DAMPAK INTEGRASI CHATGPT TERHADAP DIMENSI BERPIKIR KREATIF MAHASISWA TEKNOLOGI PENDIDIKAN UNIVERSITAS NEGERI PADANG
Abstract
This study investigates the relationship between ChatGPT usage and creative thinking skills among Educational Technology students at Universitas Negeri Padang (UNP). Using a quantitative correlational method, data were collected from 187 respondents through Likert-scale questionnaires. The instruments were validated using Pearson Product Moment with r-table = 0.312 (n = 40, alpha = 0.05), with all 20 items of each variable declared valid; reliability was confirmed with Cronbach's alpha = 0.918 (Variable X) and 0.945 (Variable Y). Descriptive statistics showed that ChatGPT usage was at a moderate level (mean = 78.26), with the understanding of material indicator scoring highest (mean = 20.07). Creative thinking skills were also at a moderate level (mean = 76.73), with flexibility as the highest indicator (mean = 19.55) and fluency as the lowest (mean = 18.81). Pearson Product Moment correlation analysis yielded r = 0.679 with a significance of <0.001, indicating a significant positive relationship at the strong category. These findings suggest that optimal and responsible use of ChatGPT is associated with higher creative thinking competencies among university students.
Penelitian ini mengkaji hubungan antara penggunaan ChatGPT dengan keterampilan berpikir kreatif mahasiswa Teknologi Pendidikan Universitas Negeri Padang (UNP). Metode yang digunakan adalah kuantitatif korelasional dengan pengumpulan data melalui kuesioner skala Likert kepada 187 responden. Hasil statistik deskriptif menunjukkan penggunaan ChatGPT berada pada kategori sedang (mean = 78,26), dengan indikator pemahaman materi memperoleh skor tertinggi (mean = 20,07). Keterampilan berpikir kreatif juga berada pada kategori sedang (mean = 76,73), dengan indikator flexibility tertinggi (mean = 19,55) dan fluency terendah (mean = 18,81). Analisis korelasi Product Moment Pearson menghasilkan r = 0,679 dengan signifikansi <0,001, menunjukkan hubungan positif yang signifikan pada kategori kuat. Temuan ini mengindikasikan bahwa penggunaan ChatGPT yang optimal dan bertanggung jawab berkaitan dengan kompetensi berpikir kreatif yang lebih tinggi pada mahasiswa
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Arikunto, S. (2010). Prosedur penelitian: Suatu pendekatan praktik. Rineka Cipta.
Association for Educational Communications and Technology (AECT). (2008). Definition and terminology committee document: The meanings of educational technology. AECT.
Baidoo-Anu, D., & Ansah, L. O. (2023). Education in the era of generative artificial intelligence (AI): Understanding the potential benefits of ChatGPT in promoting teaching and learning. Journal of AI, 7(1), 52–62. https://doi.org/10.56183/jaied.v7i1.225
Reuters. (2023, February 1). ChatGPT sets record for fastest-growing user base – analyst note. Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/technology/chatgpt-sets-record-fastest-growing-user-base-analyst-note-2023-02-01/
Chan, C. K. Y., & Lee, K. K. W. (2023). The AI generation gap: Are Gen Z students more interested in adopting generative AI such as ChatGPT in teaching and learning than their Gen X and millennial generation teachers? Smart Learning Environments, 10(1), 60. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-023-00269-3
Dwihadiah, D., Gerungan, A., & Purba, H. (2024). Penggunaan ChatGPT di kalangan mahasiswa dan dosen perguruan tinggi Indonesia. CoverAge: Journal of Strategic Communication, 14(2), 130–145.
[Referensi dihapus — tidak lagi dikutip dalam teks]
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
Ibrahim, H., Liu, F., Asim, R., Battu, B., Benkirane, S., Alhafni, B., & Bosselut, A. (2023). Generative AI and the future of higher education: A threat to academic integrity or a promising learning tool? arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.13628.
Kasneci, E., Seßler, K., Küchemann, S., Bannert, M., Dementieva, D., Fischer, F., ... & Kasneci, G. (2023). ChatGPT for good? On opportunities and challenges of large language models for education. Learning and Individual Differences, 103, 102274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2023.102274
Lim, W. M., Gunasekara, A., Pallant, J. L., Pallant, J. I., & Pechenkina, E. (2023). Generative AI and the future of education: Ragnarök or reformation? A paradoxical perspective from management educators. International Journal of Management Education, 21(2), 100790. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme.2023.100790
Merentek, T. E. (2023). Penggunaan ChatGPT sebagai sumber belajar mahasiswa. Jurnal Pendidikan Teknologi Informasi, 7(1), 45–53.
Mollick, E. R., & Mollick, L. (2023). Assigning AI: Seven approaches for students, with prompts. SSRN Working Paper. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4475995
Munandar, U. (2012). Pengembangan kreativitas anak berbakat. Rineka Cipta.
Rashid, M., Ali, H. B., Attiq, S., Ahmad, W., Raza, S. A., & Nadeem, M. (2023). Use of AI chatbots (ChatGPT) for promoting critical thinking and creativity among university students: The role of innovative behavior. Sustainability, 15(18), 13774. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151813774
Rifky, S. (2024). Dampak penggunaan artificial intelligence bagi pendidikan tinggi. Indonesian Journal of Multidisciplinary on Social and Technology, 2(1), 37–42.
Santhosh, K. K., Deepak, R. R., Rekha, V., Satish, S., Vivek, B., & Santhosh, K. (2023). Exploring the power and impact of ChatGPT in education. Journal of Engineering Education Transformations, 36(Special Issue). https://doi.org/10.16920/jeet/2023/v36i0/23090
Sekaran, U., & Bougie, R. (2019). Research methods for business: A skill-building approach (8th ed.). John Wiley & Sons.
Siemens, G. (2005). Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 2(1), 3–10. Sugiyono. (2019). Metode penelitian kuantitatif, kualitatif, dan R&D (2nd ed.). Alfabeta. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
Torrance, E. P. (1974). Torrance tests of creative thinking. Scholastic Testing Service.
Weng, X., Chiu, T. K., & Tsang, C. C. (2024). Designing generative AI tools for teachers: Toward pedagogical scaffolding. Computers & Education, 202, 104860. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2023.104860
World Economic Forum. (2023). Future of jobs report 2023. WEF.
Yassir, M. (2024). Pengaruh artificial intelligence (AI) terhadap hasil belajar mahasiswa yang dimediasi oleh motivasi belajar dan kreativitas. Jambura Journal of Educational Management, 45–54. https://doi.org/10.37411/jjem.v5i1.2145
DOI: https://doi.org/10.17509/e.v25i2.99205
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2026 EDUTECH
Ciptaan disebarluaskan di bawah Lisensi Creative Commons Atribusi-BerbagiSerupa 4.0 Internasional.