatGPT in particular, prior to and post instruction.
FOSTERING CRITICAL THINKING SKILLS USING ChatGPT IN THE PHYSICS
CLASSROOM
Various definitions for critical thinking prevalent in educational contexts (Ennis, 1996; Lipman, 1988) align
in that
(1) “critical thinking involves drawing conclusions supported by evidence” and
(2) “critical thinking involves making decisions and/or forming beliefs about a situation” (Smith & Holmes,
2020, p. 2).
Hence, fostering critical thinking skills requires deliberate practice, i.e., “doing special exercises whose
main point is to improve critical thinking skills themselves” (van Gelder, 2005, p. 43). The cultivation of critical
thinking abilities in students is imperative for facilitating the development of effective problem-solving skills,
sound judgment, and accountable academic behavior, as noted by Hidayat et al. (2023).
At the same time, it is crucial to make secondary school students aware of the limitations of ChatGPT and
other AI language models (Kasneci, 2023) because they have the potential to disseminate false information.
This seems crucial far beyond the physics classroom, namely with regards to the challenges of the information
age, where misinformation is prevalent and can have significant consequences.
Taken together, we argue that incorporating ChatGPT in (physics) physics classrooms allows teachers to
• foster students’ critical thinking skills by producing and reflecting on different ChatGPT outputs, and to
• initiate reflection processes among their students about advantages and pitfalls associated with the
use of ChatGPT as well as consequences for obtaining valid serious information in general.
TWO EASY-TO-IMPLEMENT EXAMPLES USING ChatGPT IN QUANTUM PHYSICS
CLASSROOMS
In this section, we present two concrete examples of implementing ChatGPT
1
in physics lessons on the
topic of quantum physics. We have decided to stick with quantum physics–which is today part of most
secondary school curricula across Europe as shown by Stadermann et al. (2019)–for these examples because
• of quantum physics being highly abstract and
• quantum physics is a prime example for the necessity of model descriptions (Bitzenbauer, 2021).
Thus, using ChatGPT to reflect on various texts related to quantum concepts seems valuable for engaging
students in a process of critical thinking. The following examples of ChatGPT implementations in secondary
education are by no means limited to quantum context, which we have used as an example here.
1
A plethora of further possibilities for integration of ChatGPT into (physics) lessons is offered by Skrabut (2023).

Contemporary Educational Technology, 2023
Contemporary Educational Technology, 15(3), ep430 3 / 10
Production and Critical Analysis of ChatGPT Outputs
Teachers can use ChatGPT as a tool to support students’ critical thinking skills by guiding them through
different steps: from text production, through critical analysis, to revision, e.g., according to the following
steps inspired by the think-pair-share method (Alsmadi et al., 2023; Lyman, 1981; Prahl, 2017) and exemplified
for discussing wave-particle duality and photons:
• First, the students can be asked to generate a text about photons using ChatGPT (part a in Figure 1).
• After the texts have been generated, the students can be asked to analyze and evaluate the accuracy
and clarity of the information. For example, they can be encouraged to search for any inconsistencies
or inaccuracies and compare the information provided in the text with what they had learned in class
before (“think”).
• The students should then exchange their texts created with ChatGPT in small groups (“pair”). They will
become aware that information provided by ChatGPT may differ depending on the students’ prompts
(part b in Figure 1).
• In a next step, the students could be encouraged to revise the text produced by ChatGPT using (and
citing) additional sources such as textbooks, scientific articles, or online resources. This procedure
might help students develop a habit of verifying information from multiple sources.
• Lastly, it seems sensible to facilitate a class discussion, where students can share their findings and
discuss the information they have analyzed (“share”).
A meaningful follow-up task might be to take advantage of ChatGPT’s ability to generate reasonings. For
example, in classroom practice, it might be valuable to make ChatGPT argue for a particular position, e.g., one
that does not conform to the scientific view. The students can then, firstly, point out flaws in ChatGPT’s
(a)
(b)
Figure 1. Screenshot showing different prompts a) and b) used to ask ChatGPT about the meaning of term
photon led to two slightly different answers (screenshots from https://chat.openai.com/chat)

Bitzenbauer
4 / 10 Contemporary Educational Technology, 15(3), ep430
reasoning and, second, write a counterargument. An example of the implementation of such a procedure
with ChatGPT in the context of photons is shown in Figure 2.
The prompt used in Figure 2 is formulated very specifically in order to get ChatGPT providing the required
arguments in favor of a particle notion of the photon. Therefore, it may be helpful for students to revisit the
think-pair-share exercise described earlier, but with different prompts, to compare ChatGPT’s responses.
Development of a Conceptual Survey Using ChatGPT for Use in the Physics Classroom
ChatGPT is able to develop a conceptual survey (or single items) to assess students’ understanding
(Nasution, 2023), e.g., of basic quantum concepts (part a in Figure 3). On the one hand, items created by
ChatGPT may initiate classroom discussions about correct solutions. From time to time, ChatGPT will produce
items (or answers to these items) that are not (entirely) correct from a scientific point of view (part b in Figure
3)–for example, Gregorcic and Pendrill (2023) have found “ChatGPT to be a reliable source of problematic and
incorrect answers to conceptual physics questions” (p. 8). Such invalid questions produced by ChatGPT can
be used in classroom to reflect on their scientific correctness. Therefore, ChatGPT can not only assist teachers
in assessing students’ understanding, but also provide students with the opportunity to develop their critical
thinking skills and evaluate the accuracy of information.
Figure 2. The user enforces ChatGPT to argue in favor of a naïve imagination of the photon as a spherical
particle (screenshot from https://chat.openai.com/chat)

Contemporary Educational Technology, 2023
Contemporary Educational Technology, 15(3), ep430 5 / 10
(a)
(b)
Figure 3. Screenshot showing a) an excerpt of a conceptual survey consisting of single-choice item to assess
students’ understanding of quantum interference created by ChatGPT & b) a scientifically questionable item
generated by ChatGPT which can serve as a starting point for in-depth classroom discussions (screenshots
from https://chat.openai.com/chat)

Bitzenbauer
6 / 10 Contemporary Educational Technology, 15(3), ep430
USE OF THE EASY-TO-IMPLEMENT ACTIVITIES IN THE FIELD: A PILOT STUDY
Research Question
The examples of using ChatGPT in the physics classroom introduced above were provisionally tested in a
pilot study in the field in a two-lesson intervention. In this pilot, however, it was not our goal to examine the
impact of the intervention on students’ critical thinking skills because
1. a two-lessons-course may not be expected to have a substantial and sustainable impact without
incorporation into the previous and further lessons and
2. our focus in the pilot study was on gathering first experiences in the implementation and on getting
insights into the potential values of the use of ChatGPT in the physics classroom in general.
From a scientific perspective, we were instead interested in the impact of the intervention on students’
opinions about AI in general and ChatGPT in particular, as little empirical research has been published on the
practical implementation of ChatGPT in the classroom so far. Hence, we addressed the following research
question: To what extent are students’ perceptions of the importance of AI in general, and ChatGPT in particular,
influenced by their participation in the intervention?
Study Design and Sample
The pilot study was conducted in the field and employed a one-group pretest-posttest design. Two 12th
grade physics classes (n=53 students, 30 male, 23 female) of a German high school (so-called Gymnasium)
were involved. The intervention was implemented by an instructed teacher during regular physics lessons on
quantum physics in which students had previously learned about wave-particle duality.
In total, the intervention comprised two 45-minute lessons and involved two main activities: In the first
lesson, the students critically reviewed ChatGPT outputs on the nature of photons and discussed them in a
think-pair-share format as described above. In the second lesson, they created a three-item conceptual survey
on wave-particle duality for a peer. This required them to find an appropriate prompt for ChatGPT, check the
created items for scientific validity, and work on the items developed by another student. The two partner
students later discussed their solutions and shared their results in a class discussion.
Instrument
To collect students’ perceptions of the importance of AI in general, and ChatGPT in particular, we adapted
items from a questionnaire on students’ opinions about quantum science used in an earlier study by Moraga-
Calderón et al. (2020). This questionnaire is based on ROSE (relevance of science) questionnaire originally
developed by Schreiner and Sjøberg (2004).
Additionally, we used three items from Chai et al. (2020). In total, our questionnaire comprised nine 5-
point rating-scale items (1 corresponds to “disagree”, 2 to “rather disagree”, 3 to “I do not know”, 4 to “rather
agree”, and 5 to “agree”). The questionnaire was administered prior and post the intervention. The items are
provided in Figure 4.
Data Analysis
We report descriptive statistics (mean value [M], standard deviation [SD]) for students’ ratings in pre- and
posttests, respectively. We analyze the impact of the intervention on students perceptions’ by comparing the
students’ ratings in the pretest with the ones in the posttest. Due to the small sample size and the preliminary
nature of this pilot study, we refrain from an in-depth statistical analysis.
RESULTS
In Figure 4, the students’ mean ratings on the nine items of the questionnaire for the pre- and posttest
points in time are shown. A clear tendency towards the middle of the scale is noticeable among the
participants in the pretest: This is presumably due to the fact that the students had no or little (instructional)
contact with ChatGPT or other AI tools before the intervention and thus could neither agree nor disagree with
the individual statements in the questionnaire.

Contemporary Educational Technology, 2023
Contemporary Educational Technology, 15(3), ep430 7 / 10
Regarding ChatGPT-related items, an increase in the students’ average agreement can be observed for all
but one statement: The students’ agreement with item 8 “we can use ChatGPT even if we do not understand
who it works” averaged 3.32 (SD=1.32) in the pretest while the mean value decreased to 2.66 (SD=0.95) in the
posttest. This can possibly be attributed to the fact that students have become aware that ChatGPT outputs
may not be readily consumed–however, with our pilot study, it is not possible to uncover the reasons
underlying students’ ratings.
The increase in students’ agreement with item 7 (“We should all learn to incorporate ChatGPT in our lives”)
from pretest (M=3.53, SD=1.01) to posttest (M=4.60, SD=0.77) indicates that the intervention positively
influenced students’ perceptions of ChatGPT. The same holds true for the students’ ratings on
• item 5 (“the benefits of ChatGPT are greater that the harmful effects it could have”) with an increase in
the students’ agreement from 3.13 (SD=1.24) to 4.45 (SD=1.03) and
• item 6 (“I am hopeful about my future in a world, where ChatGPT is commonly used”) with an increase
in the students’ agreement from 3.21 (SD=0.97) to 4.36 (SD=0.83).
These findings hint to optimistic views among the students with regards to the use of ChatGPT and its
impact on their lives. Lastly, the increase in students’ agreement with item 9 (“using ChatGPT enables me to
accomplish tasks more quickly”) from pretest (M=3.42, SD=1.18) to posttest (M=4.38, SD=0.73) suggests a
positive impact of the intervention on students’ opinions of the benefits of ChatGPT for teaching and learning.
With respect to the perceptions’ of the importance of AI in general, a notable augmentation in agreement with
the items can been observed as well. However, the increase in students’ agreement with these items is found
to be considerably lower compared to the ones that are distinctly linked to ChatGPT (Figure 4). The latter,
however, was expected since AI was not a specific part of the intervention in particular.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
In this article, we provided two easy-to-implement examples for the use of ChatGPT in physics education
at the secondary school level to foster students’ critical thinking skills. Although we demonstrated the different
procedures using the context of quantum physics, they are applicable in secondary school practice in general.
The results of a pilot study examining the application of the presented examples for the use of ChatGPT
in a physics classroom indicate that the intervention had a favorable influence on students’ perceptions of
ChatGPT. The participants demonstrated an increase in agreement with statements related to ChatGPT’s
benefits and its incorporation into their daily lives. On the other hand, while there was an increase in students’
agreement with items related to AI in general, the increase was considerably lower compared to ChatGPT-
specific items. In contrast to earlier research on students’ attitudes toward emerging fields such as quantum
science and technology, where students acknowledge the societal importance of the field without necessarily
finding it relevant for their own learning (Moraga-Calderón et al., 2020), our pilot study on an intervention of
ChatGPT in the physics classroom revealed a different trend: We found that while students considered AI of
average importance, ChatGPT was deemed a valuable tool for a variety of purposes. This observation may be
Figure 4. Students’ mean ratings on nine items of questionnaire for the pre- and posttest points in time
(Source: Author)

Bitzenbauer
8 / 10 Contemporary Educational Technology, 15(3), ep430
attributed to the fact that students gained firsthand experience of the potential benefits of ChatGPT through
the intervention, which likely contributed to their positive perceptions of the tool.
In summary, it can be concluded that the intervention seems to be effective in influencing students’
perceptions of ChatGPT, specifically. However, the impact on students’ perceptions of AI in general requires
further investigation. In particular, future research might explore
(a) further valuable ways of integrating ChatGPT into classroom practice, and in particular
(b) the impact of ChatGPT enhanced teaching on students’ critical thinking skills.
In the end, it is noteworthy that while ChatGPT can enrich classroom practice as shown in this paper,
learning will always remain a social process that requires teachers’ authority and guidance (Pavlik, 2023).
Funding: The author received no financial support for the research and/or authorship of this article.
Ethics declaration: Author declared that the ethical review and approval were waived for the study due to the fact that
the study was in accordance with Local Legislation and Institutional Requirements: Research Funding Principles
(https://www.dfg.de/en/research_funding/principles_dfg_funding/research_data/index.html) & General Data Protection
Regulation (https://www.datenschutz-grundverordnung.eu/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/CONSIL_ST_5419_2016_INIT_
EN_TXT.pdf).
Declaration of interest: The author declares no competing interest.
Data availability: Data generated or analyzed during this study are available from the author on request.
REFERENCES
Adiguzel, T., Kaya, M. H., & Cansu, F. K. (2023). Revolutionizing education with AI: Exploring the transformative
potential of ChatGPT. Contemporary Educational Technology, 15(3), ep429. https://doi.org/10.30935/
cedtech/13152
Ahuja, A. (2019). The impact of artificial intelligence in medicine on the future role of the physician, PeerJ, 7,
e7702. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.7702
Alsmadi, M. A., Tabieh, A. A., Alsaifi, R. M., & Al-Nawaiseh, S. J. (2023). The effect of the collaborative discussion
strategy think-pair-share on developing students’ skills in solving engineering mathematical problems.
European Journal of Educational Research, 12(2), 1123-1135. https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.12.2.1123
Baidoo-Anu, D., & Ansah, L. (2023). Education in the era of generative artificial intelligence (AI): Understanding
the potential benefits of ChatGPT in promoting teaching and learning. SSRN. https://doi.org/10.2139/
ssrn.4337484
Bitzenbauer, P. (2021). Effect of an introductory quantum physics course using experiments with heralded
photons on preuniversity students’ conceptions about quantum physics. Physical Review Physics
Education Research, 17, 020103. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.17.020103
Bogost, I. (2022). ChatGPT is dumber than you think. https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2022/12/
chatgpt-openai-artificial-intelligence-writing-ethics/672386/
Buchholz, K. (2023). ChatGPT sprints to one million users. Statista. https://www.statista.com/chart/29174/
time-to-one-million-users/
Chai, C. S., Wang, X., & Xu, C. (2020). An extended theory of planned behavior for the modelling of Chinese
secondary school students’ intention to learn artificial intelligence. Mathematics, 8(11), 2089.
https://doi.org/10.3390/math8112089
Dimitrov, M. (2023). What business leaders should know about using LLMS like ChatGPT. https://www.forbes.com/
sites/forbesbusinesscouncil/2023/02/07/what-business-leaders-should-know-about-using-llms-like-
chatgpt/
Ennis, R.H. (1996). Critical thinking dispositions: Their nature and assessability. Informal Logic, 18(2), 164.
https://doi.org/10.22329/il.v18i2.2378
Farrokhnia, M., Banihashem, S. K., Noroozi, O., & Wals, A. (2023). A SWOT analysis of ChatGPT: Implications
for educational practice and research. Innovations in Education and Teaching International.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2023.2195846
Floridi, L., & Chiriatti, M. (2020). GPT-3: Its nature, scope, limits, and consequences. Minds & Machines, 30, 681-
694. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11023-020-09548-1
Gao, J., Zhao, H., Yu, C., & Xu, R. (2023). Exploring the feasibility of ChatGPT for event extraction. arXiv.
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2303.03836

Contemporary Educational Technology, 2023
Contemporary Educational Technology, 15(3), ep430 9 / 10
Gregorcic, B., & Pendrill, A.-M. (2023). ChatGPT and the frustrated Socrates. Physics Education, 58(3), 035021.
https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6552/acc299
Halaweh, M. (2023). ChatGPT in education: Strategies for responsible implementation. Contemporary
Educational Technology, 15(2), ep421. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/13036
Hidayat, C., Lengkana, A. S., Rohyana, A., Purwanto, D., Razali, & Rosalina, M. (2023). Motivating active learning
in physical education: Critical thinking. European Journal of Educational Research, 12(2), 1137-1151.
https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.12.2.1137
Hwang, G. J., & Chang, C. Y. (2021). A review of opportunities and challenges of chatbots in education.
Interactive Learning Environments. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2021.1952615
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. https://doi.org/10.35542/osf.io/5er8f
Lecler, A., Duron, L., & Soyer, P. (2023). Revolutionizing radiology with GPT-based models: Current applications,
future possibilities, and limitations of ChatGPT. Diagnostic and Interventional Imaging.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.diii.2023.02.003
Lipman, M. (1988). Critical thinking–what can it be? Educational Leadership, 46(1), 38-43.
https://doi.org/10.5840/inquiryctnews19882252
Lyman, F. (1987). Think-pair-share: An ending teaching technique. MAA-CIE Cooperative News, 1, 1-2
McGuffie, K., & Newhouse, A. (2020). The radicalization risks of GPT-3 and advanced neural language models.
arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2009.06807
Moraga-Calderón, T. S., Buisman, H., & Cramer, J. (2020). The relevance of learning quantum physics from the
perspective of the secondary school student: A case study. European Journal of Science and Mathematics
Education, 8(1), 32-50. https://doi.org/10.30935/scimath/9545
Nasution, N. E. A. (2023). Using artificial intelligence to create biology multiple choice questions for higher
education. Agricultural and Environmental Education, 2(1), em002. https://doi.org/10.29333/agrenvedu/
13071
Pavlik, J. (2023). Collaborating with ChatGPT: Considering the implications of generative artificial intelligence
for journalism and media education. Journalism & Mass Communication Educator, 78(1), 84-931.
https://doi.org/10.1177/10776958221149577
Prahl, K. (2017). Best practices for the think-pair-share active-learning technique. The American Biology Teacher,
79(1), 3-8. https://doi.org/10.1525/abt.2017.79.1.3
Salas-Pilco, S. Z., & Yang, Y. (2022). Artificial intelligence applications in Latin American higher education: A
systematic review. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 19, 21.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-022-00326-w
Salas-Pilco, S. Z., Xiao, K., & Hu, X. (2022). Artificial intelligence and learning analytics in teacher education: A
systematic review. Education Sciences, 12(8), 569. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12080569
Sallam, M. (2023, 2023-02). The utility of ChatGPT as an example of large language models in healthcare
education, research and practice: Systematic review on the future perspectives and potential limitations.
medRxiv. https://doi.org/10.1101/2023.02.19.23286155
Schreiner, C., & Sjøberg, S. (2004). Sowing the seeds of ROSE: Background, rationale, questionnaire
development and data collection for ROSE (the relevance of science education): A comparative study of
students’ views of science and science education. Acta Didactica, 4.
Skrabut, S. (2023). 80 ways to use ChatGPT in the classroom: Using AI to enhance teaching and learning. Stan
Skrabut.
Smith, E., & Holmes, N. (2020). Evaluating instructional labs’ use of deliberate practice to teach critical thinking
skills. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 16, 020150. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEduc
Res.16.020150
Stadermann, K., van den Berg, E., & Goedhart, M. (2019). Analysis of secondary school quantum physics
curricula of 15 different countries: Different perspectives on a challenging topic. Physical Review Physics
Education Research, 15, 010130. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.15.010130
van Gelder, T. (2005). Teaching critical thinking. Some lessons from cognitive sciences. College Teaching, 53(1),
41-46. https://doi.org/10.3200/CTCH.53.1.41-48

Bitzenbauer
10 / 10 Contemporary Educational Technology, 15(3), ep430
Veloso, M., Balch, T., Borrajo, D., Reddy, P., & Shah, S. (2021). Artificial intelligence research in finance:
Discussion and examples. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 37(3), 564-584. https://doi.org/10.1093/
oxrep/grab019
Wang, J. (2023). ChatGPT: A test drive. American Journal of Physics, 91(4), 255-256. https://doi.org/10.1119/5.
0145897
Zhai, X. (2023). ChatGPT user experience: Implications for education. SSRN. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.
4312418
❖