The recent advancement of large language models presents numerous opportunities for teaching and learning. Despite widespread public debate regarding the use of large language models, empirical research on their opportunities and risks in education remains limited. In this work, we demonstrate the qualities and shortcomings of using ChatGPT 3.5 for physics task development by prospective teachers. In a randomized controlled trial, 26 prospective physics teacher students were divided into two groups: the first group used ChatGPT 3.5 to develop text-based physics tasks for four different concepts in the field of kinematics for 10th-grade high school students, while the second group used a classical textbook to create tasks for the same concepts and target group. The results indicate no difference in task correctness, but students using the textbook achieved a higher clarity and more frequently embedded their questions in a meaningful context. Both groups adapted the level of task difficulty easily to the target group but struggled strongly with sufficient task specificity, i.e., relevant information to solve the tasks was missing. Students using ChatGPT for problem posing rated high system usability but experienced difficulties with output quality. These results provide insights into the opportunities and pitfalls of using large language models in education.

Generative AI technologies such as large language models show novel potential to enhance educational research. For example, generative large language models were shown to be capable of solving quantitative reasoning tasks in physics and concept tests such as the Force Concept Inventory (FCI). Given the importance of such concept inventories for physics education research, and the challenges in developing them such as field testing with representative populations, this study seeks to examine to what extent a generative large language model could be utilized to generate a synthetic dataset for the FCI that exhibits content-related variability in responses. We use the recently introduced ChatGPT based on the GPT 4 generative large language model and investigate to what extent ChatGPT could solve the FCI accurately (RQ1) and could be prompted to solve the FCI as if it were a student belonging to a different cohort (RQ2). Furthermore, we study, to what extent ChatGPT could be prompted to solve the FCI as if it were a student having a different force- and mechanics-related preconception (RQ3). In alignment with other research, we found that ChatGPT could accurately solve the FCI. We furthermore found that prompting ChatGPT to respond to the inventory as if it belonged to a different cohort yielded no variance in responses, however, responding as if it had a certain preconception introduced much variance in responses that approximate real human responses on the FCI in some regards.

This paper provides a first example of experiments in this column using smartphones as experimental tools. More examples concerning this special tool will follow in the next issues. The differences between a smartphone and a “regular” cell phone are that smartphones offer more advanced computing ability and connectivity. Smartphones combine the functions of personal digital assistants (PDAs) and cell phones.

Currently an increasing number of head mounted displays (HMD) for virtual and augmented reality (VR/AR) are equipped with integrated eye trackers. Use cases of these integrated eye trackers include rendering optimization and gaze-based user interaction. In addition, visual attention in VR and AR is interesting for applied research based on eye tracking in cognitive or educational sciences for example. While some research toolkits for VR already exist, only a few target AR scenarios. In this work, we present an open-source eye tracking toolkit for reliable gaze data acquisition in AR based on Unity 3D and the Microsoft HoloLens 2, as well as an R package for seamless data analysis. Furthermore, we evaluate the spatial accuracy and precision of the integrated eye tracker for fixation targets with different distances and angles to the user ($n=21$). On average, we found that gaze estimates are reported with an angular accuracy of $0.83$ degrees and a precision of $0.27$ degrees while the user is resting, which is on par with state-of-the-art mobile eye trackers.