cover
Contact Name
Imron Fauzi
Contact Email
fauzi220587@gmail.com
Phone
+6285258255855
Journal Mail Official
jier.ftik@gmail.com
Editorial Address
Jl. Mataram No. 1 Kelurahan Mangli, Kecamatan Kaliwates, Kabupaten Jember
Location
Kab. jember,
Jawa timur
INDONESIA
Journal of Islamic Education Research
ISSN : 27161005     EISSN : 27160998     DOI : https://doi.org/10.35719/jier.v6i1
This journal focuses on advancing the science of Islamic Education through high-quality scholarly works that explore various dimensions, including studies on Pesantren and Madrasah education, curriculum development, pedagogy, and the integration of science and technology. It emphasizes research on the philosophy and theory of Islamic education, policy and governance, deradicalization efforts, gender issues, and comparative studies. Additionally, it addresses the role of Islamic education in fostering social and cultural transformation, alongside biographical studies of influential figures, with a commitment to contributing to global and interdisciplinary discourse.
Arjuna Subject : Umum - Umum
Articles 181 Documents
ChatGPT Use and Critical Thinking Among Undergraduate Students: A Mixed Methods Study Fauzan Adima; Fitriyatul Hanifiyah; Prima Crismono; Saiful Bahri
Journal of Islamic Education Research Vol. 7 No. 4 (2026): Journal of Islamic Education Research
Publisher : Universitas Islam Negeri Kiai Haji Achmad Siddiq Jember

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.35719/jier.v7i4.604

Abstract

This study examined undergraduate students' academic ChatGPT practices across critical thinking score categories, focusing on verification, use regulation, and perceived dependence. An observational mixed-methods approach combined a critical thinking test comprising sixteen items, a questionnaire comprising fifteen items, and interviews. Pilot testing involved forty students; Cronbach's alpha coefficients were 0.852 and 0.912 for the test and questionnaire, respectively. The presented interview accounts showed variation within and across score categories. High-scoring interviewees described checking information or limiting use, whereas the moderate-scoring interviewee reported accepting answers without verification. The lower-scoring interviewee reported correcting outputs and prompting again. Several interviewees described perceived dependence or reduced independent engagement, but these accounts did not establish cognitive decline. The original Wilcoxon comparisons did not establish an association or causal effect between use and critical thinking. The study's originality lies in distinguishing answer acceptance, iterative prompting, and independent verification rather than assigning uniform practices to score categories. It contributes contextual evidence for investigating responsible AI engagement and evaluating guidance on source checking and independent reasoning, while acknowledging measurement limitations and restricted generalizability beyond participants.