Search for: All records

Computer science has historically presented barriers for non-native English speaking (NNES) students, often due to language and terminology challenges. With the rise of large language models (LLMs), there is potential to leverage this technology to support NNES students more effectively. Recent implementations of LLMs as tutors in classrooms have shown promising results. In this study, we deployed an LLM tutor in an accelerated introductory computing course to evaluate its effectiveness specifically for NNES students. Key insights for LLM tutor use are as follows: NNES students signed up for the LLM tutor at a similar rate to native English speakers (NES); NNES students used the system at a lower rate than NES students---to a small effect; NNES students asked significantly more questions in languages other than English compared to NES students, with many of the questions being multilingual by incorporating English programming keywords. Results for views of the LLM tutor are as follows: both NNES and NES students appreciated the LLM tutor for its accessibility, conversational style, and the guardrails put in place to guide users to answers rather than directly providing solutions; NNES students highlighted its approachability as they did not need to communicate in perfect English; NNES students rated help-seeking preferences of online resources higher than NES students; Many NNES students were unfamiliar with computing terminology in their native languages. These results suggest that LLM tutors can be a valuable resource for NNES students in computing, providing tailored support that enhances their learning experience and overcomes language barriers. 

Introduction: The emergence and widespread adoption of generative AI (GenAI) chatbots such as ChatGPT, and programming assistants such as GitHub Copilot, have radically redefined the landscape of programming education. This calls for replication of studies and reexamination of findings from pre-GenAI CS contexts to understand the impact on students. Objectives: Achievement Goals are well studied in computing education and can be predictive of student interest and exam performance. The objective in this study is to compare findings from prior achievement goal studies in CS1 courses with new CS1 courses that emphasize the use of human-GenAI collaborative coding. Methods: In a CS1 course that integrates GenAI, we use linear regression to explore the relationship between achievement goals and prior experience on student interest, exam performance, and perceptions of GenAI. Results: As with prior findings in traditional CS1 classes, Mastery goals are correlated with interest in computing. Contradicting prior CS1 findings, normative goals are correlated with exam scores. Normative and mastery goals correlate with students’ perceptions of learning with GenAI. Mastery goals weakly correlate with reading and testing code output from GenAI. 

Generative AI (GenAI) is advancing rapidly, and the literature in computing education is expanding almost as quickly. Initial responses to GenAI tools were mixed between panic and utopian optimism. Many were fast to point out the opportunities and challenges of GenAI. Researchers reported that these new tools are capable of solving most introductory programming tasks and are causing disruptions throughout the curriculum. These tools can write and explain code, enhance error messages, create resources for instructors, and even provide feedback and help for students like a traditional teaching assistant. In 2024, new research started to emerge on the effects of GenAI usage in the computing classroom. These new data involve the use of GenAI to support classroom instruction at scale and to teach students how to code with GenAI. In support of the former, a new class of tools is emerging that can provide personalized feedback to students on their programming assignments or teach both programming and prompting skills at the same time. With the literature expanding so rapidly, this report aims to summarize and explain what is happening on the ground in computing classrooms. We provide a systematic literature review; a survey of educators and industry professionals; and interviews with educators using GenAI in their courses, educators studying GenAI, and researchers who create GenAI tools to support computing education. The triangulation of these methods and data sources expands the understanding of GenAI usage and perceptions at this critical moment for our community.