K Klockner, E Crawford, D Autenrieth and D Gilkey*

Safety, Health and Industrial Hygiene, Montana Technological University, USA

*Corresponding Author: D Gilkey, Safety, Health and Industrial Hygiene, Montana Technological University, USA.

Received: January 20, 2025; Published: January 30, 2025

Abstract

The use of Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) in the realm of scholarship of learning and teaching is considered a technological innovation for early higher educational adopters. However, whilst many benefits for its implementation in higher education have been proposed, the early stage of its adoption and integration into assessment design allows for a deep exploration into its value from the student perspective, a focus of this paper. Students from a leading North American University enrolled in Safety Science courses were surveyed to ascertain their views on the use of OpenAI’s ChatGPT in their course assessments. Student responses were analysed in accordance with the 4Ps of Pragmatism (Practical, Pluralistic, Participatory and Provisional), a teaching philosophy adopted in the Safety Sciences. Results revealed that ChatGPT met the 4Ps of Pragmatism, suggesting its suitability for developing mastery and competencies in the fields of Occupational Safety and Health. Students were positive (p-value <.0001) toward the use of ChatGPT in their educational journey and as it contributed to enhancing their professional practice through stimulated thinking, problem solving and development of mastery and competencies. The integration of AI technology enhanced provisional learning whereby knowledge is advanced Through practical application, exploration, and iterative refinement.

Keywords: ChatGPT; Safety Science Education; Pragmatism; Occupational Health and Safety; Generative Artificial Intelligence

References

1. Wang Y., et al. “Factors affecting the adoption of AI-based applications in higher education”. Educational Technology and Society3 (2021): 116-129.
2. Wang Y., et al. “Factors affecting the adoption of AI-based applications in higher education”. Educational Technology and Society3 (2021): 116-129.
3. Zawacki-Richter O., et al. “Systematic review of research on artificial intelligence applications in higher education–where are the educators?” International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education1 (2019): 1-27.
4. Hannan E and S Liu. “AI: New source of competitiveness in higher education”. Competitiveness Review: An International Business Journal2 (2023): 265-279.
5. Gweirtz D. “Have 10 Hours? IBM Will Train You in AI Fundamentals - For Free. 3 BLCSR Wire (2024).
6. Hawkins J. “4 free courses to help you master AI like ChatGPT and more”. BGR (2024).
7. Dempere J., et al. “The impact of ChatGPT on higher education”. Frontiers in Education1206936 (2023).
8. Montenegro-Rueda M., et al. “Impact of the Implementation of ChatGPT in Education: A Systematic Review”. Computers 8 (2023): 153.
9. Aithal PS and S Aithal. “Application of Chatgpt in Higher Education and Research - a Futuristic Analysis”. International Journal of Applied Engineering and Management Letters 3 (2023): 168-194.
10. Sullivan M., et al. “ChatGPT in higher education: Considerations for academic integrity and student learning”. Journal of Applied Learning and Teaching1 (2023): 1-10.
11. Cotton DR., et al. “Chatting and cheating: Ensuring academic integrity in the era of ChatGPT”. Innovations in Education and Teaching International2 (2023): 228-239.
12. Dept of Industry, Science and Resources. (2019). Australia’s AI ethical principles”. Australian government (2024).
13. Cebulla A., et al. “Applying ethics to AI in the workplace: the design of a scorecard for Australian workplace health and safety”. AI and society2 (2023): 919-935.
14. Castillo E. “These schools and colleges have banned ChatGPT and similar AI tools”. Best Colleges (2024).
15. Appleby C. “Will college ban Chat GPT?” Best Colleges (2024).
16. Montana Tech. “Artificial intelligence: Text generative tools (2024).
17. Klockner K., et al. “Pragmatism as a teaching philosophy in the safety sciences: A higher education pedagogy perspective”. Safety Science 138 (2021): 105095.
18. Gardener A and K Willey K. “Academic identity reconstructed: The transition of engineering academics to engineering education researchers”. Studies in Higher Education 2 (2018): 234-250.
19. Phillips MJ., et al. “Exploring and critiquing women’s academic identity in higher education: A narrative view”. Sage Open2 (2022): 1-15.
20. Boyer EL. “Scholarship reconsidered: Priorities for the professoriate”. Princeton, NJ: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching (1990).
21. Sørensen OH and D Holman. “A participative intervention to improve employee well-being in knowledge work jobs: A mixed-methods evaluation study”. In Longitudinal Research in Occupational Health Psychology (2017): 132-151.
22. Khawrin MK and EF Nderego. “Opportunities and Challenges of AI towards Education: A Systematic Literature Review”. International Journal of Education and Management Studies3 (2023): 266-271.
23. Church K. “Emerging trends: When can users trust GPT, and when should they intervene?” Natural Language Engineering (2024): 1-11.
24. Sandu N and E Gide. “Adoption of AI-Chatbots to enhance student learning experience in higher education in India”. In 2019 18^th International Conference on Information Technology Based Higher Education and Training (ITHET) (2019): 1-5.
25. Rawas S. “ChatGPT: Empowering lifelong learning in the digital age of higher education”. Education and Information Technologies (2023): 1-14.
26. Brynjolfsson E., et al. “Generative AI at work (No. w31161)”. National Bureau of Economic Research (2023).
27. Nazir A and Z Wang. “A comprehensive survey of ChatGPT: Advancements, applications, prospects, and challenges”. Meta-Radiology (2023): 100022.
28. De la Higuera C and J Iyer. “AI for Teachers: An Open Textbook. Unesco and Nantes University: Pressbooks (2024).

Citation

Citation: D Gilkey., et al. “Role of ChatGPT in Enhancing Safety Science Higher Education: Assessing the 4Ps of Pragmatism". Acta Scientific Agriculture 9.2 (2025): 123-130.

Copyright

Copyright: © 2025 D Gilkey., et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.