El uso de inteligencia artificial y sus desafíos para la evaluación académica: una revisión de la literatura


  • Guillermo vanderLinde Pontificia Universidad Católica Madre y Maestra https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0272-5027
  • Tamara Mera Cury Pontificia Universidad Católica Madre y Maestra



Palabras clave:

Procesamiento de lenguaje natural, ChatGPT, inteligencia artificial, educación, evaluación académica


El procesamiento de lenguaje natural (NLP) ha sido estudiado en la industria de la computación durante mucho tiempo.  Entre los constantes avances tecnológicos se ha logrado  el desarrollo de complejos modelos de inteligencia artificial (IA), incluyendo Chat Generative Pre-Trained Transformer (GPT chat) cuyo uso, puesto a disposición desde noviembre de 2022, ha mostrado la tendencia de irse expandiendo. Los modelos desarrollados tienen un potencial preocupante para la evaluación académica porque pueden llevar a cabo una gama de actividades lingüísticas y generar reacciones humanas. Considerando esta problemática, el objetivo de este artículo es examinar las potenciales ventajas y desventajas del uso de ChatGPT y otras tecnologías NLP en la escritura y su evaluación, según la revisión de la literatura, para llamar la atención  sobre las preocupaciones éticas planteadas por su uso. Para ello, se realizó una búsqueda en la literatura que incluía artículos en Google Académico y el resultado de la búsqueda aportó 12 artículos con un alto número de citaciones. Se utilizó  metodología cualitativa para el estudio, lo que implica la lectura y el análisis de las fuentes para encontrar información pertinente, en interés de responder a los objetivos de la investigación. Las palabras clave como "GPTChat", "contenido generado por IA", "escritura académica" y "procesamiento de lenguaje natural" “fraude (ética) en las evaluaciones” guiaron la búsqueda. Los  hallazgos de este análisis preliminar apuntan a que el ChatGPT y otras técnicas de NLP podrían aumentar la eficiencia de la escritura académica y la investigación. Sin embargo, su uso también plantea preocupaciones sobre cómo puede afectar la fiabilidad y la validez del trabajo académico. El estudio subraya la necesidad de explorar minuciosamente las posibles aplicaciones, peligros y limitaciones de estas tecnologías e, igualmente, enfatiza el valor de debates en profundidad y preocupaciones morales en torno a su aplicación.


Los datos de descargas todavía no están disponibles.


Ahsan, K., Akbar, S. y Kam, B. (2022). Contract cheating in higher education: A systematic literature review and future research agenda. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 47(4), 523–539. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2021.1931660

AlAfnan, M. A., Dishari, S., Jovic, M. y Lomidze, K. (2023). Chatgpt as an educational tool: Opportunities, challenges, and recommendations .communication, business writing, and composition courses. Journal of Artificial Intelligence and Technology, 3(2), 60-68. https://ojs.istp-press.com/jait/article/download/184/178

Anson, C. M. y Straume, I. (2022). Amazement and Trepidation: Implications of AI-Based Natural Language Production for the Teaching of Writing. Journal of Academic Writing, 12(1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.18552/joaw.v12i1.820

Ayd?n O?, Karaarslan E. OpenAI ChatGPT generated literature review: Digital twin in healthcare. In: Ayd?n O?, ed. Emerging computer technologies 2. I?zmir Akademi DernegiI?zmir Akademi Dernegi, I?zmir 2022.

Assaraf, N. (2022). Chatgpt: Optimizing language models for dialogue. https://blog.cloudhq.net/openais-chatgpt-optimizing- language-models-for-dialogue/

Cassidy, C. (2023). Australian universities to return to ‘pen and paper’ exams after students caught using AI to write essays. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/jan/10/universities-to-return-to- pen-and-paper-exams-after-students-caught-using-ai-to-write-essays Hutson 2022

Chaudhry, I. S., Sarwary, S. A. M., El Refae, G. A. y Chabchoub, H. (2023). Time to Revisit Existing Student’s Performance Evaluation Approach in Higher Education Sector in a New Era of ChatGPT—A Case Study. Cogent Education, 10(1), 2210461. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/2331186X.2023.2210461

Chechitelli, A. (2023). Sneak preview of Turnitin’s AI writing and ChatGPT detection capability. Turnitin. from https://www.turnitin.com/blog/sneak-preview-of-turnitins-ai-writing-and-chatgpt-detection-capability

Crouch, A. (2023). Culture making: Recovering our creative calling. InterVarsity Press. From: http://www.christianity9to5.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/CultureMakingChapters3-5.pdf

Dawson, P., Sutherland-Smith, W. y Ricksen, M. (2020). Can software improve marker accuracy at detecting contract cheating? A pilot study of the Turnitin authorship investigate alpha. Assessment & Evaluation in higher education, 45(4), 473-482. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2019.1662884

Dawson, P. y Sutherland-Smith, W. (2018). Can markers detect contract cheating? Results from a pilot study. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(2), 286–293. https://doi.org/10. 1080/02602938.2017.1336746

Crawford, J., Cowling, M. y Allen, K. A. (2023). Leadership is needed for ethical ChatGPT: Character, assessment, and learning using artificial intelligence (AI). Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 20(3), 02. From: https://ro.uow.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3180&context=jutlp

Dawson, P., Sutherland-Smith, W. y Ricksen, M. (2020). Can software improve marker accuracy at detecting contract cheating? A pilot study of the Turnitin authorship investigate alpha. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 45(4), 473–482. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938. 2019.1662884

Dergaa, I., Chamari, K., Zmijewski, P., & Saad, H. B. (2023). From human writing to artificial intelligence generated text: examining the prospects and potential threats of ChatGPT in academic writing. Biology of Sport, 40(2), 615-622. https://acortar.link/uMvQ7t

Fergus, S., Botha, M. y Ostovar, M. (2023). Evaluating academic answers generated using ChatGPT. Journal of Chemical Education, 100(4), 1672-1675. https://pubs.acs.org/doi/full/10.1021/acs.jchemed.3c00087

Firat, M. (2023). What ChatGPT means for universities: Perceptions of scholars and students. Journal of Applied Learning and Teaching, 6(1). https://acortar.link/uMvQ7t

Gao, C. A., Howard, F. M., Markov, N. S., Dyer, E. C., Ramesh, S., Luo, Y. y Pearson, A. T. (2022). Comparing scientific abstracts generated by ChatGPT to original abstracts using an artificial intelligence output detector, plagiarism detector, and blinded human reviewers. bioRxiv. https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.12.23.521610

Hassani, H. y Silva, E. S. (2023). The role of ChatGPT in data science: how ai-assisted conversational interfaces are revolutionizing the field. Big data and cognitive computing, 7(2), 62. Freom https://www.mdpi.com/2504-2289/7/2/62

Hern, A. (2022) AI bot ChatGPT stuns academics with essay-writing skills and usability. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2022/dec/04/ai-bot-chatgpt-stuns- academics-with-essay-writing-skills-and-usability

Hopp, C. y Speil, A. (2021). How prevalent is plagiarism among college students? Anonymity preserving evidence from Austrian undergraduates. Accountability in Research, 28(3), 133–148. https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2020.1804880

Hutson, M. (2022). Could AI help you to write your next paper? Nature, 611(7934), 192–193. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-022-03479-w

Kung, T. H., Cheatham, M., Medenilla, A., Sillos, C., De Leon, L., Elepan ?o, C., Madriaga, M., Aggabao, R., Diaz- Candido, G. y Maningo, J. (2023). Performance of ChatGPT on USMLE: Potential for AI-assisted medical education using large language models. PLOS Digital Health, 2(2), e0000198.

Lines, L. (2016). Ghostwriters guaranteeing grades? The quality of online ghostwriting services available to tertiary students in Australia. Teaching in Higher Education, 21(8), 889–914. https:// doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2016.1198759

Linn, M. C., Donnelly-Hermosillo, D. y Gerard, L. (2023). Synergies Between Learning Technologies and Learning Sci- ences: Promoting Equitable Secondary School Teaching. In Handbook of research on science education (pp. 447-498). Routledge.

Linn, M. C., Gerard, L., Ryoo, K., McElhaney, K., Liu, O. L. y Rafferty, A. N. (2014). Computer-guided inquiry to improve science learning. Science, 344(6180), 155-156.

Lo, C. K. (2023). What is the impact of ChatGPT on education? A rapid review of the literature. Education Sciences, 13(4), 410. From: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7102/13/4/410

Lund, B. D. y Wang, T. (2023). Chatting about ChatGPT: how may AI and GPT impact academia and libraries?. Library Hi Tech News, 40(3), 26-29. https://acortar.link/YoxHgQ

Malinka, K., Peresíni, M., Firc, A., Hujnak, O. y Janus, F. (2023). On the educational impact of ChatGPT: Is Artificial Intelligence ready to obtain a university degree? In Proceedings of the 2023 Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education V. 1 (pp. 47-53). https://dl.acm.org/doi/pdf/10.1145/3587102.3588827

Mitchell, A. (2022, December 26). Professor catches student cheating with ChatGPT: ‘I feel abject terror’. New York Post. https://nypost.com/2022/12/26/students-using-chatgpt-to-cheat- professor-warns/

Pellegrino, J. W. y Quellmalz, E. S. (2010). Perspectives on the integration of technology and assessment. Journal of Re- search on Technology in Education, 43(2), 119-134.

QAA. (2020) . Contracting to cheat in Higher Education – How to address contract heating, the use of third-party services and essay mills. Quality Assurance Agency (QAA).

Sabzalieva, E. y Valentini, A. (2023). ChatGPT e inteligencia artificial en la educación superior: Guía de inicio rápido. UNESCO.

Sedaghat, S. (2023). Early applications of ChatGPT in medical practice, education and research. Clinical Medicine, 23(3), 278-279. From https://www.rcpjournals.org/content/clinmedicine/23/3/278

Shahriar, S., y Hayawi, K. (2023). Let's have a chat! A Conversation with ChatGPT: Technology, Applications, and Limitations. arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.13817. https://arxiv.org/pdf/2302.13817.pdf

Stokel-Walker, C. (2022). AI bot ChatGPT writes smart essays — Should professors worry? Nature, d41586-022-04397-7. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-022-04397-7

van Dis EAM, Bollen J, Zuidema W, van Rooij R, Bockting CL. ChatGPT: five priorities for research. Nature. 2023; 614(7947):224–226.

Yang, M. (2023). New York City schools ban AI chatbot that writes essays and answers prompts. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/jan/06/new-york-city- schools-ban-ai-chatbot-chatgpt

Yeadon, W., Inyang, O. O., Mizouri, A., Peach, A. y Testrow, C. (2022). The death of the short-form physics essay in the coming AI revolution. arXiv preprint arXiv:2212.11661. https://arxiv.org/abs/ 2212.11661

Zhai, X. (2021). Advancing automatic guidance in virtual sci- ence inquiry: From ease of use to personalization. Educational Technology Research and Development, 69(1), 255-258.

Zhai, X., Haudek, K. C., Shi, L., Nehm, R. y Urban-Lurain, M. (2020a). From substitution to redefinition: A framework of machine learning-based science assessment. Journal of Re- search in Science Teaching, 57(9), 1430-1459.




Cómo citar

vanderLinde, G., & Mera Cury, T. (2024). El uso de inteligencia artificial y sus desafíos para la evaluación académica: una revisión de la literatura. Cuaderno De Pedagogía Universitaria, 21(41), 126–137. https://doi.org/10.29197/cpu.v21i41.564