Using ChatGPT during technology learning produces significantly higher post-test learning outcomes than conventional learning in a quasi-experiment of two classes of 31 students¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causalr1·q2
Currency · newest study 2023 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q2 i? Experimental class students using ChatGPT scored significantly higher on the final test than control class students using conventional methods (t count = 5.424 > t table = 2.000, df = 60, α = 0.05). → Hakiki 2023
Evidence¶
Hakiki 2023¶
Hakiki, M., Fadli, R., Samala, A. D., Fricticarani, A., Dayurni, P., Rahmadani, K., Astiti, A. D., & Sabir, A. (2023). Exploring the impact of using Chat-GPT on student learning outcomes in technology learning: The comprehensive experiment. Advances in Mobile Learning Educational Research, 3(2), 859-872. https://doi.org/10.25082/AMLER.2023.02.013
q2 · i? · causal · r1
Quasi-experiment with an experimental class using ChatGPT and a control class using conventional methods, each of 31 students, assessed by final test scores and analyzed with a pooled variance t-test. The article reports "tcount> ttable (5.424> 2.000)" at α = 0.05, so H0 was rejected. No effect size was printed.
"with a value of t count = 5.424 and t table = 2.000, it can be concluded that tcount> ttable (5.424> 2.000). Therefore, the null hypothesis (H0) which states that there is no positive and significant influence on the use of Chat GPT (Generative Pre-trained Transformer) is rejected."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Post-test mean learning outcomes were 81.81 in the ChatGPT class versus 70.45 in the conventional class — possibly the same claim (merge candidate)
- Final-test score distributions concentrated differently by group: the ChatGPT class peaked at interval 79-83 (32.26% of students) while the control class peaked at 56-61 (25.81%) — related
- ChatGPT-enhanced instruction produced significantly higher overall post-test achievement in Grade 12 Quantum Theory than traditional teaching, with a large effect size (η² > 0.14) — related
- ChatGPT-integrated instruction produced significantly higher post-test writing motivation scores than conventional instruction among EFL learners, with a medium effect size — related
- Student interpreters who practiced with an automated scoring system outperformed the control group on total interpreting scores at post-test — related
- Post-test mean differences favored the ChatGPT group on knowing, applying, and reasoning subscales and overall at α=0.05 — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
chatgpt-technology-learning-higher-outcomes |
title |
Using ChatGPT during technology learning produces significantly higher post-test learning outcomes than conventional learning in a quasi-experiment of two classes of 31 students |
description |
Using ChatGPT during technology learning produces significantly higher post-test learning outcomes than conventional learning in a quasi-experiment of two classes of 31 students |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2023 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-16 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — hakiki-2023 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.