[Paper Review] Investigating student perceptions of creativity and generative ai in computational physics

Pachi Her, Patti C. Hamerski|arXiv (Cornell University)|Mar 12, 2026

Creativity in Education and Neuroscience0 citations

TL;DR

The study analyzes upper-division computational physics students' views on creativity and generative AI using the Four C Model, finding that students view their creativity as mostly mini-c/little-c and see gen-AI as a learning tool with concerns about accuracy and creativity.

ABSTRACT

Generative Artificial Intelligence (gen-AI) is rapidly becoming more integrated into today's classrooms in all ranges of education. In higher education, Gen-AI is often seen as a resource for students, aiding them in drafting outlines, solving simple mathematical problems, or even decoding or constructing code. In this paper, we analyze essay-based interviews (N=6) from an upper-division computational physics course, in which physics majors addressed their views and attitudes towards Gen-AI and how it affects their learning. We analyzed the concepts of creativity and gen-AI using the Four C Model, a framework encompassing four types of creativity. Our analysis of the data involved coding and characterizing students' definitions of creativity and generative AI. Our findings revealed two main observations: first, students conceptualized their creativity primarily within mini-c and little-c; second, students perceived gen-AI as a resource and learning tool but expressed skepticism regarding its accuracy and creativity.

Motivation & Objective

• Examine how upper-division physics students define creativity in the context of computational physics.
• Assess student attitudes toward generative AI as a learning resource.
• Apply the Four C Model to categorize students' notions of creativity and gen-AI.
• Identify potential skepticism or limitations students perceive in gen-AI tools.

Proposed method

• Conduct essay-based interviews with N=6 upper-division computational physics students.
• Code and characterize student definitions of creativity and generative AI.
• Map findings to the Four C Model (mini-c, little-c, Pro-C, Symbolic-C).
• Synthesize themes about how gen-AI is used as a resource or learning aid.

Experimental results

Research questions

• RQ1 How do students in an upper-division computational physics course define creativity?
• RQ2 How do students perceive generative AI as a learning tool in their course context?
• RQ3 To what extent do student definitions of creativity align with the Four C Model?
• RQ4 What concerns do students express about the accuracy and creativity of gen-AI?

Key findings

• Students conceptualize creativity primarily within mini-c and little-c.
• Students perceive gen-AI as a resource and learning tool, but are skeptical about its accuracy.
• There is notable skepticism regarding gen-AI's creativity in producing meaningful or novel solutions.