CHAPTER 2

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

2.1 LITERATURE REVIEW

This chapter provides an overview of previous research on Assessing the

impact of Using Chat GPT in the academic performance of 1 st year IT Students of

HGBC in Computer Programming, placing them in the context of the study. By

reviewing these studies, researchers obtain valuable direction and understanding,

guaranteeing the importance and precision of their chosen subject. Through analyzing

existing literatures and pinpointing areas lacking in research, this research establishes

a strong basis for our further exploration, setting the stage for generating fresh

perspectives and achievements in the field.

2.1 ChatGPT as an Artificial Intelligence (AI)

Limna et. al (2023), provides a well explained concept on the integration of ChatGPT

brought by the rapid technological advancements; a chatbot driven by artificial

intelligence (AI) across multiple industries, comprising instruction. This study

highlights how ChatGPT serve as a powerful tool nowadays in contributing

immediate responses to questions, allowing educators to focus on more complex

tasks, and can reduced workload. Moreover, the study also raised some concerns

about the accuracy and validity of information provided by the chatbot.

Another related study found was Kamalov et. al (2023) which examined the potential

impact of AI on education through review and analysis of the existing literature across

three major axes: applications, advantages, and challenges. This study focuses on the

use of artificial intelligence in collaborative teacher–student learning, intelligent

tutoring systems, automated assessment, and personalized learning. The adoption of

ChatGPT garnered a wide-range of audience and surprising the people on its

exceptional writing and comprehension skills. Educators at secondary and tertiary

education institutions have raised the alarm over the possibility of the abuse of

ChatGPT by students and called for its restrictions, for instance, School districts in

Australia’s Queensland and Tasmania schools and New York City and Seattle have

prohibited the use of ChatGPT on students’ devices and networks. Despite this, it was

undeniably found students on digital era, impossible to prevent this AI. Nonetheless,

this study suggested to still forward incorporating AI into educational system that

leverage the outcomes of their capabilities while anticipating restrictions.

2.2 Impact of ChatGPT on Education

Adeshola, (2023) explored the challenges and opportunities around the new launched

OpenAI ChatGPT generation model. Many industries, particularly the academic

sector, are alarmed by the release of OpenAI ChatGPT's language-generation model.

After ChatGPT was released, which resolves academic issues in less than a few

minutes, a number of academicians asked institutions to create new forms of

evaluation. The study emphasized academic cheating and intellectual dishonesty as a

new sort of cheating that brings distinct challenge with the use of AI-generated
language to cheat on assignments. With these, educational institutions can lessen the

incorporate less AI-generated text and by creating clear policies and guidelines.

Ngo, (2023), also emphasized the benefits of ChatGPT, according to students,

included saving time, providing information in various areas, providing personalized

tutoring and feedback, and illuminating ideas in writing. More so, several barriers

recognized on using ChatGPT such as inability to assess the quality and reliability of

sources, inability to cite sources accurately, and inability to replace words and use

idioms accurately. Regarding this, it is crucial to have verifying ChatGPT’s responses

with credible sources; using ChatGPT as a reference source or a consultant tool;

offering guidelines for use; and supporting academic integrity to ensure ethical uses of

ChatGPT in an academic context.

2.3 Relationship of ChatGPT on Student Computer Programmers

Xue, (2024), highlights the relationships of using ChatGPT to student Computer

Programmers with their academic performance. The participants had to draw a UML

diagram and then use programming to implement its design while also having a

thorough survey and evaluation upon it. It revealed that 48 of the 56 volunteers who

were enlisted were able to successfully record their screen images. When creating the

UML diagram and programming, participants in the Experimental Group have access

to ChatGPT 3.5 and additional online resources like Google and Stack Overflow; on

the other hand, participants in the Control Group have access to all online resources

except ChatGPT (i.e., the only design variable is the access to ChatGPT). This study

discovered that: (1) utilizing ChatGPT has no discernible effect on students' learning
performance in the CS1 assignment-style tasks; (2) after utilizing ChatGPT, students'

propensity to use other conventional educational resources is largely reduced (though

still present); (3) the majority of students have neutral opinions about ChatGPT's role

in CS1 programming, but the majority of them voiced concerns about its possible

ethical issues and inconsistent performance across different tasks.

2.4 Usage Frequency of ChatGPT based on SEX

Siregar, (2023) shed light on the role of ChatGPT among individuals regarding its

usage level, specifically from students in Medan. The study revealed that males’

students are dominant than female regarding the usage level in ChatGPT.

Additionally, it pointed out that the younger students have high level of ChatGPT

usage rather than the older students towards their academic performance.

2.5 Usage patterns and frequency of Students on ChatGPT

Chivose, (2023), exposing intricate student usage patterns, and elucidating faculty

members' perspectives on ChatGPT integration into instructional strategies.

According to the survey, there are notable adoption rates among faculty (60%),

postgraduates (83.3%), and undergraduates (66.7%). A detailed analysis is conducted

on the variety of engagement patterns, from regular interactions to infrequent use.

Furthermore, the study defines the numerous roles that ChatGPT plays in the

academic area, including tasks such as information retrieval, research facilitation, and

problem-solving. Moreover, according to users, the perceived benefits of ChatGPT

use include essential aspects such as academic support, time efficiency, and increased

creativity. Through these concerns, the study considered recommendations to

policymakers that support thorough adoption strategy, thoughtful policy formulation

that addresses ethical issues, strategic faculty training investment, equitable

accessibility, and the implementation of strong monitoring and evaluation

mechanisms.

2.6 Student satisfaction and Engagement Towards Using ChatGPT

Kwan Lo, (2023), elaborated a three-dimensional framework comprising behavioral,

emotional, and cognitive aspects in response to ChatGPT on student engagement.

According to the findings, there is strong but limited evidence about behavioral

engagement (e.g., using ChatGPT) and disengagement (e.g., academic dishonesty).

There is weak evidence about emotional engagement (e.g., disappointment and

worry/anxiety) and broad but weak evidence about cognitive engagement (e.g.,

improved understanding and positive self-perception) and disengagement (e.g.,

decreased critical thinking and overreliance).

Furthermore, related literature by Abdaljaleel, (2023), provide excellent concept on

factors influencing university students’ attitude in using ChatGPT in Arab countries.

This study verified "TAME-ChatGPT" as a valuable tool for assessing ChatGPT

adoption among university students, as multivariate analysis showed that age,

university type, country of residence, and recent academic success significantly

influenced the attitude towards ChatGPT usage. The successful integration of

ChatGPT in higher education relies on the perceived ease of use, perceived

usefulness, positive attitude towards technology, social influence,

behavioral/cognitive elements, low anxiety, and minimal perceived risks.

THEORITICAL FRAMEWORK

The provided framework discusses various aspects on impact usage of

ChatGPT towards academic performance across different advantages, disadvantages,

emphasizing its frequency based on sex, patterns including its attitude factors and its

relationship to computer programming. ChatGPT significantly serve as powerful tool

across multiple industries, highlighting its positive and negative contributions around

the world (Limna et. al. 2023). The adoption of the ChatGPT which significantly

examined the potential impact of AI on education through review and analysis of the

existing literature across three major axes: applications, advantages, and challenges,

focusing on teacher-student learning and led into some restriction on different schools

in the use of ChatGPT networks to the educators primarily secondary and tertiary

education (Kamalov et. al 2023). Academic cheating and intellectual dishonesty

become a new sort of cheating that brings distinct challenge with the use of AI-

generated language to cheat on assignments (Adeshola, 2023). According to ( Ngo,

2023) benefits of ChatGPT, according to students, included saving time, providing

information in various areas, providing personalized tutoring and feedback, and

illuminating ideas in writing as well as the barriers recognized on using ChatGPT

such as inability to assess the quality and reliability of sources, inability to cite

sources accurately, and inability to replace words and use idioms accurately. For its

relationship to student Computer Programmers in regards to their academic

performance discovered that utilizing ChatGPT has no discernible effect on students'

learning performance in the CS1 assignment-style tasks, after utilizing ChatGPT,

students' propensity to use other conventional educational resources is largely reduced

(though still present, the majority of students have neutral opinions about ChatGPT's

role in CS1 programming, but the majority of them voiced concerns about its possible

ethical issues and inconsistent performance across different tasks (Xue, 2024).

Furthermore, males’ students are dominant than female regarding the usage level in

ChatGPT. Additionally, it pointed out that the younger students have high level of

ChatGPT usage rather than the older students towards their academic performance as

stated by (Siregar et. al., 2023). Exposing intricate student usage patterns, and

elucidating faculty members' perspectives on ChatGPT integration into instructional

strategies and engagements patterns to regular interactions to infrequent use.

According to users, the perceived benefits of ChatGPT use include essential aspects

such as academic support, time efficiency, and increased creativity, (Chivose, 2023).

Three-dimensional framework comprising behavioral, emotional, and cognitive

aspects in response to ChatGPT on student engagement. strong but limited evidence

about behavioral engagement (e.g., using ChatGPT) and disengagement (e.g.,

academic dishonesty). There is weak evidence about emotional engagement (e.g.,

disappointment and worry/anxiety) and broad but weak evidence about cognitive

engagement (e.g., improved understanding and positive self-perception) and

disengagement (e.g., decreased critical thinking and overreliance), (Kwanlo, 2023). In

addition to this, factors influencing university students’ attitude in using ChatGPT are

critical for assessing the influence of ChatGPT adoption and usage to student

attitudes. The successful integration of ChatGPT in higher education relies on the

perceived ease of use, perceived usefulness, positive attitude towards technology,

social influence, behavioral/cognitive elements, low anxiety, and minimal perceived

risks, (Abdaljaleel, 2023). Overall, the framework highlights the multifaceted

approaches needed to assess the adoption and usage of ChatGPT AI tool across

different populations.
 Conceptual Framework

Input Process Output

1. Profile of the 1. Analyzing the profile

respondents in terms of of the respondents.
Prior programming
experience and Frequency [Link] researchers will
of ChatGPT usage conduct a survey that
[Link] does programming involves an activity for
The Impact of using CHAT
performance differ the respondents, a Pre-test
Activity and a Post test GPT in the academic
between students who use
ChatGPT (experimental Programming Activity. performance of 1st year
group) and those who do In the Post Test Half of Information technology
not (control group)? the respondents will
student of HGB College in
3. Does using ChatGPT complete the activity
their Computer
significantly improve the using AI tool (Chat Gpt),
while the other half will Programming subject
programming
performance of 1st-year complete that activity
IT students compared to without AI assistance.
those who do not use it? After the programming
4. What are the activity the experimental
perceptions of students in group will answer the
the experimental group survey to gather their
regarding the usefulness perception regarding the
and effectiveness of usefulness and
ChatGPT in effectiveness of ChatGPT
programming? in programming

Feedback
 Figure No. 1: Paradigm of the Study

The conceptual framework of this study focuses on assessing the impact of ChatGPT

on the programming performance of 1st-year IT students at HGB College. It aims to

compare the programming performance of students who use ChatGPT (experimental

group) with those who do not (control group) while also examining students’

perceptions of ChatGPT’s effectiveness in programming. The inputs include

respondents’ profiles such as prior programming experience and accessibility to AI

tools, the differences in programming performance, such as coding accuracy,

efficiency, and completion time, between students who use ChatGPT (experimental

group) and those who do not (control group) and the experimental group perceptions

of AI’s effectiveness on their academic performance. All these inputs will be assessed

and evaluated through conducting an experimental method a Likert scale survey that

will help determine the impact of AI on the respondent’s Academic Performance.

Research Hypothesis

This study will be guided by the following hypothesis which states that:

Null Hypothesis (Ho): There is no significant difference in programming

performance between students who use ChatGPT and those who do not.

Alternative Hypothesis (Ha): There is a significant difference in programming

performance between students who use ChatGPT and those who do not.
DEFINITION OF TERMS

Key terms are operationally defined to provide clarity throughout the study.

Information Technology (IT) - course offered by Honorato Guzman Baquiran

College that covers the support, administration, and design of telecommunications and

computer systems.

IT Students – in this study, IT students are college students enrolled on the IT course

at HGB College.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) - rrefers to computer systems capable of performing

complex tasks that historically only a human could do, such as reasoning, making

decisions, or solving problems.

Academic Performance - refers to the measurement of student achievement across

various academic subjects.

Assumption of the Study

The study focuses on assessing the impact of using ChatGPT in the academic

performance of 1st year IT Students of HGBC in Computer Programming. The

following assumptions were made:

1. The researchers assumed that the respondents will be a great source of

information and transparency.

2. The researchers assumed that the respondents will be sincere to their responses

in regard to their usage and impact to ChatGPT.

3. The researchers assumed that the respondents’ usage and impact of ChatGPT

may vary on their perception, however there will be similarities.

4. The researchers would thoroughly explicate the purpose of the study and its

relevance to respondents.
 REFERENCES

Abdaljaleel, M., Barakat, M., Alsanafi, M., Salim, N. A., Abazid, H., Malaeb, D., ... &

Sallam, M. (2024). A multinational study on the factors influencing university

students’ attitudes and usage of ChatGPT. Scientific Reports, 14(1), 1983.

[Link]

Adeshola, I., & Adepoju, A. P. (2023). The opportunities and challenges of ChatGPT

in education. Interactive Learning Environments, 1-14.

[Link]

Chivose, E. M. (2023). The Adoption and Usage Patterns of ChatGPT Among

Students and Faculty Members in Higher Education: a Study of the University of

Nairobi, Faculty of Education (Doctoral dissertation, University of Nairobi).

[Link]

Kamalov, F., Santandreu Calonge, D., & Gurrib, I. (2023). New era of artificial

intelligence in education: Towards a sustainable multifaceted

revolution. Sustainability, 15(16), [Link]://[Link]/2071-

1050/15/16/12451

Limna, P., Kraiwanit, T., Jangjarat, K., Klayklung, P., & Chocksathaporn, P. (2023).

The use of ChatGPT in the digital era: Perspectives on chatbot implementation.

Journal of Applied Learning and Teaching, 6(1), 64-74.

[Link]/profile/Pongsakorn-Limna/publication/371013404_The_Use_of_Cha

tGPT_in_the_Digital_Era_Perspectives_on_Chatbot_Implementation/links/

646ff33c6fb1d1682b0ad4ef/The-Use-of-ChatGPT-in-the-Digital-Era-Perspectives-on-

[Link]

Lo, C. K., Hew, K. F., & Jong, M. S. Y. (2024). The influence of ChatGPT on student

engagement: A systematic review and future research agenda. Computers &

Education, 105100.

[Link]

Ngo, T. T. A. (2023). The perception by university students of the use of ChatGPT in

education. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (Online),

18(17), 4.

[Link]

origsite=gscholar&cbl=5452619

Siregar, F. H., Hasmayni, B., & Lubis, A. H. (2023). The Analysis of Chat GPT Usage

Impact on Learning Motivation among Scout Students. International Journal of

Research and Review, 10(7), [Link]://[Link]/profile/Andre-

Lubis/publication/

372448822_The_Analysis_of_Chat_GPT_Usage_Impact_on_Learning_Motivation_a

mong_Scout_Students/links/64b7bc12b9ed6874a52e29ed/The-Analysis-of-Chat-

[Link]
Xue, Y., Chen, H., Bai, G. R., Tairas, R., & Huang, Y. (2024, April). Does ChatGPT

Help With Introductory Programming? An Experiment of Students Using ChatGPT in

CS1. In Proceedings of the 46th International Conference on Software Engineering:

Software Engineering Education and Training (pp. 331-341).

[Link]

Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (2nd ed.).

Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Zawacki-Richter, O., et al. (2019). The Role of Artificial Intelligence in

Education. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education,

16(1), 1–14.