Perceptions of Higher Education Students

towards ChatGPT Usage

Soumya Ranjan Das

University of Hyderabad, India

Madhusudan J.V.
University of Hyderabad, India

www.ijte.net

To cite this article:

Das, S.R. & J.V., M. (2024). Perceptions of higher education students towards ChatGPT
usage. International Journal of Technology in Education (IJTE), 7(1), 86-106.
https://doi.org/10.46328/ijte.583

The International Journal of Technology in Education (IJTE) is a peer-reviewed scholarly online journal.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Authors alone are responsible
for the contents of their articles. The journal owns the copyright of the articles. The publisher shall not be
liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand, or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever
caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of the research material. All
authors are requested to disclose any actual or potential conflict of interest including any financial, personal
or other relationships with other people or organizations regarding the submitted work.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
 International Journal of Technology in Education
2024, Vol. 7, No. 1, 86-106 https://doi.org/10.46328/ijte.583

Perceptions of Higher Education Students towards ChatGPT Usage

Soumya Ranjan Das, Madhusudan J.V.

Article Info Abstract

Article History In the context of contemporary technological advancements, Artificial
Received: Intelligence (AI) has gained considerable significance in the field of education. In
22 August 2023
light of ChatGPT’s growing popularity, this research aims to explore how higher
Accepted:
30 December 2023
education students perceive the use of ChatGPT in academics, examining factors
influencing its acceptance, as well as its benefits, limitations, and ethical concerns.
The study applied a survey design, collecting data through Google Forms from
undergraduate, postgraduate, and doctoral students. A total of 162 participants,
Keywords
who were using ChatGPT selected through convenience sampling. The findings
Artificial intelligence
indicate a positive perception among respondents regarding ChatGPT's academic
ChatGPT
Higher education applications, its benefits, limitations, acceptance factors, and ethical concerns. The
Perception study also reveals that the perception of higher education students towards
ChatGPT usage is not significantly influenced by gender, academic programs, and
streams. The insights gained from this study holds significant implications for the
responsible and effective integration of ChatGPT in higher education
environments, taking into account its perceived benefits and ethical concerns.

Introduction

Artificial intelligence (AI) applications in the field of education have received noticeably more attention in recent
years (Zawacki-Richter et al., 2019). The 2018 Horizon report by Educause, (a non-profit organization reporting
key trend and emerging technologies in higher education), extensively explores the significance of AI and adaptive
learning technologies as major breakthroughs in the field of educational technology. In country like India, the
National Education Policy (2020), recognizes the emergence of disruptive technology like AI, which has the
ability to not only match but even surpass the capabilities of talented persons, making it a useful tool to improve
learning and education. On the other hand, National Institution for Transforming India (2018), formerly known
as the Planning Commission of India, accords significant weight to AI in the education sector. For example, it can
be used to advance the quality and accessibility of education in India by personalizing learning, creating smart
content, predicting student performance, assisting teachers in successfully managing classrooms, and also
improving student learning outcomes.

Recently Open AI launched generative pre-trained transformer (ChatGPT) in November 2022. Due to the quality
of its language model, ChatGPT has received a lot of interest in few months (Neumann, 2022). One million users
have registered for the platform in the first week after it was made available to the public (Haque et al., 2022).

86
 International Journal of Technology in Education (IJTE)

ChatGPT is frequently utilized in various fields, such as higher education, K–12 education, and
improving practical skills. The influence of ChatGPT on productivity, efficiency, and ethical issues is one of the
topics that are most frequently discussed on social media networks (Mogavi et al., 2023). Keeping in view its
popularity and its rapid application in different context and specifically in higher education, an attempt has been
made to explore its usage perception among higher education students in terms of its academic usage, benefits,
limitation, acceptance factors and ethical considerations.

Generative Pre-trained Transformer (GPT-3), which was first proposed in a work by Vaswani et al. (2017) and
has since become a popular choice for natural language processing tasks (NLP). GPT-3 distinguishes itself as one
of the most substantial language models currently available with its vastness evident in its 175 billion parameters
(Cotton et al., 2023). The ChatGPT is a NLP which is an intelligent tool that is used to produce coherent and
pertinent responses to human questions on a variety of topics (Mogavi et al., 2023). Even though ChatGPT's
primary function is to replicate human speech, it is more than capable of doing much more. It can actually come
up with original ideas for poetry, stories, or novels, as well as act in whatever way it can (Tlili et al., 2023).

Literature Review

Related literature has been explored using databases such as Google scholar, ProQuest, ScienceDirect. The
available studies are primarily comprised of published journal articles, along with some emerging preprints in this
evolving field.

Academic Usage of ChatGPT

As the study shows, ChatGPT is frequently employed in three contexts like higher education, K-12 education, in
practical skill acquisition. Productivity, efficiency, and ethics are the three most commonly discussed aspects of
ChatGPT on social media networks (Mogavi et al., 2023). In a systematic review on application of AI in higher
education, Zawacki-Richter et al. (2019), explored its applications in academic level of higher education i.e.,
profiling, prediction of students learning, assessment, personalized learning and intelligence tutoring system. The
usage of ChatGPT as an AI tool has the potential to aid academics in generating systematic, cohesive, (mostly)
accurate, and helpful publications, as highlighted by (Zhai, 2022).

Sulisworo and Dahlan (2023) found that lecturers are using the ChatGPT in their teaching for various purposes
such as getting ideas, information, translating writings, creating questions for deeper understanding of the topic.
It is also interesting and effective to use ChatGPT in teaching but lecturers are of the opinion that, one should be
critical and careful to use it. Student use ChatGPT for getting academic information and strengthening
communication skills. As the study shows, students request to the institution to organise training session and to
offer paid accounts in order to maximize its utilization (Phuong et al., 2023). The ChatGPT is being used by the
higher education students for some academic purposes such as, homework, as a writing assistant, solving problem,
preparing test, analyzing data, getting conceptual clarification, supporting research, providing supplementary
learning material (Hasanein & Sobaih, 2023). Faculties have unfavorable attitude towards ChatGPT usage in

87
Das & J.V.

higher education as it leads to plagiarism and increasing cheating (Ahmed, Hassaan, Iqbal, and Nayab, 2022).
Experiment shows that writing essay by students using ChatGPT is getting low score than manual writing. Student
not able to write authentic, quality content by using it (Banovac, 2023). On the other hand study shows that
students mostly use ChatGPT for academic content construction, getting information, novelty, and convenience
(Jishnu et al., 2023).

Benefits and Limitations

Students had a high level of comfort embracing new technologies, and their regular usage of ChatGPT had helped
them to form habits. Besides, students thought ChatGPT's user-friendly interface, which was accessible in several
languages and operated efficiently with minimal prompts, was appealing to them (Strzelecki, 2023). Using
ChatGPT also has some benefits for both the students and teachers by decreasing burden of teachers in the process
of assessment, working like a teaching assistant, helping in personalized learning of the students, playing role as
a research assistant, also creating content, helping in translating the language, and its limitations are it can’t’
understand like a human, it has lack of data after 2021 as well cant’ replace human knowledge and capability
(Khan et al., 2023; Shidiq et al., 2023 and Zhai, 2023).

The initial use of ChatGPT in education also manifested some more areas of opportunities as well as ethical issues
i.e., greater level of student engagement in academic activities, developing digital literacy, supporting intellectual
practices, interaction, collaboration, accessibility, feedback, translating language, summarizing text, questioning
and answering, personalized assessment, as well as explored some issues with regard to academic integrity, i.e.,
difficulty in evaluating sources, generating inaccurate information, reliability issues, plagiarism and unclear
authorship (Cotton et al., 2023; Javaid et al., 2023; Rasul et al., 2023; and Schonberger, 2023). Analysis of the
generated text of ChatGPT for academic progress explores that, manuscript, literature review, citations,
plagiarism, and references are becoming main concerns after the advancement of AI. On the other hand, it has
great potential to generate quality information, novel ideas, knowledge and thoughtful insight (Bukar et al.,2023).

Strength, weakness, opportunities and threat (SWOT) analysis of ChatGPT, explored that providing believable
responses, self-improving capabilities, and real-time responses are some of the strengths. Weakness includes
limited depth of understanding, challenges in evaluating response quality, potential for bias, and absence of
higher-order cognitive capabilities. In terms of opportunities, ChatGPT can improve access to knowledge,
promote complicated, individualized learning, and reduce instructional workload.

Lack of contextual understanding, threats to academic integrity, continuation of educational prejudice,

democratization of plagiarism, and a decline in high-order cognitive abilities are all threats to education
(Farrokhnia et al., 2023; Rahman and Watanobe, 2023). Students' favorable opinions of ChatGPT and their
determination to use it pushed for its implementation in education. However, no statistical association
exists among students' perception and their intent to use ChatGPT (Bonsu and Baffour-Koduah, 2023).

Rane et al. (2023), investigated that ChatGPT cannot perform like an author adequately due to several limitations.

88
 International Journal of Technology in Education (IJTE)

These include “limited understanding, absence of critical thinking in users, declining creativity, restricted access
to current research, ethical concerns, bias in generated text, absence of hands on experience of ChatGPT, incorrect
information, lack of current update in information, lack of emotional intelligence, inadequate feedback, deficiency
in guidance and also criticism for the personal improvement of the student.” According to Iqbal Nayab, Ahmed
& Hassaan (2022), ChatGPT is helping in planning the lesson, assessment but the major risk is associated with
plagiarism and cheating. Students have positive views towards the application of ChatGPT. Additionally, students
believe ChatGPT usage has benefitted them in areas such as, time- saving, providing information, personalized
tutoring, giving feedback and enlightening ideas in academic context. The most concerns revolve around the
quality and reliability of the sources, along with a lack of accurate source citation (Tho, 2023).

Acceptance Factors

By utilizing UTAUT2 (Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology) model, Foroughi et al. (2023) and
Lara-lara (2023), explored that “user experience, performance expectations, hedonic motivation, perceived value,
and habit” played a significant role in shaping the intention to use ChatGPT. Furthermore, facilitating setting,
habit, and behavioral target were identified as conditioning factors influencing user behavior. Another study by
Lawal Faruk et al. (2023), applied psycho-technical approach as predictors of ChatGPT usage and revealed that
perceived usefulness significantly predict its usage.

Further contextual factors such as its novelty and humanness leads to its usage. Among the psychological element,
openness, agreeableness, and neuroticism determine the usage scenario. In another context, relative advantage,
compatibility, ease of use, observability, and triability are significantly identified as adoption factors of ChatGPT
by higher education students (Raman, 2023). In addition to this, “male students have prioritized compatibility,
ease of use, and observability while female students prioritized adoption of ChatGPT with relation to ease of use,
compatibility and relative advantages (Raman, 2023).

Using ChatGPT in software engineering research is backed by motivator factors such as, code summarization,
generating necessary descriptions, and synthetic data generation, which lead the possible value and utility of
ChatGPT (Akbar et al., 2023). Study also revealed favorable attitude and the utilization of ChatGPT which were
determined by factors like ease of use, postive attitude towards technology, social influence, low perceived risk
and low anxiety (Abdaljaleel et al., 2023). On the other hand, it’s fast response and ease of use act as acceptance
factors in academic activities (Hasanein and Sobaih, 2023). Maheshwari (2023), explored some factors of using
ChatGPT such as “perceived ease of use, usefulness, interactivity, personalization, and adoption intentions in
shaping their utilization of ChatGPT for their academic pursuits”.

Another study by Tiwari & Bhat (2023), indicated that student hold a positive perception of incorporating
ChatGPT into instruction. The utility, social presence, legitimacy of the tool, along with enjoyment and motivation
contribute to a positive inclination towards using ChatGPT in an educational setting. However, the students’
adoption and utilization of ChatGPT were not significantly influenced by the perceived ease of use. In contrast
Yifan et al. (2023) revealed that “perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, social impact, convenience, and

89
Das & J.V.

perceived interest has an impact on the willingness of university students to use ChatGPT”.

Ethical Concerns

As the above studies reveals some of the usage of ChatGPT in academia, there arising some ethical concerns like
falling creativity, and violations of academic integrity (Raman, 2023). According to Vaccino-salvadore (2023),
when using ChatGPT in language learning, privacy, bias, reliability, accessibility, authenticity, and negative
impact on academic integrity are significant ethical implications to consider while integrating ChatGPT into the
language classroom.

Risk associated with plagiarism of the content, issues of copyright, citation practices, and the potential impact on
the “Matthew Effect in scholarly publishing” (which denotes that, researcher and journal of high level get more
citations than they really deserve) have been identified by (Alkhaqani, 2023;Lund et al., 2023; Rane et al., 2023;
Tawfeeq et al., 2023;Yu, 2023). Akbar et al. (2023), found some principles of ethical concerns of using ChatGPT
in engineering research, such as “bias, privacy, accountability, reliability, intellectual property, security,
manipulation, unintended consequences, human labour displacement, legal compliance, ethical governance, trust,
informed consent, fairness, transparency, long-term consequences, exacerbating inequalities, lack of
accountability, and the ethical implications of automation.” Among these ethical principles, bias, fairness, and
privacy are identified as more significant than others.

ChatGPT might be useful as writing aid; yet, in order to maintain academic integrity and ensure ethical use, it is
essential to adhere to responsible procedures. Proper citation and acknowledgement of ChatGPT contribution is
essential to prevent plagiarism and to maintain the standard of academic writing .So by following the citation
guideline scholars can maximize the benefit of the ChatGPT usage (Jarrah & Wardat, 2023).
Within the context of higher education where online exams are increasingly prevalent, ChatGPT presents a
possible threat to the authenticity of these assessments (Susnjak, 2022). Utilizing ChatGPT in educational settings
necessitates adherence to the subsequent principles: individual privacy, fairness, lack of bias, and transparency in
use (Mhlanga, 2023).

Rationale of the Study

ChatGPT has received lots of interest and popularity of its usage in each and every sector of the society, which
also demands the need of research into its use in the higher education field as we found it is being applied in
higher education in some previous studies. Janssen et al., (2022) explored the reasons for Chatbot’s failure due to
its ineffective practices, lack of resources, data security, not meeting user expectations. On the contrary, another
study by Haque et al. (2022) highlighted that ChatGPT used not in education field but also in various other fields.
Hence, as a new technology, further research required to comprehensively explore its potential use, benefits,
limitations and impact in the field of education (Firat, 2023).

From the related literature we got that most of the studies related to ChatGPT focused on the analysis of secondary

90
 International Journal of Technology in Education (IJTE)

sources like social media, newspaper and very rare empirical articles also. The previous literature contains a
scarcity of empirical studies on ChatGPT. Moreover, there have been very few studies conducted on the perception
of higher education students regarding the utilization of ChatGPT. However, concerns brought up by a highly
intelligent Chatbot like ChatGPT were not systematically investigated in the context of education. Therefore, it is
yet unclear whether ChatGPT will allay or potentially amplify the concerns that had been indicated by earlier
Chatbots. In order to ensure safe use, it is crucial to look into the issues with using ChatGPT in higher education.

From the aforementioned analysis, it is clear that this new AI technology is being highlighted from the standpoint
of academics in the field of educational research. It is also getting more and more acceptable and popular day by
day. The researcher has therefore conducted this study in order to comprehend and examine how higher education
students perceive the usage of the ChatGPT, as well as its acceptance, benefits, limitations, and ethical
considerations. To ensure ChatGPT's successful adoption in educational contexts, it is essential to comprehend
the distinctive perceptions of higher education students.

Investigating students' perceptions can also give developers and educators insightful input that can be used to
improve and optimize AI-based educational technology. Understanding user viewpoints is crucial for building AI
systems that take users' wants, preferences, and ethical considerations into account (Li & Shonfeld, 2020).
Therefore, keeping in view the above justification, this study aims to investigate the following objectives

Objectives of the Study

1. To examine the extent to which higher education students use ChatGPT for academic purposes
2. To identify the benefits and limitations of using ChatGPT in higher education as perceived by higher
education students
3. To examine the factors that influences the acceptance of ChatGPT among higher education students
4. To identify the ethical issues associated with the use of ChatGPT in higher education from the perspective
of students
5. To study the perception of higher education students towards ChatGPT with reference to gender,
academic programs and streams of education

Hypotheses

H01 There is no significant difference in the perception among Ph.D., Masters and Bachelors students towards the
usage of ChatGPT
H02 There is no significant difference in the perception of Boys and Girls students of higher education towards
the usage of ChatGPT
H03 There is no significant difference in the perception among Arts, Commerce and Science students towards the
usage of ChatGPT

The above objectives of the study have been studied by employing the following research methodology.

91
Das & J.V.

Method

Survey method has been used to conduct this research. In a survey design the researcher collects data and examines
the current attitude, beliefs, opinion, or practices of people (Creswell, 2012 p377). Survey serves as a valuable
method for capturing the current trends of the world, making it an ideal method for measuring perception of
ChatGPT as the ChatGPT is being popular now-a-days in every sector of the society. In this study student’s
perception was assessed and analyzed quantitatively to reveal insights into the utilization, acceptance, benefits-
limitations and ethical concerns associated with ChatGPT usage.

Participants

Total 162 higher education students from different higher education institutions and different academic programs
(Ph.D., Masters and Bachelors) of India has been responded to the questionnaire. The data was collected through
a Google Form, using a combination of purposive and convenience sampling methods. Participants who employed
the ChatGPT voluntarily provided their responses. The data collection took place during the months of April and
June of 2023. Table 1 presents a comprehensive overview of the demographic composition of the participants.

Table 1. Variable Wise Distribution of Participants

SL No. Variable Dimension Frequency Percentage
1 Gender Male 83 51.1
Female 79 48.8
2 Program Ph.D. 90 55.6
Masters 58 35.8
Bachelors 14 8.6
3 Stream Arts 98 60.49
Science 50 30.86
Commerce 14 8.64
Total 162 100

Tools and Techniques

A Likert type scale has been prepared by the researcher by following some related studies (Kashive et al., 2021;
Limo et al., 2023; Shoufan, 2023). The statements of the scale consist five dimensions such as ChatGPT academic
usage, acceptance factor, benefits, limitations and ethical concerns which overall aims to measure the perception
of higher education students.

The questionnaire consists of a total 28 items pertaining to measure each dimension of the perception of higher
education students towards its usage. The first section of the scale includes demographic information of the
respondents (gender, institution, academic program & stream). The second section deals with measuring students’
perception in terms of their academic usage (frequency, specific purpose, time duration of using), what are the

92
 International Journal of Technology in Education (IJTE)

factors lead them to use the ChatGPT, what benefits and limitations they are facing, what ethical concerns they
are perceiving by using this AI tool (such as plagiarism, assessment).

The reliability of the scale was measured using Cronbach's Alpha with the help of Statistical Package for Social
Science Research (SPSS). The overall Cronbach's Alpha coefficient for all dimensions was 0.882 considered as
appropriate value and it is > 0.7 (Cortina, J. M. (1993). Specifically, the Cronbach's Alpha coefficients for the
dimensions of academic usage, perceived benefits, acceptance factors, and ethical concerns were found to be
0.644, 0.832, 0.801, and 0.062 respectively. These values were found to have reliable alpha exceeding the 0.7
threshold. Table 2 displays the Cronbach's Alpha values for each dimension and overall measure.

Table 2. Reliability Statistics for the Perception Scale of ChatGPT

Sl.no Dimensions No of Items Cronbach’s (α)
1 Academic usage 07 0.644
2 Perceived benefits 12 0.832
3 Acceptance factors 06 0.801
4 Ethical concerns 03 0.062
Overall 28 0.882

Data Analysis

Microsoft Excel was used to organize the data, and the statistical package for social science research (SPSS),
version 22 was used for analysis. Initially, a percentage analysis was conducted for each dimension in relation to
its respective objective to determine the results of each objective. In the first dimension (academic usage),
questions 1, 2, 3, and 6 are presented in categorical response format with different response options. A percentage
analysis was conducted to analyze the responses for these questions as well as rest of the items of the scale.
Subsequently, an independent samples t-test and one way ANOVA were used to study the variations in
perceptions with relation to gender, academic programs, and streams of higher education students.

Results
The Extent to Which Higher Education Students Use ChatGPT for Academic Purposes

Table 3 depicts the overall responses with respect to usage perception of ChatGPT for academic purposes. The
results reveal that a more that average proportion of higher education students (53.1%) have been using ChatGPT
for academic purposes for less than two months, while (25.9%) have been using it for exactly two months.
Therefore, it is evident that higher education students have recently started to use ChatGPT for academic purposes,
with majority of less than 2 months of experience. It shows that it is a new tool in the field of academia in higher
education.

On the other hand, if we focus on the frequency of its usage for academic purposes then majority of the students

93
Das & J.V.

are using it several times a week (32.7%) and once a week (21%). And less than half of students (24.7%) are using
it rarely. This shows that the ChatGPT is being used frequently for their academic purposes. Responses indicate
a diverse range of academic activities, with (29%) favoring its use for research purposes.

Table 3. Academic Usage towards ChatGPT

Questions Responses in %
1. Time range of using 2 Months 3-6 Months Less than 2
ChatGPT for academic months
purposes 25.9% (42) 21% (34) 53.1% (86)
2. Frequency of using Several times Once a week A few times a Rarely
ChatGPT for academic a week month
purposes 32.7% (53) 21% (34) 21.6% (35) 24.7% (40)
3. Kind of academic Writing Summarizing or Taking notes Conducting Other
activities using ChatGPT assignment paraphrasing Research
text
22.2% (36) 22.8% (37) 16.7% (27) 29% (47) 9.25% (15)
4. Relying on ChatGPT as Always Never Often Rarely Sometimes
primary source of 16.7% (27) 12.3% (20) (17.3% (28) 32.1% (52) 21.6% (35)
information for academic
tasks?
5. Degree of overall Very useful Somewhat Neutral Somewhat Not useful at
usefulness of ChatGPT useful Not useful all
for academic purposes? 27.8% (45) 39.5% (64) 21% (34) 8.6% (14) 3.1% (5)
6. Spending of time by <10 Minutes 10-30 Minutes 30 to 1 hr 1-2 hrs More than
using ChatGPT for 2hrs
academic purposes? 24.7% (40) 43.2% (70) 18.5% (30) 11.1% (18) 2.5(4)
7. Rating of proficiency in Expert Intermediate Beginner
using ChatGPT for 17.3(28) 48.1(78) 34.6% (56)
academic tasks?

The similar percentages of students (22.8%), use ChatGPT for writing assignments, summarizing, and
paraphrasing, while only (16.7%) use it for taking notes. A small portion of respondents are found to be using it
for asking question, coding, getting ideas, concept learning, programming language, letter and email writing. The
data suggests that, there is no strong reliance on ChatGPT as the primary source of information for academic tasks,
with a significant portion of respondents (32.1%) rarely and sometimes (21.6%) relying on it and a small portion
of the respondents (16.7%) reported always relying on it, while 12.3% stated that they never rely on it. (39.5%)
respondents responded that, ChatGPT has some potential advantages for academic purposes. It is important to
note that only a small portion (27.8%) believe it to be very useful. It is revealed that, majority 43.2% of
respondents spent between 10- and 30-minutes utilizing ChatGPT for academic purposes the most frequently
while fewer respondents rate themselves as beginners (34.6%) or experts (17.3%).

94
 International Journal of Technology in Education (IJTE)

Benefits and Limitations of Using ChatGPT in Higher Education as Perceived by Students

The second objective aims to assess how they are getting benefits and what are the limitations they are
experiencing by using it. Table 4 reveals that majority of students are in favor of positive direction i.e., agreed
(41.4%), strongly agreed (26.5%) that ChatGPT saves their time in completing assignment. On the other hand,
ChatGPT provides very convenient way for accessing academic resources as a greater number of respondents is
agreed (72.2%) with this statement.

Table 4. Benefits and Limitations of ChatGPT

Statements Responses in%
Strongly Agree Undecided Disagree Strongly
Agree Disagree
8.Saves time for completing 26.5% (43) 41.4% (67) 18.5% (30) 9.3% (15) 4.3% (7)
assignment
9. More convenient for to access 24.1% (39) 48.1% (78) 13.6% (22) 11.7% (19) 2.5% (4)
academic resources and
information
10.Helping in better 19.1% (31) 51.2% (83) 19.1% (31) 8% (13) 2.5% (4)
understanding difficult concepts
11.Helps in personalized 22.2% (36) 50% (81) 14.8% (24) 9.9% (16) 3.1% (5)
learning
12.Increasing confidence in 17.3% (28) 42.6% (69) 17.3% (28) 17.9% (29) 4.9% (8)
academic abilities
13. Helping in coming up with 18.5% (30) 48.8% (79) 16% (26) 13.6% (22) 3.1% (5)
more creative solutions to
academic problems
14. Improves writing skills 19.1% (31) 38.9% (63) 19.1% (31) 16% (26) 6.8% (11)

15. Effectiveness in helping to 23.5% (38) 49.4% (80) 17.3% (28) 6.8% (11) 3.1% (5)
complete academic tasks
16. Raises uncertainty about the 22.8% (37) 50.6% (82) 15.4(25) 8% (13) 3.1% (5)
reliability of the information
provided
17. Declines the creativity and 18.5% (30) 42% (68) 16% (26) 17.9% (29) 5.6% (9)
critical thinking
18. Using for academic tasks 14.2% (23) 48.8% (79) 13.6% (22) 16.7% (27) 6.8% (11)
makes feel less dependency from
peers and teachers.
19. May not understand the 15.4% (25) 60.5% (98) 17.9% (29) 5.6% (9) 0.6% (1)

nuances of certain topics or

assignments.

95
Das & J.V.

According to the findings, most students (70.3%) strongly agreed or agreed that ChatGPT make it easier for them
to learn complex ideas. However, a small portion of students (19.1%) are still undecided. The overall proportion
of students who disagree or strongly disagree is relatively low (10.5%), indicating a generally positive perception
i.e., (70.3%) of ChatGPT as tool for improving understanding. It is also helpful in making learning personalized
as majority of respondents (72.2%) showed positive perception while relatively low percentage of students
disagree or strongly disagree (13%) on this statement.

A significant percentage of students (combined, 60%) either strongly agree with or agree that ChatGPT can boost
their confidence in their academic abilities. However, a small portion of students (17.3%) are still undecided and
the prevalence of pupils who disagree (17.9%) may also point to some restrictions or difficulties in this aspect.
Similarly, positive perception (67.3%) also found in terms of assisting the respondents in finding more creative
solution of the problems.

A significant number of students (58% combined) either strongly agreed or agreed that ChatGPT can improve
their writing skills. However, there is a notable proportion of students who remain undecided (19.1%) or disagree
(16%), indicating potential variations in the effectiveness of ChatGPT in enhancing writing skills. A majority of
students (72.9%) agreed and strongly agreed that ChatGPT is helping them in completing academic tasks.

It is revealed that a significant proportion of students (73.4%), either strongly agree or agree that using ChatGPT
raises uncertainty about the reliability of information provided. This indicates that students have concerns
regarding the reliability or accuracy of the information obtained through ChatGPT. Majority of students (61.1%)
also agreed or strongly agreed that using ChatGPT declines their creativity and critical thinking. Using ChatGPT
for academic tasks makes feel them less dependent on peers and teachers as (63%) of respondents agreed on this
statement. ChatGPT may not understand the nuances of certain topics or assignment as a greater number of
students (76.9%) agreed or strongly agreed on this aspect.

Factors Influencing the Acceptance of ChatGPT among Higher Education Students

The third objective deals with the factors, which attracted the higher education students to accept the ChatGPT.
In Table 5, it is shown that majority of the respondent (82.8%) agreed or strongly agreed that ChatGPT is easy to
use, also it is cost effective to use (83.9%). A significant proportion of respondents (72.3%) expressed an intention
to continue using the ChatGPT for academic purposes. Majority of respondents (71.6%) either agreed or strongly
agreed that they would recommend the ChatGPT to their peers. (55.2%) of respondents, or a significant portion,
agreed or strongly agreed that they trusted the ChatGPT's accuracy and reliability of the information it generates.
A considerable percentage of respondents (27.8%) expressed either disagreement or uncertainty. 71% of
respondents are strongly agreed or agreed that using the ChatGPT improved their learning experience. Only
(18.9%) of respondents expressed their disagreement or uncertainty. This shows that respondents thought the
ChatGPT is a useful tool for enhancing the learning process. Therefore, all the factors, such as ease of use, cost-
effectiveness, intention to use, peer recommendations, trust in accuracy and reliability, and enhancing learning
outcomes, demonstrate the acceptance of ChatGPT among higher education students with a positive perception.

96
 International Journal of Technology in Education (IJTE)

Table 5. Factors of Acceptance of ChatGPT

Statements Responses in %
Strongly Agree Undecided Disagree Strongly
Agree Disagree
20. Easy to use 19.8% (32) 63% (102) 9.3% (15) 5.6% (9) 2.5% (4)

21. Cost effective to use 21.6% (35) 62.3% (101) 5.6% (9) 6.8% (11) 3.7 % (6)
22. Intended to continue using for 20.4% (33) 51.9% (84) 14.8% (24) 6.2% (10) 6.8 % (11)
academic purposes.
23. Recommending to peers 20.4% (33) 51.2% (83) 12.3% (20) 11.1% (18) 4.9 % (8)
24.Trusting the accuracy and 11.7% (19) 44.4% (72) 16% (26) 19.8% (32) 8% (13)
reliability of information
25.Enhances learning experience 15.4% (25) 55.6% (90) 11.1% (18) 11.7% (19) 6.2% (10)

Ethical Issues Associated with the Use of ChatGPT in Higher Education from the Perspective of Students

The fourth objective of the study deals with the ethical concerns associated with ChatGPT usage among higher
education students. Table 6 shows that a significant percentage of respondents (82.1%) either agreed or strongly
agreed that they had concerns about the potential for plagiarism when using the ChatGPT. This suggests that there
is a perceived risk of plagiarism associated with the use of the ChatGPT. The usage of the ChatGPT raises
concerns about fairness and accuracy in academic assessments, according to the majority of respondents (78.4%).
Higher education students are agreed and strongly agreed (79.6%) that too much dependency on ChatGPT for
academic task leads to addiction. This suggests that there is a perceived risk of becoming overly dependent on the
ChatGPT for academic tasks, leading to potential addiction.

Table 6. Ethical Concerns in Using ChatGPT for Academic Purpose

Statements Responses in %
Strongly Agree Undecided Disagree Strongly
Agree Disagree
26.Concerned about the potential 25.3% (41) 56.8% (92) 13% (21) 3.7% (2) 1.2% (2)
for plagiarism when using ChatGPT
27.Raises concerns in academic 20.4% (33) 58% (94) 11.7% (19) 6.2% (10) 3.7% (6)
assessments about fairness and
accuracy.
28.Too much dependency for 30.2% (49) 49.4% (80) 10.5% (17) 6.2% (10) 3.7% (6)
academic task could lead to
addiction

Perception of Higher Education Students towards ChatGPT Usage in terms of Gender

The null hypothesis of the study was to find out the difference in perception of higher education students towards

97
Das & J.V.

ChatGPT in relation to gender. This was tested using an independent sample ‘t’ test since the data met the
assumptions of normality and homogeneity of variance. Table 7 indicates the result of the test.

Table 7. Perception towards ChatGPT in Relation to Gender

Dimensions Gender N Mean SD SED t P value
Academic Boys 83 8.72 2.270 0.365 -0.204 0.838
usage Girls 79 8.80 2.377
Benefits and Boys 83 40.14 7.719 1.160 0.474 0.636
limitations Girls 79 39.59 7.005
Factors of Boys 83 22.31 4.553 0.690 0.289 0.773
acceptance Girls 79 22.11 4.215
Ethical Boys 83 8.20 1.873 0.256 0.058 0.953
concerns Girls 79 8.19 1.321
Overall Boys 83 79.39 13.287 2.014 0.342 0.733
Perception Girls 79 78.70 12.295

To examine the perception scores of male and female higher education students regarding the use of the ChatGPT,
an independent sample ’t’ test was conducted. Table 7 indicates that there is no statistically significant difference
between the mean scores of boys and girls at the 0.05 level, ‘t’ (160) =0342, p=0.733. That is the average
performance of score of Boys (M = 79.39, SD = 13.287) was not significantly different from that of Girls (M =
78.70, SD = 12.295). Hence, the null hypothesis “There is no significant difference in the perception of Boys and
Girls students of higher education towards the ChatGPT usage” is retained. However, when dimension wise
comparison made, no statistically significant difference found with relation to academic usage, benefits and
limitations, factors of acceptance and ethical concerns as the p > 0.05 level of significance.

Perception of Higher Education Students towards ChatGPT Usage in terms of Academic Programs i.e.,
Ph.D., Masters and Bachelors

To compare the perception of higher education students among different academic program, one way ANOVA
was conducted. Table 8 indicates the result of the group comparison.

Table 8. ANOVA Result on Perception of Higher Education Students towards ChatGPT Usage in terms of
Different Academic Programs (Ph.D., Masters and Bachelors)
Sources SS df MS F P
Between Groups 9.835 2 4.918
0.030 0.971
Within Groups 26275.769 159 165.256
Total 26285.605 161
Note- SS (Sum of square), df (degrees of freedom), MS (Mean square)

98
 International Journal of Technology in Education (IJTE)

From Table 8, no statistically significant difference was found between group means as determined by one-way
ANOVA (F (2,159) = 0.030, P=0.971) in overall perception of higher education students towards the use of
ChatGPT in terms of different academic programs. Hence, the null hypothesis “There is no significant difference
in the perception among Ph.D., Masters and Bachelors students towards the ChatGPT usage” was accepted.

Perception of Higher Education Students towards ChatGPT Usage in terms of Different streams of
Education i.e., Arts, Science and Commerce.

In addition to compare the perception of higher education students among different streams of education, one-
way ANOVA was conducted. Table 9 shows the result of the group comparison.

Table 9. ANOVA Result on Perception of Higher Education Students towards ChatGPT Usage in terms of
Different Streams of Education i.e., Arts, Science and Commerce
Sources SS df MS F P
Between Groups 196.824 2 98.412
0.600 0.550
Within Groups 26088.769 159 164.080
Total 26285.605 161
Note- SS (Sum of square), df (degrees of freedom), MS (Mean square)

According to Table 9, no statistically significant difference was found between group means as determined by
one-way ANOVA (F (2,159) = 0.600, P=0.550) in overall perception of higher education students towards the
use of ChatGPT in terms of different streams of education. Hence, the null hypothesis “There is no significant
difference in the perception among Arts, Science and Commerce students towards the ChatGPT usage” was
accepted.

Discussion

Major findings of the study are listed as below:

1. Most of the student use ChatGPT for two and less than two months, utilized more for research purposes,
having no strong reliance on it as primary source of information and students also beginners in their
response to use ChatGPT.
2. It has some benefits such as it is saving time, very convenient in accessibility, easier to learn complex
ideas, personalizing learning, increasing confidence in solving academic problems, improving writing
skills, autonomy in learning, and some limitations found by the study are uncertainty on reliability of
information, affecting creative and critical thinking and not understanding nuances of certain topic.
3. Perceived factors of accepting the ChatGPT are ease of its use, cost effectiveness, positive intention,
improving learning experience, recommending peers. However, the study explored a low perception
score on the accuracy and reliability factors of ChatGPT.
4. Higher education students are concerned about its plagiarism issues, fairness in academic assessment,

99
Das & J.V.

and risk of its addiction associated with the ChatGPT usage.

5. Gender, academic program and streams of education have no statistically significant relationship in
determining the perception of higher education students towards the usage of ChatGPT.

The current analysis focused on how higher education students perceived using ChatGPT for a variety of academic
activities, as well as how they felt about its advantages and limitations, factors that contributed to its acceptance,
and ethical issues related to academic activities. It also aimed to find out the differences in perception in terms of
gender, academic programs, and streams. There is paucity of research on this subject, particularly in the context
of higher education; our findings have a significant impact on how students in higher education view the value of
ChatGPT.

Few recent studies (Cotton et al., 2023; Mogavi et al., 2023; Zawacki-Richter et al., 2019; Zhai,2023) have
explored some aspects of ChatGPT usage and application such as acquiring practical skill, efficiency and
productivity, translating language, summarizing text, questioning-answering and helping researchers in producing
papers that are methodical, coherent, (partially) accurate, and instructive in higher education. These results align
closely with the findings of the present study. There is no strong reliance on ChatGPT as primary source of
information for their academic task as the more number of students given response as rarely and sometimes.
Gregorcic and Pendrill, (2023) also agree that ChatGPT is generating unreliable, incorrect and contradicted
responses but linguistically it is advanced. Similarly, previous studies (Khan et al., 2023; Cotton et al., 2023;
Javaid et al., 2023; Schonberger, 2023; Rasul et al., 2023) have provided supporting evidence for the benefits and
limitations discussed in this research. These benefits include personalized learning, acting as a research and
teaching assistant, content creation, language translation, supporting intellectual practices, providing feedback,
answering questions, and facilitating academic tasks. On the other hand, the limitations identified encompass the
absence of human-like creativity, potential negative effects on creativity levels, impacts on thinking skills, and
the challenge of understanding students' unique learning preferences (Shidiq et al., 2023). Other limitations
include a lack of contextual understanding and limited depth of comprehension (Farrokhnia et al., 2023; Rahman
and Watanobe, 2023).

Students' perceptions of acceptance factors are consistent with the findings of Strzelecki (2023), who observed
that the user-friendly interface and multilingual capabilities of ChatGPT have contributed to its acceptance. The
ethical concerns are aligned with the prior research which revealed that, after the advancement of AI, manuscript,
literature review, citations, plagiarism, references, and inaccuracy are becoming main concern (Bukar et al.,2023),
risk to the integrity of online exams particularly in higher education (Susnjak, 2022), personal privacy (Mhlanga,
2023), reliability issues (Cotton et al., 2023), frequent use are affecting the thinking skill of the students in daily
life (Shidiq et al., 2023). Related studies found that in employing AI, there is no correlation between learning
capacity and gender (Devi and Rroy, 2023). Raman, (2023) found that “male students have prioritized
compatibility, ease of use, and observability while female students prioritized adoption of ChatGPT with relation
to ease of use, compatibility and relative advantages. Further male students prefer user friendly interface and
related attributes more than female students and display greater interest in compatibility issues.”

100
 International Journal of Technology in Education (IJTE)

Conclusions

It is crucial to understand that ChatGPT is a technology that, at least initially, may be used to assists teachers
rather than to replace them (Koraishi, 2023). One million users have registered for the platform in the first week
after it was made available to the public (Haque et al., 2022). The present study explored overall positive
perception with regard to dimensions like, its academic usage, benefits, limitations, acceptance factors and ethical
concerns towards the use of ChatGPT. The result of the study provides valuable insight about the perception of
higher education students towards the use of ChatGPT in terms of their academic usage, benefits, limitations,
factors of acceptance and ethical concerns, which will help to understand the student’s current perception on this
tool and subsequently it will support the higher education institution to implement, integrate and prepare
framework how to use in the process of research and other academic activities. Higher educational institutions
may benefit from the study's analysis of the advantages and limitations of using ChatGPT by optimizing those
benefits and mitigating those limitations. Institutions can guarantee a well-balanced and successful
implementation of ChatGPT in higher education by developing appropriate solutions to deal with these
difficulties. Institutions can concentrate on strengthening of acceptance factors through training, education, and
awareness campaigns by analyzing variables including its cost effectiveness, ease of use, trust in AI systems, and
recommending to peers.

Institutions can formulate guidelines and procedures that address issues with plagiarism, and assessment,
ensuring the rights and benefits of students in relation to quality practices, such as using AI detectors in the higher
education institutions. Students can learn to use AI responsibly and ethically by participating in curriculum
activities that encourage critical thinking and ethical discussion of AI issues. Further research needs to be
conducted through a follow-up longitudinal study to monitor the long-term perceptions of higher education
students towards the usage of ChatGPT, with an aim to investigate the evolution of perceptions as students
continue to engage with the technology over an extended period. Studies need to be conducted by expanding the
dimensions explored in the current study, which could provide a more comprehensive understanding about
ChatGPT. Additionally, research may explore the impact of academic training and familiarity with AI
technologies on students' perceptions of ChatGPT. Understanding how prior knowledge and exposure to AI
contribute to their acceptance and usage is very crucial. Moreover, it is essential to study how ChatGPT influences
academic performance at different levels of education. Another avenue of research could focus on examining the
integration of ChatGPT in school education settings to assess its effectiveness and potential benefits. The present
study highlights the overall perception of higher education students towards ChatGPT usage and also its
limitations and ethical concerns which could assist the stakeholders of higher education to effectively use the
ChatGPT by utilizing the gathered data.

Acknowledgement

We sincerely appreciate the efforts of everyone who helped this empirical investigation to be completed
successfully. The study's participants, whose valuable time, and cooperation made this research feasible, are to be
especially thanked. Throughout the research process, we would also like to thank our friends and colleagues for

101
Das & J.V.

their suggestions, and helpful advice.

References

Abdaljaleel, M., Angeles, L., Barakat, M., Alsanafi, M., & Salim, N. (2023). Factors Influencing Attitudes of
University Students towards ChatGPT and its Usage : A Multi-National Study Validating the TAME-
ChatGPT Survey Instrument. https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-3400248/v1
Akbar, M. A., Khan, A. A., & Liang, P. (2023). Ethical Aspects of ChatGPT in Software Engineering Research.
http://arxiv.org/abs/2306.07557
Alkhaqani, A. L. (2023). ChatGPT and Academic Integrity in Nursing and Health Sciences Education. Journal of
Medical Research and Reviews, 1(1), https://doi.org/10.5455/JMRR.20230624044947
Al-qadri, A. H., and Ahmed, S. A. M. (2023). Assessing the ChatGPT Accuracy Through Principles of Statistics
Exam : A Performance and Implications,researchsquare. https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-2673838/v1
Antonio, F., Limo, F., Nacional, U., and Enrique, D. E. (2023). Personalized tutoring : ChatGPT as a virtual tutor
for personalized learning experiences. Social space journal. 23(01), 292–312.
https://socialspacejournal.eu/menu-script/index.php/ssj/article/view/176
Banovac, A. (2023). ChatGPT-3.5 as writing assistance in students ’ essays. Humanities and Social Sciences
Communication, 6(3), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-023-02269-7
Bukar, U. A., Md Sayeed, Md. S., Razak, S.F.A., Yogarayan, S., & Amodu, O.A. (2023). Text Analysis of Chatgpt
as a Tool for Academic Progress or Exploitation. SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4381394
or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4381394
Cortina, J. M. (1993). What is coefficient alpha? An examination of theory and applications. Journal of applied
psychology, 78(1), 98-104.
https://www.psycholosphere.com/what%20is%20coefficient%20alpha%20by%20Cortina.pdf
Cresswel.J.W. (2012). Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, And Evaluating Quantitative And
Qualitative Research. Noida: Pearson India Education Services Pvt. Ltd.
Debby R. E. Cotton, Peter A. Cotton and J. Reuben Shipway (2023): Chatting and cheating: Ensuring academic
integrity in the era of ChatGPT, Innovations in Education and Teaching International, DOI:
10.1080/14703297.2023.2190148
Devi, D., and Rroy, A. D. (2023). Role of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Sustainable Education of Higher Education
Institutions in Guwahati City: Teacher’s Perception. International Management Review, 19, 111–116.
Special Issue. https://americanscholarspress.us/journals/IMR/pdf/IMR-0-2023/IMR2023SpringSp-
art10.pdf
Farrokhnia, M., Banihashem, S. K., Noroozi, O., and Wals, A. (2023). A SWOT analysis of ChatGPT:
Implications for educational practice and research. Innovations in Education and Teaching International,
00(00), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2023.2195846
Faruk,L.I.D., Rohan, R., Ninrutsirikun, U., Pal, D. (2023, December06–09). Generative AI (ChatGPT) from
Psycho-Technical Perspective. In 13th International Conference on Advances in Information Technology
(IAIT 2023). Bangkok, Thailand. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 8 pages.
https://doi.org/10.1145/3628454.3629552

102
 International Journal of Technology in Education (IJTE)

Firat, M. (2023). How Chat GPT Can Transform Autodidactic Experiences and Open Education?
https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/9ge8m
Foroughi, B., Senali, M. G., Iranmanesh, M., Khanfar, A., Ghobakhloo, M., & Annamalai, N. (2023).
Determinants of Intention to Use ChatGPT for Educational Purposes : Findings from PLS-SEM and
fsQCA. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction,1–20.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2023.2226495
Gregorcic, B., and Pendrill, A. (2023). ChatGPT and the frustrated. Physics Education, 58(3), 1-10.
DOI: 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
Hasanein, A. M., & Sobaih, A. E. E. (2023). Drivers and Consequences of ChatGPT Use in Higher Education :
Key Stakeholder Perspectives. European Journal of Investigating in Health, Psychology. Education,
2023, 13, 2599–2614. https://doi.org/ 10.3390/ejihpe13110181
Haque, M. A. (2023). A Brief Analysis of “ChatGPT”-A Revolutionary Tool Designed by OpenAI. EAI Endorsed
Transactions on AI and Robotics, 1, e15. https://doi.org/10.4108/airo.v1i1.2983
Iqbal Nayab, Ahmed Hassaan, A. K. A. (2022). Exploring teachers’ attitudes towards using chatgptl. Global
Journal for Management and Administrative Sciences, 3(4), 97–111.
https;//doi.org/10.46568/GJMAS.V3I4.163
Janssen, A., Grutzner, L. and Breitner, M.H. (2021) Why do Chatbots fail? A Critical Success Factors Analysis.
Forty-Second International Conference on Information Systems, Austin, Texas, December 12-15, 2021,
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/354811221_Why_do_Chatbots_fail_A_Critical_Success_Fac
tors_Analysis(PDF)
Javaid, M., Haleem, A., Pratap, R., Khan, S., and Haleem, I. (2023). Unlocking the opportunities through
ChatGPT Tool towards ameliorating the education system. BenchCouncil Transactions on Benchmarks
, Standards and Evaluations, 3(2), 1-12 100115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tbench.2023.100115
Jishnu, D., Srinivasan, M., Dhanunjay, G. S., & Shamala, R. (2023). Unveiling student motivations: a study of
chatgpt usage in education. ShodhKosh: Journal of Visual and Performing Arts, 4(2), 65–73.
https://doi.org/10.29121/shodhkosh.v4.i2.2023.503
Jarrah, A. M., Wardat, Y., & Fidalgo, P. (2023). Using ChatGPT in academic writing is (not) a form of plagiarism:
What does the literature say?. Online Journal of Communication and Media Technologies, 13(4),
e202346. https://doi.org/10.30935/ojcmt/13572
Kashive, N., Powale, L. and Kashive, K. (2021), "Understanding user perception toward artificial intelligence
(AI) enabled e-learning", International Journal of Information and Learning Technology, Vol. 38 No. 1,
pp. 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJILT-05-2020-0090
Khan, R. A., Jawaid, M., Khan, A. R., and Sajjad, M. (2023). ChatGPT - Reshaping medical education and clinical
management. Pakistan Journal of Medical Sciences, 39(2), 605-607.
https://doi.org/10.12669/pjms.39.2.7653
Koraishi, O. (2023). Teaching English in the Age of AI: Embracing ChatGPT to Optimize EFL Materials and
Assessment. Language Education and Technology (LET Journal), 3(1), 55-72.
https://langedutech.com/letjournal/index.php/let/article/view/48/37

103
Das & J.V.

Lara-lara, F. (2023). Use of ChatGPT at University as a Tool for Complex Thinking : Students ’ Perceived
Usefulness. Journal of New Approaches in Educational Research,12(2),323–339.
https://doi.org/10.7821/naer.2023.7.1458
Li, F., and Shonfeld, M. (2020). Artificial intelligence in education: promises, ethics, and challenges. Journal of
Research on Technology in Education, 52(1), 5-8.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/332180327_Artificial_Intelligence_in_Education_Promise_a
nd_Implications_for_Teaching_and_Learning
Lund, B. D., Wang, T., Mannuru, N. R., Nie, B., Shimray, S., & Wang, Z. (2023). ChatGPT and a new academic
reality: Artificial Intelligence-written research papers and the ethics of the large language models in
scholarly publishing. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 74(5), 570–
581. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24750
Maheshwari, G. (2023). Factors influencing students ’ intention to adopt and use ChatGPT in higher education :
A study in the Vietnamese context. Education and Information Technologies, 0123456789.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-12333-z
Mhlanga, D. (2023). Open AI in Education , the Responsible and Ethical Use of ChatGPT Towards Lifelong
Learning. SSRN. February. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4354422
Ministry of Education, Government of India. (2020). National education policy
.https://www.education.gov.in/sites/upload_files/mhrd/files/NEP_Final_English_0.pdf
Mogavi, R. H., Deng, C., Kim, J. J., Zhou, P., Kwon, Y. D., Metwally, A. H. S., Tlili, A., Bassanelli, S.,
Bucchiarone, A., Gujar, S., Nacke, L. E., and Hui, P. (2023). Exploring User Perspectives on ChatGPT:
Applications, Perceptions, and Implications for AI-Integrated Education. arxiv.
http://arxiv.org/abs/2305.13114
National Institution for Transforming India, Government of India. (2018). National strategy for artificial
intelligence.https://www.niti.gov.in/sites/defult/files/2023-03/National-Strategy-for-Artifical
Intelligence.pdf
Neumann, M., Rauschenberger, M., and Schön, E.-M. (2023). "We Need To Talk About ChatGPT": The Future
of AI and Higher Education. In 2023 IEEE/ACM 5th International Workshop on Software Engineering
Education for the Next Generation (SEENG) (pp. 29-32). Melbourne, Australia.
https://doi.org/10.1109/SEENG59157.2023.00010
Perspective, P., Ibrahim, L., & Faruk, D. (2023). University Students ’ Acceptance and Usage of Generative AI (
ChatGPT ) from a University Students ’ Acceptance and Usage of Generative AI ( ChatGPT ) from a
Psycho-Technical Perspective. December. https://doi.org/10.1145/3628454.3629552
Phuong, N. T., Tien, C., Thi, K., & Quang, N. (2023). Interaction behaviors of students from thai nguyen
university of education with chatgpt. European Journal of Education Studies, 10(11), 39–50.
https://doi.org/10.46827/ejes.v10i11.5047
Rahman, M. M., and Watanobe, Y. (2023). ChatGPT for Education and Research:opportunities, threats, and
strategies and Strategies. Applied Sciences, 13(9),1-21. https://doi.org/10.3390/app13095783
Raman, R. (2023). University students as early adopters of ChatGPT : Innovation Diffusion Study.
https://www.researchsquare.com/article/rs-2734142
Rane, N. L., Choudhary, S. P., Tawde, A., & Rane, J. (2023). ChatGPT is not capable of serving as an author :

104
 International Journal of Technology in Education (IJTE)

ethical concerns and challenges of large language models in education. International Research Journal
of Modernization in Engineering Technology and Science,5(10),851-874.
https://doi.org/10.56726/IRJMETS45212
Rasul, T., Nair, S., Kalendra, D., Robin, M., Santini, F. de O., Ladeira, W. J., Sun, M., Day, I., Rather, R. A., and
Heathcote, L. (2023). The role of ChatGPT in higher education: Benefits, challenges, and future research
directions. Journal of Applied Learning and Teaching, 6(1), 41–56.
https://doi.org/10.37074/jalt.2023.6.1.29
Schonberger,M.(2023). ChatGPT in Higher Education : The Good , The Bad , and The University. 9th
International Conference on Higher Education Advances. Valencia, Spain, June 19 – 22, 2023, 331–338.
https://doi.org/10.4995/HEAd23.2023.16174
Shidiq, M., Jadid, N., and Java, E. (2023). The use of artificial intelligence-based chat- gpt and its challenges for
the world of education ; from the viewpoint of the development of creative writing skills. Proceeding of
1st International Conference on Education, Society and Humanity, Postgraduate program of Nurul Jadid
University, Probolinggo, Indonesia, 01(01), 360–364. https://ejournal.unuja.ac.id/index.php/icesh
Shoufan, A. (2023). Exploring Students’ Perceptions of ChatGPT: Thematic Analysis and Follow-Up Survey.
IEEE Access, 11, 38805-38818. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2023.3268224
Sulisworo, D., & Dahlan, U. A. (2023). Exploring the Usage of ChatGPT in Higher Education : Frequency and
Impact on Productivity. Buletin Edukasi Indonesia (BEI) 2(01), 39–46.
https://doi.org/10.56741/bei.v2i01.310
Strzelecki, A. (2023). To use or not to use ChatGPT in higher education? A study of students’ acceptance and use
of technology. Interactive Learning Environments, May, 1–14.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2023.2209881
Susnjak, T. (2022). ChatGPT: The End of Online Exam Integrity?, http://arxiv.org/abs/2212.09292
Tanner, P., Asmalina, S. Krista, D. Glazewski, C. E. H. I. (2022). Exploring the use of GPT-3 as a tool for
evaluating text-based collaborative discourse. Companion Proceedings 12th International Conference
on Learning Analytics and Knowledge (LAK22) University of California, Irvine at the Newport Beach
Marriott, March 21-25, 2022.
https://tanner49.github.io/files/LAK22_Phillips_et_al_camera_reading.pdf
Tawfeeq, T. M., Awqati, A. J., & Jasim, Y. A. (2023). The Ethical Implications of ChatGPT AI Chatbot : A
Review Journal of Modern Computing and Engineering Research. Journal of Modern Computing and
Engineering Research, 2023, 49-57.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/374697825_The_Ethical_Implication_of_ChatGPT_AI_Chat
bot_A_Review
Tho, C. (2023). The Perception by University Students of the Use of ChatGPT in Education. Emerging
Technologies in Learning, 18(17), 4–19 https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v18i17.39019.
Tiwari, C. K., & Bhat, M. A. (2023). What drives students toward ChatGPT? An investigation of the factors
influencing adoption and usage of ChatGPT. Interactive Technology and Smart Education,
https://doi.org/10.1108/ITSE-04-2023-0061
Tlili, A., Shehata, B., Adarkwah, M.A., et al. (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.

105
Das & J.V.

https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-023-00237-x.
Vaccino-salvadore, S. (2023). Exploring the Ethical Dimensions of Using ChatGPT in Language Learning and
Beyond. Languages, 8(3) 1-6. https://doi.org/ 10.3390/languages8030191 4-9
Yifan, W., Mengmeng, Y., & Omar, M. K. (2023). “A Friend or A Foe” Determining Factors Contributed to the
Use of ChatGPT among University Students. International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive
Education and Development, 12(2), 2184–2201. https://doi.org/10.6007/IJARPED/v12- i2/17400
Yu, H. (2023). Reflection on whether Chat GPT should be banned by academia from the perspective of education
and teaching. Frontiers in Psychology, 1-12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1181712
Zawacki-Richter, O., Marín, V. I., Bond, M., and Gouverneur, F. (2019). Systematic review of research on
artificial intelligence applications in higher education – where are the educators? International Journal
of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 16(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-019-0171-0
Zhai, X. (2023,April 12). ChatGPT for Next Generation Science Learning. The ACM Magazine for students, 29(3),
42-46. https://doi.org/10.1145/3589649
Zhai, X. (2023b). ChatGPT User Experience: Implications for Education. SSRN Electronic Journal.
https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4312418

Author Information
Soumya Ranjan Das Madhusudan J.V.

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0668-1981 https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6582-0152
Doctoral Research Fellow Professor
University of Hyderabad University of Hyderabad
Department of Education and Education Technology Department of Education and Education Technology
India India
Contact e-mail: [email protected]

106