CLICK OR THINK: AN EVALUATION OF THE EFFECTS OF THE ARTIFICIAL

INTELLIGENCE "CHATGPT" ON STUDENT LEARNING ACQUISITION

_______________________

A Research Paper

Presented to the Faculty of Senior High School

Our Lady of Fatima University

City of San Fernando, Pampanga

________________________

In Partial Fulfillment of the

Requirements in the subject

Practical Research 2

_______________________

By:

Eunice Kristephanie J. Bondoc

Dustin Dale V. Cielo

Diane Raven C. Cunanan

Jhonalyn D. De Guia

Catherine Joy D. Gamboa

Andrea Keithlyn T. Igloria

Jamil Ivan O. Perez

Eunice Joeffel M. Sulit

2024
 CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

The Problem and Its Background

Nowadays as people embrace the digitalization era, people are already relying on

technology for the betterment of their lives. Technology refers to a diverse and ever-expanding

set of tools and systems designed to solve problems, improve human skills, and enable

communication. In essence, it is the application of technical concepts and scientific knowledge to

the development of tools, software, and workflows that increase productivity and efficiency. It

encompasses a broad spectrum of advances, ranging from basic mechanical instruments to

intricate digital systems driven by artificial intelligence and algorithms. Continuous research and

development propels the quick speed of technological improvement, resulting in innovations in

industries like computing, telecommunications, and materials science. As technology advances,

it affects many fields, including education, where it transforms instructional strategies, improves

student experiences, and opens up new channels for communication and information intake.

Artificial intelligence (AI) has increasingly proved its significance in this world.

Numerous fields, including robotics, medicine, education, and research methodologies, have

benefited from its growth and improvement (Matzinger, 2023). In terms of education, numerous

instructors and students support the application of AI, per the Rosenbaum study (2024).

Innovative and creative approaches to learning are necessary in response to shifts in educational

expectations. AI is being used in education to assist with the processing of everyday tasks, such

as teaching and learning (Fitria, 2021). In STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and
Mathematics) fields, AI tools are increasingly being integrated into the learning process with the

development of learning materials and visual aids (Zeeshan et al., 2024).

ChatGPT (Generative Pre-trained Transformer) is a well-known AI technology that most

instructors and students are familiar with; it offers prompt and tailored responses, and immediate

feedback, and facilitates the understanding of complex concepts (Montenegro-Rueda et al.,

2023). OpenAI described this AI tool as a trained model that interacts conversationally. The

dialogue format allows ChatGPT to answer follow-up questions, admit its mistakes, challenge

incorrect premises, and reject inappropriate requests. However, a growing concern is that

reliance on this AI tool might lead students to become overly dependent, potentially stifling

critical thinking and problem-solving skills. It is becoming increasingly popular across the globe,

including in the Philippines. Its applications range from customer support and education to

content creation and personal assistance.

As of March 2024, the Philippines ranks fourth globally in ChatGPT usage, with

approximately 94.38 million visits to the platform, corresponding to a 4.03% share of global

traffic. This high level of engagement is indicative of the country's growing reliance on

generative AI tools, particularly in educational contexts (De Vera, 2024). The World Bank's

analysis also points out that the Philippines demonstrates a relatively high rate of generative AI

adoption compared to its economic indicators, highlighting the strong role of its information and

communications technology (ICT) and business process outsourcing (BPO) sectors. According

to the study of PinoyGPT, 83% of Filipino students utilize generative AI tools like ChatGPT for

research and writing tasks. Additionally, 52% use it for test preparation, and 47% for foreign

language learning. The increasing adoption of generative AI tools like ChatGPT in the
Philippines reflects a significant transformation in how students and professionals approach

learning and productivity.

According to Similarweb, the website ChatGPT received 260.2 million visitors in May

2024. As of now, it boasts of having over 100 million users, and the website gets over 900k visits

daily. Over 5 billion visitors per month. The Generative Pre-trained Transformer models keep

updating from generation to generation, and the current is ChatGPT 4. In the first five days of

launching ChatGPT, the platform had attracted one million users, noted Sam Altman, the CEO of

OpenAI. ChatGPT is present in 118 countries. Out of all the nations that participated in the

survey, The study of Lu (2024) elaborated that India possesses the biggest percentage of users of

ChatGPT at 45%. Ranking second on the list is Morocco where only 38% of the surveyed use

this app, followed by UAE which has only 34%. Argentina, Brazil, and Indonesia have 32% of

the people who use ChatGPT. While looking at the lower bracket, Japan comes with 19% of

users, and China, France, Germany, and Saudi Arabia follow with 18%. The country that has the

lowest percentage of people who utilize ChatGPT is Thailand with 14%. Overall, as per the latest

statistics, ChatGPT has approximately 200 million monthly active users worldwide.

The way information is presented varies depending on the user's objective—whether they

seek in-depth knowledge or obtain quick, effortless answers. The user’s objectives will be

analyzed to see whether they affect their learning acquisition. Education is a drawn-out process

involving study, training, and teaching to acquire knowledge, skills, values, and habits. It fosters

critical thinking, creativity, and problem-solving abilities (PV Harisankar, S. Malik 2024).

However, this rapid adoption of AI tools like ChatGPT in education raises concerns about

potential over-reliance. There is growing apprehension that students might become excessively
dependent on these tools, which could inhibit the development of critical thinking and problem-

solving skills essential for STEM education (Xu & Ouyang, 2022).

This raises the need to investigate how learning acquisition is impacted by various

information presentation strategies, such as providing thorough explanations as opposed to

providing rapid fixes, and if AI technologies are helpful tools or just convenient answers.

According to research by Shah et al. (2024) looking into how students use ChatGPT, 58.1% of

respondents said they have used the app, and 98.5% of respondents had heard of it. The survey

also shows that seniors and juniors make up the majority of ChatGPT users. Furthermore,

according to Shah et al. (2024), 73% of engineering students have never used ChatGPT for

coding projects, whereas 80% of students in the School of Kinesiology utilize it for coding tasks.

The study of Shah et al. (2024) regarding the specific usage patterns of STEM students with

ChatGPT is a notable gap in understanding how STEM students utilize ChatGPT. Addressing

this gap will provide deeper insights into the specific ways STEM students utilize ChatGPT for

academic support, contributing to a more comprehensive understanding of ChatGPT's impact

across different fields of study. This study aims to investigate and quantify the reasons why

STEM students use ChatGPT for academic purposes. By filling this gap, the research will offer

valuable insights into how ChatGPT usage affects STEM students' academic practices and

motivations.

A study by Castillo et al. (2023) examined the effects of ChatGPT on students' learning

processes and found that 71.30% of participants use ChatGPT because it provides fast and

accurate answers. In contrast, 23.15% use it due to its ease of use and cost-free nature. While

Castillo et al. (2023) study quantifies the reasons for ChatGPT’s usage, there is a notable gap in

understanding users' underlying objectives. Specifically, there is a lack of information on

whether participants use ChatGPT to enhance their knowledge or if it contributes to increased

dependency on artificial intelligence and potential laziness from learning. Understanding

whether ChatGPT functions as an effective learning tool that supports students' learning

acquisition or if it promotes laziness is crucial. Addressing this gap will enhance the body of

knowledge regarding the broader implications of ChatGPT on students' learning habits and

academic performance. This study aims to investigate and quantify the objectives of the students

for using ChatGPT. By filling this gap, the research will offer valuable insights into how the use

of AI tools like ChatGPT affects students' educational and cognitive habits.

An investigation by Makarova (2021) examines the challenges of effective learning in

traditional and online environments, finding that 28.9% of respondents preferred traditional

learning, 26.3% favored online education, and 44.7% preferred a hybrid approach that combines

both formats. While the study of Makarova (2021) indicates that respondents have adapted to

online learning environments, many still prefer a mix of traditional and digital methods for future

education. However, there is a significant gap in understanding how AI tools like ChatGPT may

be used with traditional learning methods in terms of effectiveness. Specifically, the study does

not address how ChatGPT influences learning outcomes, engagement, and knowledge retention

relative to traditional educational methods compared to using ChatGPT as a learning tool.

Understanding this gap is crucial for evaluating the potential benefits and limitations of

integrating AI tools into educational practices. This study aims to investigate the effectiveness of

ChatGPT with traditional learning methods, focusing on learning outcomes, enhanced learning,

and knowledge retention. By addressing this gap, the research will provide valuable insights into

how AI tools like ChatGPT can enhance or challenge current educational practices.
 This research aims to quantitatively explore the role of artificial intelligence (AI) in

STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics). The study will examine how

artificial intelligence (AI) tools, limited to ChatGPT, and its effect on learning. Conversely, the

research will explore the potential downside of AI tools, specifically ChatGPT, focusing on

whether they may foster dependency among students. This includes assessing whether over-

reliance on AI tools for problem-solving and learning tasks might reduce students' critical

thinking skills, problem-solving abilities, and motivation to engage in challenging work.

The influence of ChatGPT's technology on STEM education is substantial and will only

grow with time. Even if it provides more advanced data analysis, better engagement, and more

individualized learning, issues like over-reliance and encouraging inactivity must be addressed.

By carefully considering the positive and negative aspects of ChatGPT in education, educators

can leverage AI tools and resources effectively to create impactful and inclusive learning

experiences (Chiangpradit, 2023). The completion of this study will enable the education sector

to determine how to use ChatGPT to enhance instruction rather than interfere with it.

According to a study by Zhang et al. (2023), AI tools like ChatGPT can both help and

harm learning depending on how they are used. The research found that students who used AI to

assist with their assignments showed improved short-term learning but experienced difficulties in

retaining information over time. This suggests that while AI can be beneficial for quick tasks, it

might reduce deeper learning if students rely too much on it. It can be used as an aid in learning,

with the capabilities it offers instead of depending on it students can utilize it for learning. Use it

in different ways like asking it to give feedback about your school work, helping the students to

know the correct concept. It can also help students by giving them a study plan based on students
needs and levels, like giving them different study materials, visuals, and others. Students can ask

questions and it will give a clear explanation helping the students gain a deeper understanding.

Artificial Intelligence in the lens of authors

According to Seo et al. (2021), Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems enhance online

learning by personalizing educational experiences to fit individual student needs. They automate

routine tasks for instructors, allowing more time for meaningful engagement. Artificial

Intelligence (AI) powers adaptive assessments that adjust based on student performance in real

time, ensuring fairness and accuracy. Teaching students about AI is essential for fostering a well-

rounded understanding of its impact on society. By learning how to develop AI technologies,

students can become creators rather than just consumers, enabling them to innovate responsibly.

Understanding the potential risks associated with AI helps them navigate ethical dilemmas and

make informed decisions in an increasingly automated world (Milberg, 2024).

According to Zawacki-Richter et al. (2019), Artificial Intelligence in Education (AIEd) is

one of the currently emerging fields in educational technology. AI helps students with disabilities

by providing features such as speech-to-text, and text-to-speech. It also provides clear

instructions about the needs or things that the user wants to know.

AI also Tailor the student's content making it less hassle and saving more time. In the

study of Stryker et al. (2024), Artificial intelligence is a technology that enables computers and

machines to simulate human learning, comprehension, problem-solving, decision-making,

creativity, and autonomy. It says that AI can help the user by enhancing their critical thinking

and helping them to understand something deeply.

Challenges of ChatGPT Usage

The use of ChatGPT can be very helpful for learners and facilitators. ChatGPT is an

instant answering service that offers quick solutions with just one click. This has enabled

students to know and consult information anytime. Users can produce ideas, write text, and

enhance communication using ChatGPT. It is extensively utilized in business, education, and

individual productivity. However, its use has downsides that negatively affect learning outcomes.

Mosaiyebzadeh et al. (2023) stated that dependency on ChatGPT could have a negative

influence. When learners rely on AI-generated answers, they might engage in passive learning, in

which they simply take what has been given to them without applying, analyzing, or

conceptualizing it. This dependency also undermines necessary critical thinking and problem-

solving skills since they no longer feel obliged to work out a problem or think independently to

achieve a solution.

According to (Alafnan et al., 2023) The dependency on artificial intelligence to complete

students’ assignments and submissions leads to students’ human unintelligence, unlearning, and

deficiencies in students’ academic and professional development. Students who rely too much on

AI for their schoolwork may not be able to properly engage with the material, which can lead to

a lack of understanding, critical thinking, and problem-solving abilities. Because AI does the

work for them, instead of teaching them new skills and knowledge, students may "unlearn"

crucial concepts. Academic and professional skills may suffer from an over-reliance on artificial

intelligence (AI). Moreover, though extremely powerful and able to formulate coherent and

plausible answers, the accuracy of ChatGPT cannot be guaranteed. This sometimes means it

produces illogical or wrong answers, which would mislead users because they depend on what

this system comes up with without further verification. These errors are the outcome of
enormous and diversified data with which the model was trained. Hence, at times, the answers

from ChatGPT could carry wrong or biased information, indicating the defects in the very data

from which it was trained.

The concepts that generative models assist students with learning are not truly understood

by them; rather, their training is based on statistical patterns seen in the data. When it comes to

giving students feedback or explanations that are specific to them, this could be a drawback.

According to a study by Wang et al., (2020), a teaching system based on generative models was

unable to offer explanations that were specific to each learner.

As stated in the study by Bolukbasi et al., (2016), a generative model trained on a large

corpus of text from the internet exhibited gender bias in its language generation. This can prove

that the generative model can have biased data which can hinder the credibility of the

information given to students.

Benefits of ChatGPT usage

AI ChatGPT provides many important benefits that can help people in different areas of

life. According to Oranga (2023), one major advantage is how quickly it can give answers. When

students have questions about their homework or projects, they can ask ChatGPT and get

information almost instantly. This saves time and makes studying easier. Another benefit is that

ChatGPT helps improve communication skills. It allows users to practice writing and speaking.

For example, someone learning a new language can have conversations with ChatGPT, which

builds confidence and helps them learn better. ChatGPT is also useful for brainstorming ideas. If

someone is working on a creative project and feels stuck, they can ask ChatGPT for suggestions.

This can inspire new thoughts and lead to better solutions. As stated in the study of Baidoo-Anu
(2023) ChatGPT can be deemed beneficial in many ways. One of the ways expressed is for

ChatGPT to be used as a personal tutor as it provides feedback based on an individual's learning

process.

A study by Kim et al. (2019) showed that a generative model (ChatGPT) trained on a

dataset of human-graded essays could accurately grade essays written by high school students,

with a correlation of 0.86 with human grades. The study showed that the model was able to

identify key features of well-written essays and was able to provide feedback that was similar to

that provided by human graders therefore it can also be used as an automated essay grader that

can support students in their writing.

ChatGPT can be used as a tool for interactive learning as it delivers personalized

responses, it can also provide tutoring for most students. It has the ability to communicate

through several languages which can be helpful to all students (Peng et al, 2019).

A study by Chiang et al. (2021) showed that students studying programming could

benefit from more effective help from an adaptive learning system based on a generative model

(ChatGPT), leading to better programming proficiency. According to the study, the model could

recognize what the pupils knew and modify the level of difficulty in the tasks it created.

Personalized tutoring, automatic essay grading, language translation, interactive learning, and

adaptive learning are just a few of the features that make ChatGPT a potentially effective tool for

improving teaching and learning (OpenAI, 2023).

Statement of the Problem

A major impact on students' acquisition of knowledge could result from the use of

artificial intelligence (AI) tools like ChatGPT in educational environments. To fully understand

how these technologies affect different facets of learning, a thorough examination is necessary.

About ChatGPT's function in education, this study seeks to answer several important questions.

The following queries will be addressed by the study:

1. How many demographic profiles of the respondents be described in terms of:

1.1 Age

1.2 Sex

1.3 Internet connectivity

1.4 Frequency of usage

2. How may Artificial Intelligence affect students learning acquisition in terms of:

2.1 Enhance learning

2.2 Information adequacy

2.3 Accessibility

2.4 Validity and Credibility

2.5 Usability

3. How may learning acquisitions be described:

3.1 Knowledge Retention

3.2 Better understanding of the lesson

4. Is there a significant relationship between the utilization of ChatGPT and student

learning acquisition?
 5. Is there a significant relationship between learning acquisition and a student's

demographic profile when grouped?

Hypothesis

Based on the problem stated above, the following hypotheses to be tested in this study

were formulated:

(H₀)1:

There is no significant relationship between the utilization of ChatGPT and students'

learning acquisition.

(H₁)1:

There is a significant relationship between the utilization of ChatGPT and students'

learning acquisition.

(H₀)2:

There is no significant relationship between students' demographic profile and their

learning acquisition when grouped.

(H₁)2:

There is a significant relationship between students' demographic profile and their

learning acquisition when grouped.

Conceptual Framework

This study utilizes a correlational framework to explore the relationship between students'

use of ChatGPT and their learning acquisition. By examining how different patterns of

interaction with this AI tool influence academic outcomes, the framework aims to identify key

factors that contribute to effective learning. Understanding these correlations will help educators

develop strategies that enhance the educational experience through the thoughtful integration of

technology.

This study is anchored on the Effects of the Artificial Intelligence "ChatGPT" on Student

Learning Acquisition of Senior High School Students, the Grade 12 Science, Technology,

Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM). The study is focused on the positive and negative

experiences of Grade 12 STEM Senior High School Students while using the Artificial

Intelligence ChatGPT. In support of that, Mohammed et al. (2023) stated that ChatGPT should

be embraced as a learning tool rather than feared for its potential negative impacts. However,

Krupp (2024) highlighted that ChatGPT can lead to diminished reflection and limited critical

thinking, which are two of the primary concerns associated with the use of large language

models (LLMs) in education.

This study aims to investigate whether the use of ChatGPT is influenced by the

demographic profile of the user, specifically age, gender, and internet connectivity. The

demographic factors to be considered include age based on the likelihood of using ChatGPT is

examined across different age groups. Younger students, such as those in elementary and junior

high school, are expected to have a lower likelihood of using the AI tool compared to older

students, like those in college, particularly engineering students, who may have a higher
probability of using ChatGPT. According to data based on Statista (Thormundsson, 2024), male

users are more predominant, accounting for over 65% of ChatGPT users in 2023. This suggests

that gender may influence the frequency of ChatGPT usage, with male users potentially using the

tool more often than female users. Lastly, the internet connectivity is based on the accessibility

of ChatGPT, which is also influenced by the user's internet connectivity. Students with limited

internet access are expected to have a lower chance of using ChatGPT, while those with strong,

reliable internet connections are more likely to engage with the tool. Additionally, this study

seeks to explore how students from different educational backgrounds, such as those in lower

grade levels, differ in their use of ChatGPT compared to STEM students. The analysis will help

understand how these demographic profiles, academic levels, and fields of study may affect AI

usage patterns, specifically ChatGPT.

The study explores the role of the demographic profile and factors like age, sex, and

grade level. And to know if this demographic profile can influence the frequency of usage of

ChatGPT by an individual. Young students may use ChatGPT frequently because some of the

young students rely on AI tools when it comes to their assignments. While college students may

not use ChatGPT, as they prefer reading or using physical books rather than using AI tools, some

of them also think that using ChatGPT is a form of cheating. In support of that, the study of

Intelligence (2024) shows a result that twelve percent of student ChatGPT users say using AI

technology is cheating, while 64% believe it’s somewhat cheating. According to data from the

study of Bouzar et al. (2024), males reported spending more time using ChatGPT, whereas

females exhibited a higher frequency of usage. This shows that while men may not use ChatGPT

regularly, they do so for a longer period. Women, on the other hand, prefer to use it more

frequently but for a shorter period. According to Rosenbaum (2024), almost half, or 49%, of U.S.
teachers and K-12 students say they are using ChatGPT weekly. While, Yu et al. (2024) stated

that the 198 males and 130 females respondents, with 80.19% of participants had a college or

university degree, stated that the ChatGPT usage frequency of 31.4% of respondents was two to

four times per week, followed by a 15.5% who once per week. Additionally, the usage of

ChatGPT and the frequency of usage affect each other. Students who use Chatgpt for answering

their homework may use Chatgpt regularly, and students who use Chatgpt for researching only

use it only twice a week. As stated by Intelligence (2024), the most popular ChatGPT used

among student users 69% is for writing assignments, and of the 69% who use ChatGPT for

writing assignments, 17% say they use it all the time, while 24% use it most of the time.

The use of ChatGPT can influence respondents' learning acquisition in various ways,

including their ability to retain knowledge, better understand lessons, enhance learning, and

improve test scores. This relationship is also tied to how frequently respondents use AI tools like

ChatGPT. Since AI tools offer easy access to information and often provide accurate answers,

the frequency of use may impact the learning acquisition of the respondents. This study aims to

determine whether respondents use ChatGPT to gain knowledge, enhancing learning, and

improving knowledge retention, or if frequent use leads to over-reliance on AI tools, resulting in

potential laziness. Furthermore, the research explores whether the use of ChatGPT affects critical

thinking and aims to identify how respondents perceive and use the tool in ways that may

influence their learning acquisition and cognitive habits.

Figure 1: The Conceptual Framework of the Study

Significance of the Study

This study aims to examine how the use of ChatGPT affects student learning acquisition.

By understanding how students use this AI tool, we can provide valuable insights and benefits

for the following.

Students

With insights from this research, students will be better positioned to make informed

choices about utilizing ChatGPT as a source of knowledge. Understanding the strengths and

limitations of the application will help them discern when and how to leverage it effectively,

ensuring they maximize their learning potential.

 The findings will reveal how ChatGPT can complement traditional study methods.

Students will learn about strategies that integrate AI into their learning routines, potentially

leading to more efficient study habits. For example, they may discover how to use ChatGPT for

clarifying complex topics, generating practice questions, or summarizing key concepts,

ultimately enriching their study experience.

For those who have not yet utilized ChatGPT, our study will highlight the potential

benefits of incorporating AI into their learning. This can inspire students to explore new avenues

for knowledge acquisition, encouraging curiosity and a proactive attitude toward learning. By

understanding the application’s capabilities, students may feel more motivated to experiment

with it as a learning companion.

Educators

One of the key benefits of this study is the opportunity for educators to teach students

about the responsible use of AI tools. By highlighting the risks of over-reliance on ChatGPT,

educators can instill a sense of critical awareness in students. They can guide learners in

discerning when it is appropriate to use AI and when to seek information through traditional

methods.

With the insights from this research, educators can remodel their teaching strategies to

incorporate AI in meaningful ways. This may include creating interactive activities that leverage

ChatGPT, encouraging collaborative problem-solving, or integrating AI-generated content into

discussions. Such approaches can keep students engaged and motivated while enhancing their

learning experience.
Faculty

The results of this study will serve as a vital source of feedback for the school faculty,

providing actionable insights that can be used to enhance educational programs and create a

more supportive learning environment. By analyzing student interactions with ChatGPT,

educators can identify strengths and areas for improvement in their teaching strategies.

The feedback gathered from the study will offer faculty a clearer understanding of how

students are using ChatGPT in their learning. This data can inform program revisions, allowing

educators to make targeted improvements that better align with student's needs and learning

styles.

The results can be utilized to inform professional development initiatives for faculty.

Workshops can be organized to explore best practices for integrating ChatGPT into their

teaching, equipping educators with the skills to effectively support students in using AI as a

learning tool.

Educational Institution

The results of this study will serve as a vital source of feedback for the school faculty,

providing actionable insights that can be used to enhance educational programs and create a

more supportive learning environment. By analyzing student interactions with ChatGPT,

educators can identify strengths and areas for improvement in their teaching strategies.
Curriculum Planning

The curriculum can benefit from this study by guiding them to collaborate with

CHATGPT, aligning with educational purposes while enhancing learning acquisition. They can

adapt by accommodating learning resources for those who need extra help. This can also benefit

them by informing them on how to incorporate ChatGPT with learning acquisition or

personalized learning experiences.

Future researchers

This study can be a baseline data for future researchers, as they can use this to be a

guideline and can give them knowledge or information in case they encounter the same problem

or gaps in their study. They can identify the gaps or areas that need more deeper explanation.

They can use this study to compare ChatGPT to other future AI tools or updated versions.

Scope and Delimitation

This research will look into how students utilize ChatGPT in educational circumstances.

It will attempt to determine if ChatGPT enhances or hinders students' learning. This study aims

to explore the effect of ChatGPT on a student's learning acquisition in order to give insights into

how AI might be effectively integrated into educational circumstances.

The intended sample population of the study will be senior high school students of which

there are eighty-three (83) grade 12 STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and

Mathematics) students. The STEM students at the higher education institution in Pampanga,

Philippines, who are enrolled for the academic year 2024–2025, would belong to this category.

STEM education offers students a platform to be able to acquire skills that are vital in the future
and these include problem-solving skills, communication skills, and collaboration skills.

Considering the fact that the majority of them apply ChatGPT and other AI technologies in their

studies and assignments (Aleksic-Maslac, 2019), senior high school students are the most

relevant target audience. STEM students are suitable in terms of evaluating the effect of AI on

acquisition owing to how often they use it, the intensity of their curriculum including the subjects

that they are taking, and their role in cultivating changes to the educational system. Students

from other grade levels will also be excluded from this research, as it will focus solely on grade

12 STEM students. The data will be gathered through an online survey using Google Forms to

enable the researchers to quickly assess the respondents. This study will be conducted during the

1st semester of the 2024-2025 academic year.

To conclude, this research focuses solely on how the use of ChatGPT enhances the

learning, retention, and application of knowledge acquired by students. The aim of the paper in

this respect will be to focus extensively on this group in order to make sensible suggestions on

how the use of AI tools can be hedged and held accountable. By focusing on such issues, it is

hoped that the research will contribute to a student's effort toward less dependence on AI

technology such as Chat GPT.

Definition of Terms

The following terms were defined operationally to provide insight into the ideas covered

in the study.

Artificial intelligence (AI)

 Making a machine behave in ways that would be called intelligent if a human were so

behaving (Cope,2020). defined as A trained model that has conversational abilities. Artificial

intelligence (AI) is being used in education to assist with repetitive processes like learning.

Knowledge Acquisition

Refers to the process of acquiring new knowledge and building upon the existing

knowledge when knowledge is gained (Abdekhoda et al., 2023). It is defined as The process of

learning new information, abilities, and behaviors through experience, and education is known as

acquisition. Furthermore, it is believed that skill development, improvement, and learning are all

parts of acquisition.

Knowledge retention

Is defined as a challenge that persists in education, even though many methods help

students maintain their knowledge (Alsarayreh, 2021). AI resources that enhance students'

education.

Learning aid

Refers to AI-based learning aids are resources designed to improve students' education.

Additionally, as learning resources and visual aids are developed, AI tools are being incorporated

into the educational process more and more.

Acronyms

ChatGPT- Chat Generative Pre-trained Transformer

AI- Artificial Intelligence

DepEd- Department of Education

STEM- Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics

 CHAPTER 2

METHODOLOGY

This study was conducted to determine the effects of the artificial intelligence ChatGPT

on student learning acquisition. This chapter outlines the research methods and approaches, the

design of the study, the population and sampling procedure, the research instruments used, the

data collection procedures, and the analysis of the data involved in the study.

Research Design

This study will employ a quantitative research approach to systematically evaluate the

effects of the artificial intelligence model "ChatGPT" on student learning acquisition. According

to Wilson (2019), quantitative research methods are concerned with the planning, design, and

implementation of strategies to collect and analyze data. Descartes, the seventeenth-century

philosopher, suggested that how the results are achieved is often more important than the results

themselves, as the journey taken along the research path is a journey of discovery.

The researchers used a correlational research study between the effects of using ChatGPT

and student learning acquisition, including the demographic profiles of the respondents in terms

of age, sex, internet connectivity, and frequency of usage. Additionally, the study will examine

how Artificial Intelligence affects students' learning acquisition in terms of enhanced learning,

information adequacy, accessibility, validity and credibility, and usability. By analyzing the data

collected from student surveys and academic records, the study aims to identify patterns that

highlight the overall impact of AI-assisted learning on knowledge retention, better understanding

of the lesson, enhanced learning, and improved test scores. According to the editorial desk
(2024), There is growing concern among educators and experts that the increasing use of AI

language models like ChatGPT in the classroom could lead to a lack of critical thinking and

independent learning among students. The ease and convenience of generating text with the help

of AI may discourage students from developing their ideas and conducting independent research,

leading to a lack of creativity and originality in their work. This concern is particularly relevant

in subjects that require critical thinking and analysis, such as literature, history, and philosophy.

Relying too heavily on AI language models could potentially undermine these skills and lead to a

lack of intellectual curiosity and independent thinking. It explains that relying too much on

ChatGPT might lead to a lack of critical thinking and discourage students from developing their

own ideas and independent thinking. According to Aktay et al. (2023), it is seen that students

want to use ChatGPT both for reviewing Science and for studying different subjects. The

students have stated that using ChatGPT contributes to their academic success, allows them to

access more information through it, and that ChatGPT provides correct and understandable

answers to their questions.

The correlational analysis will be used in this study to reveal if there's a relationship

between the frequency of students using ChatGPT in their learning acquisition. This method will

help the researcher to identify how ChatGPT might affect the learning acquisition of the

students. It also examines the other characteristics, intrinsically how ChatGPT might affect the

learning and critical thinking of the students, by correlating it with the usage of ChatGPT. As

stated by Seeram (2019), correlational research is a type of non-experimental research that

facilitates prediction and explanation of the relationship among variables. Literature on

correlational research is sparse; however, a detailed account of this methodology can be found in

some texts. Recently, Curtis et al. (2019), published a comprehensive article focusing on
evidence-based practice in health care, stressing the importance and use of correlational research

design. Researchers use a correlational research design to measure 2 or more variables to

investigate the extent to which the variables are related.

Methods and Techniques of Research

This study will employ a correlational research design to examine the impact of ChatGPT

on student learning acquisition and the role of demographic factors. Correlational research, as

seen through Bhandari (2021), focuses on correlations between variables without the researcher

changing or altering any of them. The strength and/or direction of association between two (or

more) variables can be seen through correlation. A correlation may indicate a positive or

negative relationship. A correlational design will also be used to demonstrate the relationship

between the variables and how they influence one another. A preliminary sort of study that looks

into the relationship between two variables is correlational research. This kind of research will

not involve manipulating the variables. Researchers pay greater attention to observation rather

than modifying or altering them (Eckel, 2024). Participants will consist of students from diverse

educational institutions, with a sample size determined through power analysis to ensure

statistical validity. A structured questionnaire will be developed to gather demographic profiles,

including age, sex, internet connectivity, and frequency of ChatGPT usage. In addition, a

separate survey will measure various aspects of learning acquisition, such as knowledge

retention, understanding of lessons, and enhanced learning experiences.

Respondents of the Study

This study involved eighty-three (83) Senior High School students, aged 16-19 in the

Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) strand from a higher education
institution, in the City of San Fernando, Pampanga, Philippines. These students are ideal for the

research because they often use ChatGPT in their coursework. STEM students solve real-life

problems, and the projects include complex issues in Science and Mathematics; thus, students

would benefit from AI applications that support the development of critical thinking and

problem-solving skills.

According to the paradigm shift study conducted by Ouyang et al. (2021), the main

purpose of the AI technology was to present STEM knowledge as well as course content to the

students and the students themselves benefited from the learning paths introduced by intelligent

systems. STEM students are more logical and demand higher cognitive skills; they are also

familiar with the use of AI tools, so they are perfect respondents for the survey on the application

of AI in learning. The benefits of embedding AI into STEM education consist of the following;

smart and personalized learning environment, understanding of students’ learning behaviors as

well as the improvement of performance evaluation (Alabdulhadi & Faisal, 2021; Walker et al.,

2014).

In this study, purposive sampling was applied in order to ensure that the identified

respondents had the appropriate characteristics for this research. According to Nikolopolou

(2023), purposive sampling entails identifying people who possess certain characteristics

relevant to the goals of the research. This method is especially helpful in finding out STEM

students who often employ AI entities like ChatGPT.

Sampling Procedure

This study uses non-probability sampling, specifically purposive sampling, which gathers

data from the participants with the same qualities. According to Bisht (2024), purposive
sampling, also known as judgmental or expert sampling, is a method that is suitable for small

populations with a clear research purpose, allowing the researcher to target individuals with

specific attributes relevant to the study. The sampling frame for this study will be derived from

the list of enrolled Grade 12 Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM)

students with the same particular characteristics. The selection of participants will ensure that the

participants for this study are fitted for the qualities needed for this study; thereby, it will

enhance the accuracy and reliability of the data collected. Before the administration of the survey

questionnaire, respondents will be asked whether they perceive ChatGPT affects their learning

acquisition and how frequently they utilize ChatGPT. This inquiry aims to quantify both the

positive and negative effects of using ChatGPT, as well as to assess the frequency of its use

among participants. Furthermore, if students respond to the survey questionnaire, the researcher

will be able to correlate the positive and negative impacts of ChatGPT usage, thereby facilitating

the potential for students to effectively use AI tools, specifically ChatGPT, as a learning

resource.

Research Instrument

The primary research instrument for this study will be an online survey created using

Google Forms, consisting of carefully self-structured questions. The survey to be distributed is a

self-made custom to the problems of the study to be able to gather accurate data (Bhandari,

2023). This survey is designed to capture quantitative data regarding the usage of ChatGPT

among STEM students. The questions will be divided into several sections, including

demographic information, frequency of ChatGPT usage, perceived benefits and drawbacks, and

specific impacts on learning acquisition. The survey will feature closed-ended questions allowing

for easy quantification of responses for students using ChatGPT. Administering the survey
online facilitates broader accessibility and convenience for respondents, enabling them to

complete the questionnaire at their own pace.

Part I- Demographic profile

This part will contain the respondent’s age, gender, internet connectivity, and the

frequency of usage of the artificial intelligence “ChatGPT”

Part II- Effect of ChatGPT on students' learning acquisition

Using a multiple-choice format created with Google Forms, the respondents' degree of

agreement with statements about how ChatGPT influences their learning acquisition will be

assessed in this section. The options are strongly agreed, agree, disagree, and strongly disagree.

Part III- Learning Acquisition Outcomes

In this part, the respondents' level of agreement with statements regarding their learning

acquisition will be determined by the use of multiple choices that consist of strongly agree,

agree, disagree, and strongly disagree. This will be used to determine the respondents’ learning

outcomes when using the artificial intelligence ChatGPT.

Content Validity of the Instruments

This study intends to guarantee the validity of the instruments that will be employed, and

to do so, the researchers employ the I-CVI. The Item Content Validity Index, or I-CVI, is defined

by Yusoff (2019) as an essential statistic for assessing the content validity of measurement tools,

especially in domains like the social sciences, healthcare, and education. Based on professional

assessments, measures the degree to which each item on a scale or questionnaire is relevant. The
use of I-CVI is vital for ensuring that the items included in a measurement tool accurately reflect

the construct being measured. This process helps to enhance the reliability and validity of

research findings by ensuring that all components are relevant and necessary (Polit & Beck,

2006). I-CVI is calculated by taking the number of experts who rate an item as "very relevant"

(typically a score of 3 or 4 on a Likert scale) and dividing it by the total number of experts

involved in the evaluation. As stated in the study of Lynn (1986), the I-CVI values are

interpreted as follows: an I-CVI greater than 0.79 indicates that the item is deemed relevant; an I-

CVI between 0.70 and 0.79 suggests that the item may require revision; and an I-CVI less than

0.70 suggests that the item should be removed from the instrument. The instrument that will be

used in this study will be validated by 3 experts, and if deemed relevant, the instrument will be

used.

Reliability and Consistency of the Instruments

To demonstrate the concept of the research instruments' reliability and internal

consistency, Researchers will utilize Cronbach alpha coefficients to evaluate the effects on

student learning acquisition and frequency usage of ChatGPT. Cronbach's alpha also known as

Coefficient alpha computes an internal consistency reliability estimate for test items that are

measured on scales with three or more response options (Kalkbrenner, 2021). This statistical

measurement will evaluate the questionnaire items' internal consistency to make sure they

accurately reflect the effects on students' learning acquisition and the frequency of ChatGPT

usage.
Administrative Feasibility

According to Miller (2006), administrative feasibility should be considered together with

the validity and reliability of an instrument by establishing the cost, time, and ease of

administration. The instrument for this study was self-administered using Google Forms.

Furthermore, once the I-CVI was implemented among senior high school students at a state-

funded educational institution in Pampanga, the instrument used in this study went through pilot

testing to confirm that the survey (questionnaire) was relevant to the objectives. After pilot

testing, the instrument was sent to actual participants. Participants were given 15-20 minutes to

finish both sets of instruments and answer questions. Respondents are encouraged to ask

questions about new language, items, concepts, and difficulties when filling out survey

(questionnaire) questions. Participants were also informed that all information and materials

would be kept secret and used only for educational reasons.

Data Gathering Procedures

In this study, the following research instruments were employed: the researchers

employed self-administered online Google Forms-based survey questionnaires as their main tool

of data collection. Once the survey questionnaires have been reviewed and approved, the

researcher will develop and get validation from a subject matter expert and distribute it to the

respondents. The researcher will then provide a short discussion of the goal of the study.

This study sought to understand how ChatGPT affects different assets of learning. The

researcher will gather the data using Google Forms-based survey questionnaires. The gathered

responses will provide insights into how ChatGPT influences the learning process.
 The survey (questionnaire) link will be given to STEM students who have agreed to

participate in the study. Before finally answering the form, consent was sought from the

respondents who would fill out the form. This method is useful in gathering data while at the

same time maintaining the voluntary nature of participation. The researchers will gather

information from students to assess the effect of an artificial intelligence tool known as ChatGPT

on the students' learning acquisition. The survey questionnaires, consisting of forty (40)

questions, were structured into three (3) key sections: demographic profile, effect of ChatGPT on

learning acquisition, and learning outcomes. The three sections use a Likert scale, allowing

respondents to express their opinions through four response options: even for the information on

the response options, there is disagreement among subjects with such options as strongly agree,

agree, disagree, and strongly disagree. The researchers will examine and interpret the data once it

has been collected.

Statistical Treatment of Data

This study utilizes Pearson correlation as the statistical tool since we

are looking for correlations between the variables. To properly investigate

how the demographic factors of the respondents correlate with students'

learning acquisition. According to Berman (2016), Pearson correlation

measures how two objects relate by calculating the sum of the products of

their differences from the means, divided by the product of the squared

differences from their means. Pearson’s correlation quantifies the strength of

the relationship between two variables, ranging from −1 to +1: −1 or +1

indicates a perfect linear relationship, while 0 indicates no linear relationship

(Stewart, 2024). The Pearson correlation is statistically significant, as

supported by Turney (2024) because it tests the significance of the

relationship between two variables and helps determine how strong this

relationship is. The presence or absence of correlation is indicated using the

Pearson correlation, which also assesses the exact extent of correlation

between the variables.

Ethical Considerations

Ethical consideration refers to the principles and guidelines that researchers must follow

to ensure that their studies are conducted ethically and responsibly, as stated by Hassan (2024).

Participants need to understand the purpose of the study, their role in it, and how their data will

be handled. This guarantees their voluntary and pressure-free consent to participate. Therefore,

the researchers provided consent for the participants to be aware and informed regarding the

purpose of the study and will be given a decision to withdraw anytime. Thourani (2022) believed

that informed consent is a fundamental belief of research ethics since every individual has the

freedom to make their own decisions and should be aware of all of the knowledge provided that

they need to make the right decisions. Another crucial aspect is confidentiality concerning the

Data Privacy Act of 2012. Ethical issues and reports that violate the consensus of this study will

be handled in a legal and manageable manner, by the Data Privacy Act of the Philippines,

Republic Act No. 10173, which protects all forms of information. The researcher aims to

complete the study with integrity, respect for participants' rights, and ethical conduct,

contributing to the advancement of knowledge in this important area. Hoft (2021) stated that

practices of anonymity and confidentiality are used to protect the privacy of human subjects who

are participating in a study while collecting, analyzing, and reporting data. Therefore, the
researchers ensure that whatever data they collect will assure the anonymity of the participants

and will securely be maintained, as well as the participants' responses. Lastly, researchers ought

to be transparent about their conclusions and any biases they may have had, and it will only be

used for academic purposes.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

This chapter includes the data analysis and findings of the research study. Researchers

used tables to present the data gathered from the respondents. In addition, it includes the

interpretation of data.

1. How many demographic profiles of the respondents be described in terms of:

1.1 Age

Table 1: Demographic Profile of the Respondents in terms of Age

Age f % Rank
 16 7 8.4 3

17 55 66.3 1

18 20 24.1 2

19 1 1.2 4

Total 83 100

The demographic profile of the respondents, as shown in Table 1, highlights that the majority of

the participants are 17 years old, accounting for 66.3% of the total respondents, ranking first.

This suggests that the study primarily involves individuals who are in the typical age bracket for

senior high school students. Following this, 18-year-olds make up 24.1% of the sample, ranking

second, while 16-year-olds constitute 8.4%, ranking third. Notably, only one respondent, or

1.2%, is 19 years old, indicating a minimal representation of older students in the study. The

distribution reflects a concentration of respondents within the expected age range for the

educational level targeted by this research, ensuring the data accurately represents the population

of interest. Such a distribution is critical for understanding patterns related to learning acquisition

and AI integration within this age group.

1.2 Sex

Table 2: Demographic Profile of the Respondents in terms of Sex

Sex f %

Male 45 54.2

Female 38 45.8

Total 83 100
Table 2 reveals the demographic profile of respondents based on their sex, showing a slightly

higher proportion of males (54.2%) compared to females (45.8%). This indicates a relatively

balanced gender representation, though male respondents make up the majority. The near-

equitable distribution ensures that the study captures diverse perspectives and experiences related

to learning acquisition and the potential effects of artificial intelligence. Such gender

representation is important for producing insights that are not skewed toward one sex, allowing

for more generalized conclusions in the context of the research objectives.

1.3 Internet connectivity

Table 3: Demographic Profile of the Respondents in terms Speed Level of

Internet Connection

Speed Level f % Rank

Very Slow 1 1.2 4

Slow 4 4.8 3

Fast 60 72.3 1

Very Fast 18 21.7 2

Total 83 100

Table 3 highlights the demographic profile of respondents in terms of the speed level of their

internet connection. The majority, 72.3%, reported having a fast internet connection, which

ranked first, followed by 21.7% with very fast internet. Meanwhile, 4.8% indicated slow internet

and only 1.2% experienced very slow connectivity. These results suggest that most respondents

have reliable internet speeds conducive to efficient online learning or interaction with artificial
intelligence tools. The high prevalence of fast and very fast connections reflects a potential

advantage in leveraging technology for learning, while the minority with slower connections

may face challenges in accessing digital resources effectively. This variability in connectivity

underscores the importance of ensuring equitable access to technological tools for all learners.

1.4 Frequency of usage

Table 4: Demographic Profile of the Respondents in terms Frequency of Using ChatGPT

Frequency of Using ChatGPT f % Rank

Never 1 1.2 5

Rarely 20 24.1 2

Monthly 7 8.4 4

Weekly 37 44.6 1

Daily 18 21.7 3

Total 83 100

Table 4 presents the respondents' demographic profile based on their frequency of using

ChatGPT. The highest proportion, 44.6%, reported using ChatGPT weekly, making it the most

common frequency. This is followed by 24.1% who rarely use it and 21.7% who access the tool

daily. A smaller segment, 8.4%, uses ChatGPT on a monthly basis, while only 1.2% reported

never using it. These findings indicate that most respondents engage with ChatGPT regularly,

either weekly or daily, suggesting its growing integration into their activities, likely for

academic, professional, or personal purposes. However, the presence of those who rarely or

never use the tool highlights differing levels of adoption, which could be influenced by factors
such as familiarity, accessibility, or perceived utility. This variation underscores the potential for

increasing awareness and training to maximize ChatGPT's benefits across different user groups.

2. How may Artificial Intelligence affect students learning acquisition in terms of:

2.1 Enhance learning

Table 5: Effect of Artificial Intelligence on Student Learning Acquisition in terms of

Learning Enhancement

Indicators Mean SD Interpretation

1. I use ChatGPT to further my understanding of the

3.30 0.64 Strongly Agree
topics I’m studying by asking questions.

2. The use of ChatGPT enhances my ability to

learn independently in understand the lessons or 3.18 0.65 Agree
subjects I am studying.

3. The use of ChatGPT improves my

3.29 0.62 Strongly Agree
understanding of complex topics or lessons.

4. The use of ChatGPT improves my critical

3.13 0.69 Agree
thinking skills.

5. ChatGPT allows me to review and understand

3.20 0.58 Agree
problem-solving by giving me step-by-step solutions.

Overall Mean 3.22 Agree

Table 5 presents the perceived effect of Artificial Intelligence (AI), specifically ChatGPT, on

student learning acquisition in terms of learning enhancement, with a focus on the top three
indicators. The median is included and computed in the test since it is the appropriate measure of

average for Likert data.

The highest-ranked indicator, with a mean of 3.30 (SD = 0.64), reflects students' frequent use of

ChatGPT to deepen their understanding of study topics through inquiry. This underscores the

tool's role in fostering curiosity and active engagement in learning. The second-ranked indicator

(mean = 3.29, SD = 0.62) emphasizes ChatGPT's utility in simplifying complex topics, which

suggests its effectiveness as a supportive tool for clarifying difficult lessons. The third indicator

(mean = 3.20, SD = 0.58) highlights how ChatGPT aids in problem-solving by providing step-

by-step solutions, which is indicative of its potential to support skill development in structured

learning tasks. Overall, the top three indicators reveal that ChatGPT significantly contributes to

enhancing student understanding, problem-solving capabilities, and learning engagement,

especially in challenging academic areas. These findings demonstrate its potential to complement

traditional learning strategies and foster independent study habits.

2.2 Information adequacy

Table 6: Effect of Artificial Intelligence on Student Learning Acquisition in terms of

Information Adequacy

Indicators Mean SD Interpretation

1. ChatGPT gives me enough information to

3.23 0.55 Agree
cover everything I need to learn.

2. The information from ChatGPT is helpful for

3.35 0.55 Strongly Agree
finishing my homework and school projects.

3. I find that ChatGPT provides comprehensive

and reliable information, making it a trusted tool for 3.17 0.62 Agree
learning.
 4. I use ChatGPT to create review materials for
my lessons, which helps me revisit my studies by
3.11 0.80 Agree
ensuring I have adequate information to understand
and retain key concepts.

5. The information I get from AI improves my

learning, as I use ChatGPT to ask for further 3.31 0.56 Strongly Agree
explanations related to my lessons.

Overall Mean 3.23 Agree

Table 6 delves into the effect of Artificial Intelligence, specifically ChatGPT, on student learning

acquisition in terms of information adequacy, with a focus on the top three indicators. The

median is included and computed in the test since it is the appropriate measure of average for

Likert data.

The highest-ranked indicator (mean = 3.35, SD = 0.55) underscores that ChatGPT provides

students with helpful information for completing homework and school projects, demonstrating

its role as a reliable academic aid. The second indicator (mean = 3.31, SD = 0.56) highlights that

the tool enhances learning by offering further explanations related to lessons, showcasing its

capability to address information gaps and foster deeper understanding. The third indicator

(mean = 3.23, SD = 0.55) reflects students' perception that ChatGPT delivers sufficient

information to meet their learning needs, underscoring its adequacy as an educational resource.

Overall, the data suggests that students find ChatGPT to be a valuable tool for obtaining useful,

relevant, and comprehensive information, reinforcing its role in supporting academic tasks and

promoting independent learning.

2.3 Accessibility

Table 7: Effects of Artificial Intelligence on Student Learning Acquisition in

terms of Accessibility
 Indicators Mean SD Interpretation

1. ChatGPT offers features that assist me with

3.29 0.62 Strongly Agree
academic tasks, like providing study guides.

2. ChatGPT is accessible and works reliably on

3.33 0.70 Strongly Agree
several platforms and devices.

3. I find that the language ChatGPT uses is easy

to follow and access, including for those who might 3.25 0.56 Agree
not be well known with technology.

4. I use ChatGPT to find academic information

3.33 0.61 Strongly Agree
that is difficult for me to find.

5. It does not take me long to figure out how to

3.41 0.59 Strongly Agree
access ChatGPT.

Overall Mean 3.32 Strongly Agree

Table 7 explores the effect of Artificial Intelligence, particularly ChatGPT, on student learning

acquisition in terms of accessibility, with a focus on the top-ranked indicators. As Likert data is

ordinal, rather than interval or ratio, the median, a robust measure of central tendency for ordinal

data, is computed and included in the analysis.

The highest-ranked indicator (mean = 3.41, SD = 0.59) reveals that students find it quick and

easy to figure out how to access ChatGPT, emphasizing its user-friendly nature and convenience.

Sharing the second rank (mean = 3.33, SD = 0.70, and SD = 0.61), students appreciate the

platform's reliable accessibility across multiple devices and its capability to provide academic

information that is otherwise challenging to locate. The fourth-ranked indicator (mean = 3.29,

SD = 0.62) highlights ChatGPT's valuable features, such as study guides, that assist students in

completing academic tasks. Overall, with an overall mean of 3.32 and a "Strongly Agree"

interpretation, the data underscores ChatGPT’s accessibility, versatility, and ease of use, making

it an effective tool for academic support.

 2.4 Validity and Credibility

Table 8: Effects of Artificial Intelligence on Student Learning Acquisition in terms of

Validity and Credibility

Indicators Mean SD Interpretation

1. I believe the information provided by

ChatGPT is reliable and trustworthy based on its 2.94 0.77 Agree
consistent accuracy across multiple topics.

2. The information given is clear and easy to

3.22 0.64 Agree
understand.

3. ChatGPT offers factual and exact information

that has been thoroughly investigated and verified by 3.00 0.68 Agree
fact-checking.

4. ChatGPT answers my academic questions

3.19 0.57 Agree
well and accurately.

5. The information on ChatGPT expands my

understanding by simplifying difficult concepts into 3.23 0.57 Agree
understandable insights.

Overall Mean 3.12 Agree

Table 8 examines the validity and credibility of Artificial Intelligence, particularly ChatGPT, in

influencing student learning acquisition. To accurately represent the central tendency of Likert

data, which is inherently ordinal, the median is calculated and included in the test.

The highest-ranked indicator (mean = 3.23, SD = 0.57) emphasizes that ChatGPT effectively

simplifies complex concepts into understandable insights, aiding students in expanding their

understanding of challenging topics. The second-ranked indicator (mean = 3.22, SD = 0.64)

reflects the clarity and ease of understanding provided by ChatGPT, which is crucial for
fostering effective learning. Ranked third (mean = 3.19, SD = 0.57), students acknowledge the

platform's ability to accurately address academic questions, further reinforcing its credibility as a

reliable academic tool. While all indicators have a consistent "Agree" interpretation, the lowest-

ranked indicator (mean = 2.94, SD = 0.77) reveals some hesitation regarding ChatGPT's

reliability across multiple topics. Overall, with an overall mean of 3.12, the data suggests that

ChatGPT is viewed as a valid and credible source of information, albeit with some room for

improvement in ensuring trustworthiness across diverse subjects.

2.5 Usability

Table 9: Effects of Artificial Intelligence on Student Learning Acquisition in terms of

Usability

Indicators Mean SD Interpretation

1. I find it easy to use ChatGPT for knowledge

3.31 0.60 Strongly Agree
gain.

2. I use ChatGPT for clarifying lesson plans. 3.19 0.63 Agree

3. I use AI for easily generated answers. 3.18 0.67 Agree

4. I use ChatGPT in making academic work. 3.28 0.70 Agree

5. I find it easy to use ChatGPT to learn other

3.28 0.61 Strongly Agree
strategies in terms of academics.

Overall Mean 3.22 Agree

Table 9 evaluates the usability of Artificial Intelligence, specifically ChatGPT, in enhancing

student learning acquisition. The median, the most appropriate measure of central tendency for

Likert data, is included in the analysis.

The highest-ranked indicator (mean = 3.31, SD = 0.60) highlights the ease with which students

use ChatGPT for gaining knowledge, reflecting its user-friendly interface and accessibility. This

ease of use is further supported by the second-rank ed indicator (mean = 3.28, SD = 0.61), which

underscores ChatGPT's utility in helping students explore additional academic strategies. These

findings suggest that students value ChatGPT as a straightforward tool for learning and skill

enhancement. While the remaining indicators, including clarifying lesson plans (mean = 3.19)

and generating answers (mean = 3.18), are interpreted positively as "Agree," they rank slightly

lower, pointing to a more reserved acknowledgment of its capabilities in these specific areas. The

lowest-ranked indicator (mean = 3.14) involves the use of ChatGPT for creating academic

works, suggesting some limitations in its perceived effectiveness for complex academic tasks.

Overall, with an overall mean of 3.22, the data indicates that ChatGPT is generally considered

usable and effective, particularly for knowledge acquisition and academic strategy development.

3. How can the learning acquisitions be described:

3.1 Knowledge Retention

Table 10: Description of the Leaning Acquisition in terms of Knowledge Retention

Indicators Mean SD Interpretation

1. I can recall information learned from my

3.00 0.66 Agree
previous uses of ChatGPT.

2. Using ChatGPT regularly improves my long-

2.99 0.77 Agree
term knowledge retention.

3. I can recall information better after reviewing

2.96 0.74 Agree
it through ChatGPT sessions.
 4. ChatGPT helps me retain knowledge more
2.84 0.94 Agree
effectively than traditional study methods.

5. Using ChatGPT has improved my ability to

3.06 0.79 Agree
retain new information across various subjects.

Overall Mean 2.97 Agree

Table 10 evaluates the effectiveness of ChatGPT in terms of knowledge retention for students.

Given the ordinal nature of Likert data, the median is calculated to represent central tendency.

The highest-ranked indicator (mean = 3.06, SD = 0.79) emphasizes that students believe

ChatGPT has improved their ability to retain new information across various subjects, suggesting

that the AI tool plays a positive role in helping learners retain knowledge. Following this, the

second-ranked indicator (mean = 3.00, SD = 0.66) indicates that students are generally able to

recall information learned from previous ChatGPT sessions, pointing to the tool's impact on

memory retention. The third-ranked item (mean = 2.99, SD = 0.77) reveals that regular use of

ChatGPT is perceived as beneficial for long-term knowledge retention, reinforcing its role in

supporting sustained learning. The fourth-ranked indicator (mean = 2.96, SD = 0.74) shows that

students feel they can better recall information after reviewing it through ChatGPT sessions,

suggesting the platform's role in reinforcing learning. The lowest-ranked indicator (mean = 2.84,

SD = 0.94) compares ChatGPT's effectiveness in retaining knowledge to traditional study

methods, with students agreeing that it helps retain information but at a slightly lower level

compared to conventional study practices. Overall, with an average mean of 2.97, the data shows

that students generally agree that ChatGPT supports knowledge retention, though it is perceived

as somewhat less effective than traditional methods.

 3.2 Better understanding of the lesson

Table 11: Description of the Leaning Acquisition in terms of Better Understanding of the

Lesson

Indicators Mean SD Interpretation

1. ChatGPT helps me understand certain topics

3.20 0.58 Agree
that I find to be difficult by clarifying the lessons.

2. I understand my lessons better through the

help of ChatGPT because it provides a step-by-step 3.19 0.69 Agree

process.

3. The conversations I have with ChatGPT

improve my understanding of lessons because they 3.25 0.60 Agree

provide examples.

4. I ask ChatGPT to explain lessons I don’t

understand by summarizing and highlighting the key

points, providing simple and easy-to-understand 3.25 0.71 Agree

explanations that makes complex lessons easier to

follow.

5. ChatGPT enhances my understanding by

providing practice exercises to answer that are 3.24 0.69 Agree

suitable for my learning capacity.

 Overall Mean 3.23 Agree

Table 11 presents the impact of ChatGPT on students' understanding of lessons, with all

indicators falling under the "Agree" interpretation. The highest-ranked indicators, both tied at

rank 1.5 (mean = 3.25, SD = 0.60/0.71), emphasize that ChatGPT enhances students'

understanding by providing examples and by summarizing complex lessons with simple, easy-to-

follow explanations. These features suggest that students value ChatGPT’s ability to break down

difficult topics into manageable concepts and make learning more accessible. The third-ranked

indicator (mean = 3.24, SD = 0.69) indicates that students appreciate the tool’s ability to offer

practice exercises that match their learning capacity, reinforcing the practical and tailored nature

of ChatGPT’s assistance. The fourth-ranked item (mean = 3.20, SD = 0.58) shows that ChatGPT

helps students clarify difficult topics, making it easier to grasp challenging concepts. Lastly, the

fifth-ranked indicator (mean = 3.19, SD = 0.69) highlights the importance of ChatGPT’s step-by-

step process in facilitating understanding, pointing to its systematic approach to explaining

lessons. Overall, the data suggests that students find ChatGPT highly useful in enhancing their

lesson comprehension, primarily through its clarity, practical examples, and tailored exercises.

4. Is there a significant relationship between the utilization of ChatGPT and student learning acquisition?

SPSS Output:
Table 12. Relationship Between the Frequency of using ChatGPT and the Student Learning Acquisition

Variables ρ Interpretation p-value Interpretation Decision

Frequency of using

ChaptGPT and Learning 0.194 Weak Positive 0.079 Not Significant Fail to Reject

Acquisition Ho

Table 12 presents the relationship between the frequency of using ChatGPT and student learning acquisition.

The computed Spearman Rank (ρ) coefficient of 0.194 indicates a weak positive correlation between the two

variables, suggesting that while there is a slight tendency for increased frequency of ChatGPT use to be

associated with improvements in learning acquisition, the relationship is not strong. The p-value of 0.079,
which is above the conventional threshold of 0.05 for statistical significance, leads to the decision to "fail to

reject the null hypothesis" (Ho). This means that, based on the data, there is insufficient evidence to support

the claim that the frequency of using ChatGPT has a statistically significant effect on student learning

acquisition. Therefore, any observed correlation could likely be due to chance rather than a meaningful

relationship.

SPSS Output:

Table 13. Relationship Between the Effect of Artificial Intelligence on Student Learning Acquisition and

Learning Acquisition
 Variables ρ Interpretation p-value Interpretation Decision

Effect of Artificial

Intelligence on Student 0.671 Strong Significant Reject Ho

Learning Acquisition and Positive <0.001

Learning Acquisition

Table 13 reveals the relationship between the effect of Artificial Intelligence (AI) on student learning

acquisition and actual learning acquisition. The Spearman’s correlation coefficient (ρ) is 0.671, which

indicates a strong positive correlation between these two variables. This suggests that as the perceived effect of

AI on student learning acquisition increases, so does the actual learning acquisition. The p-value of less than

0.001 is significantly below the commonly accepted threshold of 0.05, indicating that the relationship is

statistically significant. As a result, the null hypothesis (Ho), which would propose no relationship between the

two variables, is rejected. This confirms that there is a meaningful, strong, and positive association between the

effect of AI on student learning acquisition and actual learning acquisition.

SPSS Output:
Table 14. Relationship Between the Sub-variables of Effect of Artificial Intelligence on Student Learning

Acquisition and Sub-Variables of Learning Acquisition

Variables ρ Interpretation p-value Interpretation Decision

Enhancing Learning and 0.484 Moderate <0.001 Significant Reject Ho

Knowledge Retention Positive

Enhancing Learning and 0.575 Moderate <0.001 Significant Reject Ho

Better Understanding of the Positive

Lesson

Information Adequacy and 0.484 Moderate <0.001 Significant Reject Ho

Knowledge Retention Positive

Information Adequacy and 0.631 Strong <0.001 Significant Reject Ho

Better Understanding of the Positive

Lesson

Accessibility and 0.325 Weak Positive <0.001 Significant Reject Ho

Knowledge Retention

Accessibility and Better 0.457 Moderate <0.001 Significant Reject Ho

Understanding of the Positive

Lesson

Validity and Credibility and 0.327 Weak Positive <0.001 Significant Reject Ho

Knowledge Retention

Validity and Credibility and 0.405 Moderate <0.001 Significant Reject Ho

Better Understanding of the Positive

Lesson

Usability and Knowledge 0.423 Moderate <0.001 Significant Reject Ho

Retention Positive

Usability and Better 0.543 Moderate <0.001 Significant Reject Ho

 Understanding of the Positive

Lesson

Table 14 presents the relationship between the sub-variables of the effect of Artificial Intelligence (AI) on

student learning acquisition and the sub-variables of learning acquisition. The correlations between these

variables reveal several key insights:

Enhancing Learning and Knowledge Retention (ρ = 0.484, Moderate Positive): There is a moderate

positive correlation between enhancing learning and knowledge retention, suggesting that improvements in

learning enhancement due to AI are associated with better knowledge retention. This relationship is significant

(p < 0.001), rejecting the null hypothesis.

Enhancing Learning and Better Understanding of the Lesson (ρ = 0.575, Moderate Positive): A moderate

positive correlation exists between the enhancement of learning and the better understanding of lessons,

indicating that AI's impact on learning enhancement is positively related to students' comprehension of lessons.

The relationship is statistically significant, as evidenced by the p-value.

Information Adequacy and Knowledge Retention (ρ = 0.484, Moderate Positive): Information adequacy

provided by AI is moderately positively correlated with knowledge retention, demonstrating that when AI

provides adequate information, students are better able to retain the learned material. This is statistically

significant (p < 0.001).

Information Adequacy and Better Understanding of the Lesson (ρ = 0.631, Strong Positive): A strong

positive correlation exists between the adequacy of information provided by AI and students' better
understanding of lessons, indicating that sufficient and relevant information helps students grasp lesson content

more effectively. This relationship is also significant.

Accessibility and Knowledge Retention (ρ = 0.325, Weak Positive): The weak positive correlation between

accessibility and knowledge retention suggests that while AI's accessibility slightly influences knowledge

retention, the impact is less pronounced compared to other variables. The relationship is still significant.

Accessibility and Better Understanding of the Lesson (ρ = 0.457, Moderate Positive): AI accessibility has

a moderately positive effect on the understanding of lessons, meaning that when AI is more accessible,

students tend to understand lessons better. This relationship is also significant.

Validity and Credibility and Knowledge Retention (ρ = 0.327, Weak Positive): The weak positive

correlation between the validity and credibility of AI and knowledge retention indicates a minor impact on

retention based on AI's perceived reliability and trustworthiness. However, the relationship is still significant.

Validity and Credibility and Better Understanding of the Lesson (ρ = 0.405, Moderate Positive) : The

moderate positive correlation suggests that when students perceive AI as valid and credible, it positively

impacts their understanding of lessons. This is statistically significant.

Usability and Knowledge Retention (ρ = 0.423, Moderate Positive): The relationship between usability and

knowledge retention is moderate, showing that AI's ease of use is somewhat related to better retention. This

correlation is significant.

Usability and Better Understanding of the Lesson (ρ = 0.543, Moderate Positive): The moderate positive

correlation between usability and better understanding indicates that students are more likely to understand

lessons when AI is easy to use. This is also significant.

5. Is there a significant relationship between learning acquisition and a student's demographic profile when

grouped?

SPSS Outputs:
Table 15. Relationship Between the Learning Acquisition and Students’ Demographic Profile

Variables Correlation Interpretatio p-value Interpretation Decision

Coefficient n

Learning Acquisition -0.022 Very Weak 0.846 Not Significant Fail to Reject

and Age Negative Ho

Learning Acquisition 0.093 Very Weak 0.402 Not Significant Fail to Reject

and Speed Level of Positive Ho

Internet Connection

Learning Acquisition 0.194 Weak Positive 0.079 Not Significant Fail to Reject

and Frequency of Using Ho

ChatGPT

Learning Acquisition 0.288 Weak Positive 0.143 Not Significant Fail to Reject

and Sex Ho

Table 15 presents the relationships between learning acquisition and various demographic factors of the

students, with correlation coefficients and p-values indicating the strength and significance of these

relationships:

Learning Acquisition and Age (ρ = -0.022, Very Weak Negative): The correlation between age and learning

acquisition is very weak and negative, suggesting that there is almost no relationship between the two

variables. The p-value of 0.846 indicates that this relationship is not statistically significant, leading to the

decision to fail to reject the null hypothesis (Ho).

Learning Acquisition and Speed Level of Internet Connection (ρ = 0.093, Very Weak Positive) : The

correlation between internet speed and learning acquisition is also very weak and positive. The p-value of

0.402 shows that this correlation is not significant, meaning there is no substantial relationship between the

speed of the internet connection and learning acquisition. Therefore, the null hypothesis is not rejected.

Learning Acquisition and Frequency of Using ChatGPT (ρ = 0.194, Weak Positive): There is a weak

positive correlation between the frequency of using ChatGPT and learning acquisition, indicating a slight

relationship between the two. However, the p-value of 0.079 suggests that the correlation is not statistically

significant, leading to the decision to fail to reject the null hypothesis.

Learning Acquisition and Sex (ρ = 0.288, Weak Positive): The relationship between sex and learning

acquisition is weakly positive, suggesting a small correlation. Despite this, the p-value of 0.143 indicates that

the relationship is not significant, so the null hypothesis is not rejected.

The table provides the results of a Chi-Square test and symmetric measures, specifically the Phi coefficient and

Cramér's V, to evaluate the relationship between sex and learning acquisition.

Chi-Square Test Results:

The Pearson Chi-Square value is 6.869 with a p-value of 0.143, which is greater than the commonly used

significance level of 0.05. This indicates that there is no statistically significant relationship between sex and

learning acquisition in this study.

The Likelihood Ratio also shows a similar pattern with a p-value of 0.115, further supporting the lack of

significant association.
The Linear-by-Linear Association has a value of 3.791 with a p-value of 0.052, which is close to significance

but does not meet the threshold.

Symmetric Measures (Phi and Cramér's V):

The Phi coefficient is 0.288, suggesting a weak association between sex and learning acquisition. However,

with a p-value of 0.143, this relationship is not statistically significant.

Similarly, Cramér's V, which measures the strength of association for nominal variables, also has a value of

0.288 and a p-value of 0.143, confirming the weak and non-significant relationship.

Interpretation:

The results indicate that sex does not significantly influence learning acquisition in the context of the study

involving artificial intelligence (AI) and student learning acquisition. While there is a weak positive

relationship as suggested by the Phi coefficient, this is not statistically significant. These findings suggest that

factors other than sex might have a more substantial impact on learning acquisition when AI is used as an

educational tool. Further analysis involving other variables or larger sample sizes might provide additional

insights into the dynamics of AI's effects on learning.

 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Summary of Results

Based on the findings of the investigation, the researchers discovered that:

1. Based on the demographic profile of the respondents, most students (66.3%) were 17

years old, followed by 18-year-olds (24.1%), with lower percentages of 16- and 19-year-olds

(8.1%) and 1.2%, respectively. This reflects the study's focus on senior high school pupils in a
typical age group. Diverse viewpoints were guaranteed by the gender distribution, which was

comparatively balanced with males at 54.2% and females at 45.8%. Most students had fast

(72.3%) or breakneck (21.7%) internet speeds, demonstrating they had dependable connectivity

to efficiently use ChatGPT and other AI technologies. ChatGPT usage varied, with weekly use

being the most prevalent (44.6%), followed by daily use (21.7%) and uncommon use (24.1%),

indicating that while many students used ChatGPT regularly, a large percentage had little

involvement with the technology.

2. ChatGPT was demonstrated to improve numerous areas of learning acquisition. It

improved students' understanding of topics (mean: 3.30), simplified complex concepts (mean:

3.29), and solved problems step by step (mean: 3.20). In terms of information adequacy, students

recognized its role in completing projects and assignments (mean: 3.35), as well as filling gaps in

their lectures. Accessibility was another positive point, with respondents praising its user-

friendly interface (mean: 3.41) and ease of use across numerous platforms. Although ChatGPT

reduced difficult concepts (mean: 3.23), several students voiced minor concerns regarding its

reliability across a wide range of topics, with validity and credibility rating lower (mean: 2.94).

Students emphasized its efficacy in obtaining knowledge (mean: 3.31) and exploring new

academic methodologies (mean:3.28).

3. ChatGPT significantly improved information retention and lesson understanding.

Students believed that it improved their ability to retain new information across several topics

(mean: 3.06) and recall previously taught material (mean: 3.00). Although the findings were

positive, traditional study methods were deemed somewhat more successful in terms of retention.
ChatGPT performed well in lesson comprehension by summarizing complex concepts (mean:

3.25), giving personalized tasks (mean: 3.24), and clarifying difficult lessons (mean: 3.20). These

findings demonstrate the tool's capacity to supplement traditional study methods, particularly for

a difficult academic subject.

4. The correlation between ChatGPT usage frequency and learning acquisition was weakly

positive (r = 0.194), but not statistically significant (p = 0.125). While the data reveals that using

ChatGPT more frequently may lead to improved learning results, the absence of statistical

significance suggests that other factors may influence this association. Individual differences in

learning styles, prior knowledge, or how ChatGPT is used may have a greater impact than

frequency alone. These data imply that ChatGPT's effects are not solely dependent on how

frequently it is used, but rather on how well it is integrated into students' learning processes. This

necessitates additional research into qualitative characteristics of usage and their matching with

learning needs.

5. The study discovered no significant association between learning acquisition and

demographic characteristics including age, gender, internet speed, or ChatGPT usage frequency.

For example, the correlation of age with learning acquisition was r = -0.022, p = 0.846 indicating

that the effect of age was weakly negative and had little influence. Similarly, in terms of internet

speed, its correlation was found to be very weak positive, r = 0.124, p = 0.265, and regarding the

frequency of usage, r = 0.170, p = 0.125, which, again were not statistically significant. The sex

factor was the most statistically significant with a correlation strength of r = 0.288, though non-

significant at a p-value of 0.143. These findings imply that demographic factors have little

influence on how learners gain from ChatGPT. Instead, its effectiveness could be more broadly
applicable, regardless of these characteristics. This lack of considerable demographic influence

emphasizes the tool's potential for widespread use among varied student populations.

Conclusions

After carrying out an evaluation and summarizing the results, the researchers concluded that:

1. ChatGPT's usability, mean=3.31, and accessibility, mean=3.41 make teaching much

easier to implement and use through an intuitive interface that easily engages users with learning

tools.

2. Its capacity to solve learning gaps (mean: 3.31), facilitate self-directed and independent

learning, and offer sufficient and pertinent knowledge for activities like projects (mean: 3.35)

demonstrated its function as a trustworthy educational resource.

3. ChatGPT promotes improved comprehension and assists students in dealing with difficult

academic subjects by simplifying complex courses (mean: 3.25) and providing personalized

tasks (mean: 3.24).

Recommendations

For further studies to be conducted, the following are the recommendations of the researchers:

1. ChatGPT's potential to improve critical thinking (mean: 3.13), as well as its role in

assisting with the creation of review materials (mean: 3.11), were among the lowest-rated

features. These lower ratings indicate the need for specific improvements in these areas. It is

recommended that students receive training or tutorials to help them better use ChatGPT for

improving critical thinking abilities and arranging study resources.

2. ChatGPT's efficacy in promoting knowledge retention was also evaluated as rather low

(mean: 2.84), especially when compared to traditional study methods. To address this, ChatGPT

might be linked into structured study frameworks, providing features like review timetables,

memory aides, and practice sessions aimed at improving long-term retention.

3. The lack of a meaningful association between ChatGPT usage frequency and learning

acquisition emphasizes the importance of increasing the tool's interaction quality. Educators

might show students how to utilize ChatGPT in a meaningful and strategic approach,

emphasizing its potential for solving complicated problems, exploring challenging concepts, and

completing advanced academic work.

 References

Adeshola, I., & Adepoju, A. P. (2023). The opportunities and challenges of ChatGPT in

education. Interactive Learning Environments, 1–14.

[Link]

Aktay, S., Gök, S., & Uzunoğlu, D. (2023, July 31). ChatGPT in education.

[Link]

fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR1KqPUib_z-

jgRkh1kddpGtGOVFeu6I_UE4pGn1VjDUxcnRk8YWZ3eVcGY_aem_QSc7-

sFLhKo1aQO22YdJ3A

Ali, J. K. M., Shamsan, M. a. A., Hezam, T. A., & Mohammed, A. a. Q. (2023). Impact of

CHATGPT on learning motivation: Journal of English Studies in Arabia Felix, 2(1), 41–49.

[Link]

Analyzing the impact of AI on knowledge acquisition of students. (2024, May 8). IEEE

Conference Publication | IEEE Xplore. [Link]

fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR1VO2-

NKYHOxfpCd65kbYeA3qXI6Do2FM75bNfV43RaBLIfgaBoYDlMNss_aem__qoPOM6FfGw

YqbdYewoUtA
Chiangpradit, L. (2023, July 18). How AI is impacting STEM Education - STEM Sports. STEM

Sports. [Link]

fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR3bNrCiXLrTJ716utzM0QH2Vla-

MATJULR8MXIciIi2cpAJPvn6KIoMw08_aem_x1lG1BgvbQdkZCuCYjYuDw

Crompton, H., & Burke, D. (2023). Artificial intelligence in higher education: the state of the

field. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 20(1).

[Link]

Eckel, J. (2024, September 19). Correlational Research: design, methods, and examples.

StudyCrumb. [Link]

fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR2glvk1rJWbPjtROFOPOCC1MJurMFqTPH20PO3Aels_

ONBa_gM5fTa5hX8_aem_4pqnroKeVdAbowC_fC9n5g

Fitria, T. N. (2021). Artificial intelligence (AI) in education: Using AI tools for teaching and

learning process. ResearchGate.

[Link]

Using_AI_Tools_for_Teaching_and_Learning_Process

Hetler, A. (2024, July 31). What is ChatGPT? WhatIs.

[Link]

fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR2dPWLbiGltt9ymSXAbdNyyRugKV2cM2bpGd4hRQi_

W55Mw1WSrvqP4PVc_aem_kJa5G5o0sKrupp, L., Steinert, S., Kiefer-Emmanouilidis, M.,

Avila, K. E., Lukowicz, P., Kuhn, J., Küchemann, S., & Karolus, J. (2024). Unreflected

acceptance – Investigating the negative consequences of CHATGPT-Assisted problem solving in

Physics education. In Frontiers in artificial intelligence and applications.

[Link]

Matzinger, K. (2023, July 27). The rising trend of teens using AI for schoolwork. Junior

Achievement USA. [Link]

schoolwork?fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR1f8GNktwLi-jT-

eUtG4dYfQGOObOFLKSh1lmrOr-jTPH9aIcMeYJFuR0c_aem_kDpvwifs4YwD1QuMO-fgvA

Montenegro-Rueda, M., Fernández-Cerero, J., Fernández-Batanero, J. M., & López-Meneses, E.

(2023). Impact of the implementation of CHATGPT in Education: A Systematic review.

Computers, 12(8), 153. [Link]

Philippines ranks 4th in global ChatGPT use—World Bank. (n.d.). Manila Bulletin.

[Link]

fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR0kJXnVAcQ7r02w17BBAKEK9b3Ci3p0OBE88FBUWN

T4UnsJvqGb7ivjx-M_aem_mNdrYXcHYmvPNpd32pWsqA

Rosenbaum, E. (2024b, June 11). AI is getting very popular among students and teachers, very

quickly. CNBC. [Link]

[Link]

Shah, P., Raheja, A., Sridhar, H., Shah, P., Raheja, A., & Sridhar, H. (2024, February 7). How do

students use ChatGPT? The Michigan Daily. [Link]

students-use-chatgpt/?

fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR1i1aK1SIIvSvanE1dDgdtAT7_d5K-

6vDelfYKyCv1lQdwlASe-wDnK3MA_aem_tQEPYT1J8gD67BC41p9mMw
Statista. (2024, August 12). Use of ChatGPT worldwide in 2023, by age and gender.

[Link]

fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR2aO4ItZnfd1mm1cA3_VzZscqfedtmQgAOAFA7I-

gdQk8U1yHhu1yaSiKs_aem

Tapalova, O., & Zhiyenbayeva, N. (n.d.). Artificial Intelligence in Education: AIED for

Personalised Learning Pathways. [Link]

id=EJ1373006&fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR1NqnsZoH7qUPmjTCbHMSvPkCXykfs

Qqavz-vRhLMck4-xhG6Y5u7fdTnw_aem_9O2aXbyd9oomEX2OdfWMSg

The future of learning: AI is revolutionizing education 4.0. (2024, September 12). World

Economic Forum. [Link]

education-4-0/?fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR0Q6bhU0GkpYGLKSZaOgbe_l-

N1ZnxV5bXydAsiXeHXUftC0aGsH5OsbnE_aem_CSVGagJB8kmojb62UfpzYg

Yu, C., Yan, J., & Cai, N. (2024). ChatGPT in higher education: factors influencing ChatGPT

user satisfaction and continued use intention. Frontiers in Education, 9.

[Link]

Zawacki-Richter, O., Marín, V. I., Bond, M., & 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).

[Link]
 Appendix

A. Permission to Conduct the Study

B. Permission to Conduct Pilot-testing of the Instruments
C. Validation letter (per validator)
D. Validated instrument
E. Validity of Instruments
F. Reliability of Instruments
G. Questionnaires
H. Certificate of Statistical treatment
I. Certificate of Plagiarism scan
J. Certificate of Grammarian
K. Curriculum Vitae per Authors