Cilt 12 Sayı 4 (2024): Business & Management Studies: An International Journal
Makaleler

Turizm eğitiminde yapay zekâ modellerinin potansiyeli: Sınav performansı ve etik tartışmalar

PDF (İngilizce)
  • Levent Selman Göktaş
Levent Selman Göktaş
Dr. Öğretim Üyesi, Harran Üniversitesi, Şanlıurfa, Türkiye

Yayınlanmış 25.12.2024

Anahtar Kelimeler

  • ChatGPT, Google Gemini, Exam, Tourism
  • ChatGPT, Google Gemini, Sınav, Turizm

Nasıl Atıf Yapılır

Turizm eğitiminde yapay zekâ modellerinin potansiyeli: Sınav performansı ve etik tartışmalar. (2024). Business & Management Studies: An International Journal, 12(4), 989-1001. https://doi.org/10.15295/bmij.v12i4.2445

Telif Hakkı (c) 2024 Levent Selman Göktaş

Creative Commons License

Bu çalışma Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License ile lisanslanmıştır.

Nasıl Atıf Yapılır

Turizm eğitiminde yapay zekâ modellerinin potansiyeli: Sınav performansı ve etik tartışmalar. (2024). Business & Management Studies: An International Journal, 12(4), 989-1001. https://doi.org/10.15295/bmij.v12i4.2445

Öz

Bu çalışma ChatGPT Plus ve Google Gemini Advanced’ın turizm işletmeciliği, turizm pazarlaması ve turizm ekonomisi derslerindeki sınav performanslarını lisans öğrencilerinin sınav performansıyla karşılaştırmayı amaçlamıştır. Harran Üniversitesi Turizm Fakültesi'nde öğrenim görmekte olan ve bu üç ders özelinde eğitimini tamamlamış 150 öğrenci seçilerek yapay zeka modelleri ile birlikte sınavlara dahil edilmiştir. Sınavda her bir ders için alanında uzman akademisyenler tarafından 25 adet soru oluşturulmuştur. Sonuçlar, ChatGPT'nin en yüksek genel doğruluk oranına ve en düşük yanlış yanıt sayısına sahip olduğunu göstermiştir. ChatGPT turizm ekonomisi sınavında 21 doğru cevap verirken, Google Gemini 18, öğrenciler ise 16,6 doğru cevap vermiştir. Turizm pazarlaması sınavında ChatGPT 19, Google Gemini 18 öğrenciler ise 14,9 doğru cevap vermiştir. Turizm işletmeciliği sınavında ise ChatGPT 22, Google Gemini 14, öğrenciler ise 16,3 soruya doğru cevap vermiştir. Ayrıca sorular kısa, uzun, kolay soru, orta zorlukta soru, zor soru, olumsuz cümle ve senaryo soruları olarak kategorilendirilmiştir. Sonuçlar incelendiğinde tüm kategorilerde ChatGPT'nin daha başarılı olduğu görülmüştür. Yapay zeka dil modelleri belirli sınav koşullarında lisans öğrencilerinden daha etkili olsa da, bu çalışma bu teknolojilerin eğitimde kullanımını optimize etmek ve doğrulamak için daha fazla araştırmaya ihtiyaç olduğunu vurgulamaktadır. Ayrıca araştırma sonucunda yapay zeka dil modellerinin gelecekte turizm eğitiminde dönüştürücü bir rol oynayabileceği düşünülmektedir. Yapay zekâ teknolojilerinin akademik ortamlarda etik ve etkili kullanımını sağlamak için sorumlu entegrasyonun, insan gözetiminin ve daha fazla doğrulama çalışmasının gerektirdiği de önemli bir bulgu olarak karşımıza çıkmıştır.

PDF (İngilizce)

Referanslar

  1. Ahmed, I., Kajol, M., Hasan, U., Datta, P. P., Roy, A., & Reza, M. R. (2023). ChatGPT vs. Bard: A Comparative Study. UMBC Student Collection. https://doi.org/10.36227/techrxiv.23536290.v2
  2. Akova, O., Kızılırmak, İ., & Tanrıverdi, H. (2015). Turizm İşletmeciliği Temel Kavramlar ve Uygulamalar. (9th Edition). Detay Yayıncılık. Ankara.
  3. Ali, R., Tang, O. Y., Connolly, I. D., Fridley, J. S., Shin, J. H., Sullivan, P. L. Z., ... & Asaad, W. F. (2023). Performance of ChatGPT, GPT-4, and Google Bard on a neurosurgery oral boards preparation question bank. Neurosurgery, 10-1227. https://doi.org/10.1227/neu.0000000000002551
  4. Aloisi, C. (2023). The future of standardised assessment: Validity and trust in algorithms for assessment and scoring. European Journal of Education, 58(1), 98-110. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12542
  5. Angel, M., Patel, A., Alachkar, A., & Baldi, P. F. (2023). Clinical Knowledge and Reasoning Abilities of AI Large Language Models in Pharmacy: A Comparative Study on the NAPLEX Exam. bioRxiv, 2023-06. https://doi.org/10.1101/2023.06.07.544055
  6. Aydın, Ö. (2023). Google Bard Generated Literature Review: Metaverse. Journal of AI, 7 (1), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.61969/jai.1311271
  7. Badat, T., Usgu, G., Dinler, E., Bayramlar, K., & Yakut, Y. (2020). Çoktan seçmeli sınavlarda kullanılan ölçme ve değerlendirme sisteminin uygulanması: Madde analiz örneği. Hacettepe University Faculty of Health Sciences Journal, 7(3), 285-295. https://doi.org/10.21020/husbfd.629548
  8. Brown, T., Mann, B., Ryder, N., Subbiah, M., Kaplan, J. D., Dhariwal, P., ... & Amodei, D. (2020). Language models are few-shot learners. Advances in Neural İnformation Processing Systems, 33, 1877-1901. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2005.14165
  9. Cadiente, A., Chen, J., Kasselman, L., & Pilkington, B. (2024). Large language models take on the AAMC situational judgment test: evaluating dilemma-based scenarios. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education. https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-4560463/v1
  10. Caramancion, K. M. (2023). News verifiers showdown: A comparative performance evaluation of chatgpt 3.5, chatgpt 4.0, bing ai, and Bard in news fact-checking. arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.17176. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2306.17176
  11. Castellanos-Gomez, A. (2023). Good Practices for Scientific Article Writing with ChatGPT and Other Artificial Intelligence Language Models. Nanomanufacturing, 3(2), 135-138. https://doi.org/10.3390/nanomanufacturing3020009
  12. Chen, L., Chen, P., & Lin, Z. (2020). Artificial intelligence in education: A review. IEEE Access, 8, 75264-75278. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2988510.
  13. Cheong, R. C. T., Pang, K. P., Unadkat, S., Mcneillis, V., Williamson, A., Joseph, J., ... & Paleri, V. (2024). Performance of artificial intelligence chatbots in sleep medicine certification board exams: ChatGPT versus Google Bard. European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, 281(4), 2137-2143. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-023-08381-3
  14. Choi, J. H., Hickman, K. E., Monahan, A., & Schwarcz, D. (2023). ChatGPT goes to law school. Minnesota Legal Studies Research. Paper No. 23-03, http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4335905
  15. Cotton, D. R., Cotton, P. A., & Shipway, J. R. (2023). Chatting and cheating: Ensuring academic integrity in the era of ChatGPT. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2023.2190148
  16. Currie, G. M. (2023). Academic integrity and artificial intelligence: is ChatGPT hype, hero or heresy?. In Seminars in Nuclear Medicine. WB Saunders. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.semnuclmed.2023.04.008
  17. Dergaa, I., Chamari, K., Zmijewski, P., & Saad, H. B. (2023). From human writing to artificial intelligence generated text: examining the prospects and potential threats of ChatGPT in academic writing. Biology of Sport, 40(2), 615-622. https://doi.org/10.5114/biolsport.2023.125623
  18. Eken, S. (2023). Ethic wars: Student and educator attitudes in the context of ChatGPT. SSRN. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4365433
  19. Essel, H. B., Vlachopoulos, D., Tachie-Menson, A., Johnson, E. E., & Baah, P. K. (2022). The impact of a virtual teaching assistant (chatbot) on students' learning in Ghanaian higher education. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 19(1), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-022-00362-6
  20. Farrokhnia, M., Banihashem, S. K., Noroozi, O., & Wals, A. (2023). A SWOT analysis of ChatGPT: Implications for educational practice and research. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2023.2195846
  21. Frieder, S., Pinchetti, L., Griffiths, R. R., Salvatori, T., Lukasiewicz, T., Petersen, P. C., Chevalier, A., & Berner, J. (2023). Mathematical capabilities of ChatGPT. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2301.13867
  22. Gilson, A., Safranek, C., Huang, T., Socrates, V., Chi, L., Taylor, R. A., & Chartash, D. (2022). How welldoes ChatGPT do when taking the medical licensing exams? The implications of large languagemodels for medical education and knowledge assessment. medRxiv. https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.12.23.22283901
  23. Gimpel, H., Hall, K., Decker, S., Eymann, T., Lämmermann, L., Mädche, A., ... & Vandrik, S. (2023). Unlocking the power of generative AI models and systems such as GPT-4 and ChatGPT for higher education: A guide for students and lecturers (No. 02-2023). Hohenheim Discussion Papers in Business, Economics and Social Sciences.
  24. Göktaş, L. S. (2023a). ChatGPT Uzaktan Eğitim Sınavlarında Başarılı Olabilir Mi? Turizm Alanında Doğruluk ve Doğrulama Üzerine Bir Araştırma (Can ChatGPT Succeed in Distance Education Exams? A Research on Accuracy and Verification in Tourism). Journal of Tourism & Gastronomy Studies, 11(2), 892–905. https://doi.org/10.21325/jotags.2023.122
  25. Göktaş, L. S. (2023b). The role of ChatGPT in vegetarian menus. Tourism and Recreation, 5(2), 79-86. https://doi.org/10.53601/tourismandrecreation.1343598
  26. Grassini, S. (2023). Shaping the Future of Education: Exploring the Potential and Consequences of AI and ChatGPT in Educational Settings. Education Sciences, 13(7), 692. MDPI AG. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/educsci13070692
  27. Halaweh, M. (2023). ChatGPT in education: Strategies for responsible implementation. Contemporary Educational Technology, Volume 15, Issue 2, Article No: ep421 https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/13036
  28. Haverkamp, W., Tennenbaum, J., & Strodthoff, N. (2023). ChatGPT fails the test of evidence-based medicine. European Heart Journal-Digital Health, https://doi.org/10.1093/ehjdh/ztad043
  29. Hien, H. T., Cuong, P. N., Nam, L. N. H., Nhung, H. L. T. K., & Thang, L. D. (2018). Intelligent assistants in higher-education environments: the FIT-EBot, a chatbot for administrative and learning support. In Proceedings of the 9th International Symposium on Information and Communication Technology (pp. 69-76). https://doi.org/10.1145/3287921.3287937
  30. Hirosawa, T., Mizuta, K., Harada, Y., & Shimizu, T. (2023). Comparative Evaluation of Diagnostic Accuracy Between Google Bard and Physicians. The American Journal of Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjmed.2023.08.003
  31. Ilgaz, H. B., & Çelik, Z. (2023). The Significance of Artificial Intelligence Platforms in Anatomy Education: An Experience With ChatGPT and Google Bard. Cureus, 15(9). https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.45301
  32. Iskender, A. (2023). Holy or Unholy? Interview with Open AI's ChatGPT. European Journal of Tourism Research, 34, 3414. https://doi.org/10.54055/ejtr.v34i.3169
  33. Jiao, W., Wang, W., Huang, J. T., Wang, X., & Tu, Z. (2023). Is ChatGPT A Good Translator? Yes With GPT-4 As The Engine. arXiv preprint arXiv:2301.08745. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2301.08745
  34. Kalla, D., & Smith, N. (2023). Study and Analysis of Chat GPT and its Impact on Different Fields of Study. International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology, 8(3). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4402499
  35. Kasneci, E., Sessler, K., Küchemann, S., Bannert, M., Dementieva, D., Fischer, F., ... & Kasneci, G. (2023). ChatGPT for good? On opportunities and challenges of large language models for education. Learning and individual differences, 103, 102274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2023.102274
  36. Koetsier, J. (2023). GPT-4 Beats 90% of Lawyers Trying to Pass the Bar. Forbes. (Access Date: 19.09.2023). https://www.forbes.com/sites/johnkoetsier/2023/03/14/gpt-4-beats-90-of-lawyers-trying-to-pass-the-bar/?sh=36a0d3053027
  37. Kortemeyer, G. (2023). Could an artificial-intelligence agent pass an introductory physics course? Physical Review Physics Education Research, 19, 010132. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.19.010132
  38. Kozak, M. & Bahar, O. (2023). Turizm Ekonomisi. (9th Edition). Detay Yayıncılık. Ankara.
  39. Kozak, N. (2019). Turizm Pazarlaması. (8th Edition). Detay Yayıncılık. Ankara.
  40. Kshirsagar, P. R., Jagannadham, D. B. V., Alqahtani, H., Noorulhasan Naveed, Q., Islam, S., Thangamani, M., & Dejene, M. (2022). Human intelligence analysis through perception of AI in teaching and learning. Computational Intelligence and Neuroscience, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/9160727
  41. Kung, T. H., Cheatham, M., Medenilla, A., Sillos, C., De Leon, L., Elepaño, C., Madriaga, M., Aggabao,R., Diaz-Candido, G., Maningo, J., & Tseng, V. (2023). Performance of ChatGPT on USMLE: Potential for AI-assisted medical education using large language models. PLOS Digital Health. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pdig.0000198
  42. Lund, B. D., Wang, T., Mannuru, N. R., Nie, B., Shimray, S., & Wang, Z. (2023). ChatGPT and a new academic reality: Artificial Intelligence‐written research papers and the ethics of the large language models in scholarly publishing. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 74(5), 570-581. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24750
  43. Malinka, K., Peresíni, M., Firc, A., Hujnák, O., & Janus, F. (2023). On the educational impact of ChatGPT: Is Artificial Intelligence ready to obtain a university degree?. In Proceedings of the 2023 Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education V. 1 (pp. 47-53). https://doi.org/10.1145/3587102.3588827
  44. Metz C. & Collins K. (2023). El nuevo GPT-4: lo bueno y lo malo-The New York Times. Access date 20/09/2024 https://www.nytimes.com/es/2023/03/18/espanol/gpt-4-como-funciona.html
  45. Najafali, D., Reiche, E., Araya, S., Camacho, J. M., Liu, F. C., Johnstone, T., ... & Fox, P. M. (2023). Bard Versus the 2022 American Society of Plastic Surgeons In-Service Examination: Performance on the Examination in its Intern Year. In Aesthetic Surgery Journal Open Forum. https://doi.org/10.1093/asjof/ojad066
  46. Newton, P. M., & Xiromeriti, M. (2023). ChatGPT performance on MCQ-based exams. EdArXiv. https://doi.org/10.35542/osf.io/sytu3
  47. Nguyen, P., Nguyen, P., Bruneau, P., Cao, L., Wang, J. & Truong, H. (2023). Evaluation of Mathematics Performance of Google Bard on The Mathematics Test of the Vietnamese National High School Graduation Examination. TechRxiv. Preprint. https://doi.org/10.36227/techrxiv.23691876.v1
  48. Patil, N. S., Huang, R. S., van der Pol, C. B., & Larocque, N. (2023). Comparative performance of ChatGPT and Bard in a text-based radiology knowledge assessment. Canadian Association of Radiologists Journal, https://doi.org/10.1177/08465371231193716
  49. Phong, N., Truong, H., Phuong, N., Philippe, B., Linh, C., & Jin, W. (2023). Google Bard's Physical Capabilities in Vietnamese High Schools. SSRN. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4525863
  50. Plevris, V., Papazafeiropoulos, G., & Rios, A. J. (2023). Chatbots put to the test in math and logic problems: A preliminary comparison and assessment of ChatGPT-3.5, ChatGPT-4, and Google Bard. arXiv preprint. ArXiv:2305.18618. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2305.18618
  51. Popenici, S.A.D., Kerr, S. (2017). Exploring the impact of artificial intelligence on teaching and learning in higher education. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 12, 22 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41039-017-0062-8
  52. Qadir, J. (2022). Engineering Education in the Era of ChatGPT: Promise and Pitfalls of Generative AI for Education. 2023 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON). https://doi.org/10.1109/EDUCON54358.2023.10125121
  53. Qin, H., Ji, G. P., Khan, S., Fan, D. P., Khan, F. S., & Gool, L. V. (2023). How good is Google Bard's visual understanding? An empirical study on open challenges. Mach. Intell. Res. 20, 605–613 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11633-023-1469-x
  54. Rahaman, M. S., Ahsan, M. M., Anjum, N., Rahman, M. M., & Rahman, M. N. (2023). The AI race is on! Google's Bard and OpenAI's ChatGPT head to head: An opinion article. SRRN. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4351785
  55. Rahman, M., & Watanobe, Y. (2023). ChatGPT for Education and Research: Opportunities, Threats, and Strategies. Applied Sciences, 13(9), 5783. MDPI AG. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/app13095783
  56. Rudolph, J., Tan, S., & Tan, S. (2023). War of the chatbots: Bard, Bing Chat, ChatGPT, Ernie and beyond. The new AI gold rush and its impact on higher education. Journal of Applied Learning and Teaching, 6(1). https://doi.org/10.37074/jalt.2023.6.1.23
  57. Sandu, N., & Gide, E. (2019). Adoption of AI-Chatbots to enhance student learning experience in higher education in India. In 2019 18th International Conference on Information Technology Based Higher Education and Training (ITHET) (pp. 1-5). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ITHET46829.2019.8937382
  58. Skalidis, I., Cagnina, A., Luangphiphat, W., Mahendiran, T., Muller, O., Abbe, E., & Fournier, S. (2023). ChatGPT takes on the European Exam in Core Cardiology: an artificial intelligence success story?. European Heart Journal-Digital Health, 4(3), 279-281. https://doi.org/10.1093/ehjdh/ztad029
  59. Skavronskaya, L., Hadinejad, A., & Cotterell, D. (2023). Reversing the threat of artificial intelligence to opportunity: a discussion of ChatGPT in tourism education. Journal of Teaching in Travel & Tourism, 23(2), 253-258. https://doi.org/10.1080/15313220.2023.2196658
  60. Sok, S., & Heng, K. (2023). ChatGPT for education and research: A review of benefits and risks. SSRN. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4378735
  61. Susnjak, T. (2022). ChatGPT: The end of online exam integrity?. arXiv preprint arXiv:2212.09292. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2212.09292
  62. Terwiesch, C. (2023). Would chat GPT3 get a Wharton MBA. A prediction based on its performance in the operations management course. Wharton: Mack Institute for Innovation Management/University of Pennsylvania/School Wharton. Available at: https://mackinstitute.wharton.upenn.edu/2023/would-chat-gpt3-get-a-wharton-mba-new-white-paper-by-christian-terwiesch/
  63. Timakov, К. А. (2023). Comparison of current language models Google Bard and ChatGPT. In. Modern strategies and digital transformations of sustainable development of society, education and science (pp. 168-171). https://doi.org/10.34755/IROK.2023.93.45.076
  64. Urman, A. & Makhortykh, M. (2023). The Silence of the LLMs: Cross-Lingual Analysis of Political Bias and False Information Prevalence in ChatGPT, Google Bard, and Bing Chat. OSF Preprints. https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/q9v8f
  65. Vakilzadeh, A. & Pourahmad Ghalejoogh, S. (2023). Evaluating the Potential of Large Language Model AI as Project Management Assistants: A Comparative Simulation to Evaluate GPT-3.5, GPT-4, and Google-Bard Ability to pass the PMI's PMP test. SSRN. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4568800
  66. Wang, Y., & Chen, D. (2018). Rising sino-US competition in artificial intelligence. China Quarterly of International Strategic Studies, 4(02), 241-258. https://doi.org/10.1142/S2377740018500148
  67. Wardat, Y., Tashtoush, M. A., AlAli, R., & Jarrah, A. M. (2023). ChatGPT: A revolutionary tool for teaching and learning mathematics. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 19(7), em2286. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/13272
  68. Yadava, O. P. (2023). ChatGPT-a foe or an ally? Indian J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. 39, 217–221. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12055-023-01507-6
  69. Yang, S., & Evans, C. (2019). Opportunities and challenges in using AI chatbots in higher education. In Proceedings of the 2019 3rd International Conference on Education and E-Learning (pp. 79-83). https://doi.org/10.1145/3371647.3371659
  70. Yu, H. (2023). Reflection on whether Chat GPT should be banned by academia from the perspective of education and teaching. Front. Psychol. 14:1181712. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1181712

Benzer Makaleler

Bu makale için ayrıca gelişmiş bir benzerlik araması başlat yapabilirsiniz.