Can ChatGPT pass a physics degree? Making a case for reformation of assessment of undergraduate degrees

Abstract The emergence of conversational natural language processing models presents a significant challenge for Higher Education. In this work, we use the entirety of a UK Physics undergraduate (BSc with Honours) degree including all examinations and coursework to test if ChatGPT (GPT-4) can pass a degree. We adopt a ‘maximal cheating’ approach wherein we permit ourselves to modify questions for clarity, split question up into smaller sub-components, expand on answers given—especially for long form written responses, obtaining references, and use of advanced coaching, plug-ins and custom instructions to optimize outputs. In general, there are only certain parts of the degree in question where GPT-4 fails. Explicitly these include compulsory laboratory elements, and the final project which is assessed by a viva. If these were no issue, then GPT-4 would pass with a grade of an upper second class overall. In general, coding tasks are performed exceptionally well, along with simple single-step solution problems. Multiple step problems and longer prose are generally poorer along with interdisciplinary problems. We strongly suggest that there is now a necessity to urgently re-think and revise assessment practice in physics—and other disciplines—due to the existence of AI such as GPT-4. We recommend close scrutiny of assessment tasks: only invigilated in-person examinations, vivas, laboratory skills testing (or ‘performances’ in other disciplines), and presentations are not vulnerable to GPT-4, and urge consideration of how AI can be embedded within the disciplinary context.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
European Journal of Physics
Published
2024-11-28
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6404/ad9874
Citations
9
Primary Topic
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.08

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Can ChatGPT pass a physics degree? Making a case for reformation of assessment of undergraduate degrees

Kevin A. Pimbblet, Lesley Morrell
9 citations
European Journal of Physics
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
1.08
article

Can ChatGPT pass a physics degree? Making a case for reformation of assessment of undergraduate degrees

Kevin A. Pimbblet, Lesley Morrell
article en
9 citations

Abstract

Abstract The emergence of conversational natural language processing models presents a significant challenge for Higher Education. In this work, we use the entirety of a UK Physics undergraduate (BSc with Honours) degree including all examinations and coursework to test if ChatGPT (GPT-4) can pass a degree. We adopt a ‘maximal cheating’ approach wherein we permit ourselves to modify questions for clarity, split question up into smaller sub-components, expand on answers given—especially for long form written responses, obtaining references, and use of advanced coaching, plug-ins and custom instructions to optimize outputs. In general, there are only certain parts of the degree in question where GPT-4 fails. Explicitly these include compulsory laboratory elements, and the final project which is assessed by a viva. If these were no issue, then GPT-4 would pass with a grade of an upper second class overall. In general, coding tasks are performed exceptionally well, along with simple single-step solution problems. Multiple step problems and longer prose are generally poorer along with interdisciplinary problems. We strongly suggest that there is now a necessity to urgently re-think and revise assessment practice in physics—and other disciplines—due to the existence of AI such as GPT-4. We recommend close scrutiny of assessment tasks: only invigilated in-person examinations, vivas, laboratory skills testing (or ‘performances’ in other disciplines), and presentations are not vulnerable to GPT-4, and urge consideration of how AI can be embedded within the disciplinary context.

European Journal of PhysicsVol. 46(1)
University of Hull (GB)
University of Hull, Durham University
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 20%
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
1.08
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.