AI能否成为教学伙伴？评估ChatGPT、Gemini和DeepSeek在三种教学策略中的表现
Can AI be a Teaching Partner? Evaluating ChatGPT, Gemini, and DeepSeek across Three Teaching Strategies
AI总结：
本文评估了ChatGPT、Gemini和DeepSeek在示例、解释与类比及苏格拉底方法三种教学策略中的表现，发现模型在前两种策略中表现相似，但在苏格拉底方法中表现差异显著，ChatGPT和Gemini得分较高，而DeepSeek得分较低。
摘要：
大型语言模型（LLMs）被寄予厚望，能够通过提供解释、反馈和指导来支持学生的学习。然而，尽管它们被迅速采用并广泛关注，关于LLMs教学技能的实证证据仍然有限。本文对流行的LLMs，即ChatGPT、DeepSeek和Gemini，作为教学代理进行了比较研究。开发了一种评估协议，聚焦于三种教学策略：示例、解释与类比以及苏格拉底方法。六名人类评估者在教授初学者C编程语言的背景下进行了评估。结果显示，LLM模型在示例、解释与类比的教学策略中表现出相似的互动模式。相比之下，在苏格拉底方法中，模型对教学策略和初始提示的敏感性更高。总体而言，ChatGPT和Gemini得分较高，而DeepSeek在各项指标上得分较低，表明不同模型在教学表现上存在差异。
英文摘要：
There are growing promises that Large Language Models (LLMs) can support students' learning by providing explanations, feedback, and guidance. However, despite their rapid adoption and widespread attention, there is still limited empirical evidence regarding the pedagogical skills of LLMs. This article presents a comparative study of popular LLMs, namely, ChatGPT, DeepSeek, and Gemini, acting as teaching agents. An evaluation protocol was developed, focusing on three pedagogical strategies: Examples, Explanations and Analogies, and the Socratic Method. Six human judges conducted the evaluations in the context of teaching the C programming language to beginners. The results indicate that LLM models exhibited similar interaction patterns in the pedagogical strategies of Examples and Explanations and Analogies. In contrast, for the Socratic Method, the models showed greater sensitivity to the pedagogical strategy and the initial prompt. Overall, ChatGPT and Gemini received higher scores, whereas DeepSeek obtained lower scores across the criteria, indicating differences in pedagogical performance across models.
机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来，可能存在错误，请以论文正文为准。
