Analysis of Lecturer and Student Perspectives on ChatGPT Utilization for Completing Assignments in Business Education
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.55606/ijel.v4i2.252Keywords:
Artificial Intelligence, ChatGPT, Education, Lecturer, StudentAbstract
Chat Generative Pretrained Transformer (ChatGPT) has rapidly gained popularity and is increasingly utilized across various fields, including education, where it plays a significant role as a supporting tool for academic tasks. In the educational context, ChatGPT can assist students in preparing and completing a wide range of assignments, providing quick access to structured information and alternative perspectives. This study was designed to explore the views of both students and lecturers on the integration of ChatGPT in academic activities, specifically as a support system for handling student assignments. Employing a descriptive qualitative approach, data were collected through interviews with 5 students and 6 lecturers from the Business Education Study Program at the State University of Surabaya. The findings reveal contrasting yet complementary perspectives. From the students’ point of view, ChatGPT offers considerable benefits, particularly in enhancing independence, efficiency, and time management when working on lecture assignments. However, these advantages are accompanied by drawbacks, such as decreased creativity, reduced critical thinking, and diminished interest in consulting traditional learning resources like books. On the other hand, lecturers acknowledge the usefulness of ChatGPT in simplifying student work and accelerating the completion of assignments but express concerns regarding the overreliance on artificial intelligence, which could potentially hinder the development of essential academic skills. Overall, the research suggests that while ChatGPT presents valuable opportunities to enhance learning processes, it must be applied thoughtfully, with careful guidance from educators to balance efficiency with the cultivation of creativity, critical thinking, and academic integrity.
References
Bahri, S. (2017). Methodology study education. Jakarta, Indonesia: Bumi Aksara.
Castro, R. A. G., Mayta Cachicatari, N. A., Bartesaghi Aste, W. M., & Llapa Medina, M. P. (2024). Exploration of ChatGPT in basic education: Advantages, disadvantages, and its impact on school tasks. Contemporary Educational Technology, 16(3), ep511. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/14615
Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008
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. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13070692
Harrison, H., Birks, M., Franklin, R., & Mills, J. (2017). Case study research: Foundations and methodological orientations. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 18(1). https://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-18.1.2655
Jo, H. (2024). From concerns to benefits: A comprehensive study of ChatGPT usage in education. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 21(35). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-024-00471-4
Julianto, A., Santoso, H., & Prasetyo, Y. (2023). Utilization chatbot based intelligence artificial for education. Journal Technology Education, 25(2), 112–123.
Li, M., Enkhtur, A., Cheng, F., & Yamamoto, B. A. (2023). Ethical implications of ChatGPT in higher education: A scoping review. arXiv Preprints. https://arxiv.org/abs/2311.14378
Maulana, R. (2023). Utilization ChatGPT as a learning medium based intelligence artificial. Journal Innovation Education, 10(1), 45–54.
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Panagopoulou, F., Parpoula, C., & Karpouzis, K. (2023). Legal and ethical considerations regarding the use of ChatGPT in education. arXiv Preprints. https://arxiv.org/abs/2306.10037 https://doi.org/10.31235/osf.io/c5hf3
Reiser, R. A., & Dempsey, J. V. (2018). Trends and issues in instructional design and technology (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.
Saldaña, J., Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Saraswati, R., Adityas, D., & Nugraha, A. (2023). The influence use ChatGPT to behavior student in finish assignment. Journal Technology and Education, 8(2), 55–64.
Satori, D., & Komariah, A. (2011). Qualitative research methodology. Bandung, Indonesia: Alfabeta.
Shahzad, M. F., Xu, S., & Javed, I. (2024). ChatGPT awareness, acceptance, and adoption in higher education: The role of trust as a cor-nerstone. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 21(46). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-024-00478-x
Singh, Y. N., & Yaduvanshi, S. (2015). Constructivism in education. International Journal of Education, 5(1), 89–93.
Supriyadi, E. (2022). Utilization technology intelligence artificial in world education. Journal Scientific Technology and Education, 9(2), 77–85.
Susnjak, T. (2022). ChatGPT: Opportunities and challenges for online education. Journal of Applied Learning & Teaching, 5(2), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.37074/jalt.2022.5.2.9
Sok, S., & Heng, K. (2024). Opportunities, challenges, and strategies for using ChatGPT in higher education: A literature review. Journal of Digital Educational Technology, 4(1), ep2401. https://doi.org/10.30935/jdet/14027
Zhai, X. (2023). ChatGPT for future education: Opportunities and challenges. Educational Technology Research and Development, 71, 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-023-10141-6
Zheldibayeva, R., de O. Nascimento, A. K., Castro, V., Kalantzis, M., & Cope, B. (2025). The impact of AI-driven tools on student writing development: A case study from the CGScholar AI Helper Project. arXiv Preprints. https://arxiv.org/abs/2501.08473 https://doi.org/10.30935/ojcmt/16738
Bushard, B. (2023, January 10). Fake scientific abstracts written by ChatGPT fooled scientists, study finds. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/brianbushard/2023/01/10/fake-scientific-abstracts-written-by-chatgpt-fooled-scientists-study-finds/
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 International Journal of Education and Literature

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.