Conversational vs Command-Driven AI Tools: Students’ Perception, Engagement and Effectiveness

Engineering notes

Engineering notes will be added by the aipentium editorial team.

Chinese explanation / 中文解读

中文解读待补充：本站会优先为大语言模型、生成式AI、ChatGPT相关技术、计算机视觉、深度学习等高价值论文补充中文说明。

Original abstract

As AI technology evolves rapidly in the past few years, its integration into classroom teaching and learning has now become prevalent, especially in the context of higher education. In Singapore, for example, the conduct of teaching and learning (and assessment) generally involves the use of AI tools, though the extent of use varies from classrooms to classrooms.Given the vast varieties of currently available AI tools for educational purposes, there is a need for educators to evaluate them and to select the most appropriate ones for their own context. For example, when giving formative feedback to students, it is important to understand whether a conversational chatbot (like ChatGPT but customized to the task) or a command-driven AI tool (where students upload their draft and get AI-feedback generated for them with the hit of a button) is more effective and leads to better learning. These two different types of AI tools require different AI-interactional skills and lead to cognitive engagement levels at students’ end and impact the way the scaffolding tasks are designed at the teacher’s end.This presentation will report on the result of such an evaluation – comparing a conversational chatbot <b><i>Cogniti</i></b> Vs a command-driven AI tool <b><i>Timely Grader</i></b> in giving formative feedback to students’ essay drafts (N =87). Through Extended TAM (El Hosayny et al., 2025; Venkatesh &amp; Davis, 2000), this presentation will explore students’ perceptions of and engagement with the tools, and report on their effectiveness in the context of a communication class in a Singaporean university.

Links and sources

Comments