Students’ Perception on AI Technology : Gemini as a Writing Assistant Tool

Dhio Rizky Ananda; Maryati Salmiah

doi:10.31764/leltj.v12i1.24393

Students’ Perception on AI Technology : Gemini as a Writing Assistant Tool

Dhio Rizky Ananda, Maryati Salmiah

Abstract

Student perceptions are very important to educators. Student perceptions lie in how students interpret their educational experiences. Perceptions are shaped by individual experiences, backgrounds and learning styles. AI is becoming increasingly common in many industries, including education, as technology advances. AI is used in education to provide learning content that suits the needs of students. One of them is Gemini. Gemini is a large language model created by Google AI. Gemini is an AI tool that can answer questions in an informative way, even when the questions are open-ended, challenging, or strange. The purpose of this research is to see students' perceptions of the use of AI technology, namely Gemini, as an auxiliary tool in the English Writing process. This research is a qualitative research. This study used the semi-structured interview method, where there are main questions and follow-up questions, where the follow-up questions will be based on the answers to the main questions given at the beginning. This study involved 9 EFL students out of 30 students who had been selected. Most students already have their own AI technology applications, so they think they are reluctant to adapt to AI technology applications like Gemini. But on the other hand, Gemini has many features that are very helpful in the writing process. Although for now students prefer AI technology applications that they have used before compared to Gemini, but when viewed from the perceptions given by students, researchers believe Gemini will be used as a writing tool in the future. This research can provide another option for students to facilitate the writing process so that they do not depend on the AI technology applications they have used before.

Keywords

Gemini; Students’ Perceptions; Writing Process

Full Text:

PDF

References

C. M. Fernández-García, R. Maulana, M. Inda-Caro, M. Helms-Lorenz, and O. García-Pérez, “Student perceptions of secondary education teaching effectiveness: General profile, the role of personal factors, and educational level,” Front. Psychol., vol. 10, no. MAR, 2019, doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00533.

A. Alam and A. Mohanty, “Cultural beliefs and equity in educational institutions: exploring the social and philosophical notions of ability groupings in teaching and learning of mathematics,” International Journal of Adolescence and Youth, vol. 28, no. 1. Routledge, 2023. doi: 10.1080/02673843.2023.2270662.

N. Tebbett, H. Jöns, and M. Hoyler, “Openness towards diversity? Cultural homophily in student perceptions of teaching and learning provided by international and home academics,” Glob. Soc. Educ., vol. 19, no. 5, pp. 522–544, 2021, doi: 10.1080/14767724.2020.1835464.

A. Shoufan, “Exploring Students’ Perceptions of ChatGPT: Thematic Analysis and Follow-Up Survey,” IEEE Access, vol. 11, pp. 38805–38818, 2023, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2023.3268224.

D. Raufelder, L. Nitsche, S. Breitmeyer, S. Keßler, E. Herrmann, and N. Regner, “Students’ perception of ‘good’ and ‘bad’ teachers-Results of a qualitative thematic analysis with German adolescents,” Int. J. Educ. Res., vol. 75, pp. 31–44, 2016, doi: 10.1016/j.ijer.2015.11.004.

M. Prorok, “Applications of artificial intelligence systems,” Deliberationes, vol. 15, no. Különszám, pp. 76–88, 2022, doi: 10.54230/delib.2022.k.sz.76.

L. Chen, P. Chen, and Z. Lin, “Artificial Intelligence in Education: A Review,” IEEE Access, vol. 8, pp. 75264–75278, 2020, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2988510.

M. Usman Hadi et al., “Large Language Models: A Comprehensive Survey of its Applications, Challenges, Limitations, and Future Prospects Large Language Models: A Comprehensive Survey of Applications, Challenges, Limitations, and Future Prospects”, doi: 10.36227/techrxiv.23589741.v4.

V. Plevris, G. Papazafeiropoulos, and A. Jiménez Rios, “Chatbots Put to the Test in Math and Logic Problems: A Comparison and Assessment of ChatGPT-3.5, ChatGPT-4, and Google Bard,” AI, vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 949–969, Dec. 2023, doi: 10.3390/ai4040048.

E. Supriyadi, P. Studi, T. Industri, S. Tinggi, and T. Bandung, “EXPLORING GOOGLE BARD’S (GEMINI) ROLE IN ENHANCING RESEARCH ARTICLES IN COMPUTATIONAL THINKING AND MATHEMATICS EDUCATION Corresponding Author,” Papanda J. Math. Sci. Res., vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 28–37, 2024.

I. Ahmed and R. Islam, “Gemini-the most powerful LLM: Myth or Truth,” 2024, doi: 10.36227/techrxiv.171177477.70151414/v1.

J. Shopovski, “Generative Artificial Intelligence, AI for Scientific Writing: A Literature Review,” 2024, doi: 10.20944/preprints202406.0011.v1.

J. Rudolph, S. Tan, and S. Tan, “War of the chatbots: Bard, Bing Chat, ChatGPT, Ernie and beyond. The new AI gold rush and its impact on higher education,” J. Appl. Learn. Teach., vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 364–389, Jan. 2023, doi: 10.37074/jalt.2023.6.1.23.

B. D. Wale and Y. F. Kassahun, “The Transformative Power of AI Writing Technologies: Enhancing EFL Writing Instruction through the Integrative Use of Writerly and Google Docs,” Hum. Behav. Emerg. Technol., vol. 2024, 2024, doi: 10.1155/2024/9221377.

M. S. Ramírez-Montoya, M. I. Loaiza-Aguirre, A. Zúñiga-Ojeda, and M. Portuguez-Castro, “Characterization of the teaching profile within the framework of education 4.0,” Futur. Internet, vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 1–17, 2021, doi: 10.3390/fi13040091.

S. TÜMEN AKYILDIZ and K. H. AHMED, “An Overview of Qualitative Research and Focus Group Discussion,” Int. J. Acad. Res. Educ., vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 1–15, Dec. 2021, doi: 10.17985/ijare.866762.

S. Mashuri, M. Sarib, A. Rasak, and F. Alhabsyi, “Semi-structured Interview: A Methodological Reflection on the Development of a Qualitative Research Instrument in Educational Studies Ruslin,” vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 22–29, doi: 10.9790/7388-1201052229.

D. I. Prastiawan, S. Aisjah, and R. Rofiaty, “The Effect of Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and Social Influence on the Use of Mobile Banking through the Mediation of Attitude Toward Use,” Asia Pacific Manag. Bus. Appl., vol. 009, no. 03, pp. 243–260, Apr. 2021, doi: 10.21776/ub.apmba.2021.009.03.4.

A. A. Rahsepar, N. Tavakoli, G. H. J. Kim, C. Hassani, F. Abtin, and A. Bedayat, “How AI Responds to Common Lung Cancer Questions: ChatGPT versus Google Bard,” Radiology, vol. 307, no. 5, 2023, doi: 10.1148/radiol.230922.

Bal Ram and Pratima Verma, “Artificial intelligence AI-based Chatbot study of ChatGPT, Google AI Bard and Baidu AI,” World J. Adv. Eng. Technol. Sci., vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 258–261, Feb. 2023, doi: 10.30574/wjaets.2023.8.1.0045.

Gemma Team et al., “Gemma: Open Models Based on Gemini Research and Technology,” 2024, [Online]. Available: http://arxiv.org/abs/2403.08295

M. Waqqor Bukhori, M. Giyaatsusshidqi, N. Agustina, and Y. Sabilal Huda, “Implementasi Penggunaan AI Dalam Proses Pembelajaran Mahasiswa Teknologi Pendidikan Angkatan 2023”.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.31764/leltj.v12i1.24393