Exploring the Responses of Large Language Models to Beginner Programmers’ Help Requests
Open accessAbstract
Background and Context: Over the past year, large language models (LLMs) have taken the world by storm. In computing education, like in other walks of life, many opportunities and threats have emerged as a consequence.
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
This paper studies how OpenAI Codex and GPT-3.5 respond to beginner programmers’ help requests from an online Dart course, finding GPT-3.5 generally outperforms Codex but both are unreliable. LLMs often identify at least one real issue and give sensible advice, yet frequently miss issues, report false positives, and provide model solutions despite being asked not to.
Key findings
- Across 150 help requests, the authors identified 275 issues (average 1.9 per request): logic errors in 72%, input/output problems in 34%, syntax errors in 8.0%, very incomplete solutions in 5.3%, semicolon issues in 2.7%, and hidden automated-test requirements in 2.0%.
- GPT-3.5 identified at least one actual issue in 90% of cases in both English and Finnish, versus Codex at 70% in English and 33% in Finnish; GPT-3.5 identified all issues in 57% (English) and 53% (Finnish), versus Codex at 13% and 17%. False positives were common: 40% for GPT-3.5 English, 23% for GPT-3.5 Finnish, 40% for Codex English, and 43% for Codex Finnish.
- In the extended GPT-3.5 English analysis of all 150 requests, it identified at least one actual issue in 82%, all actual issues in 55%, and non-existent issues in 48%; 99% of responses included code, 65% included a model solution, and 0% included automated tests.
- GPT-3.5 performed better on some logic issues than output formatting: it addressed all issues in 35% of conditional cases, 73% of iteration cases, and 57% of arithmetic cases, compared with 44% for formatting, 54% for unwanted outputs, and 50% for missing outputs.
Methods
- The data came from a 2022 open online introductory programming course at Aalto University taught in Finnish with Dart; the course had 4,247 distinct students, 120,583 submissions, and 831 help requests. The authors selected the 15 exercises with the most help requests and randomly sampled 10 help requests per exercise, yielding 150 help requests.
- They prompted two LLMs—OpenAI Codex (`code-davinci-002`) and GPT-3.5 (`gpt-3.5-turbo`)—with English and Finnish versions of a prompt template, using temperature 0, generating 600 responses total (150 help requests × 2 languages × 2 models).
- Student code was qualitatively annotated for issues by one experienced course teacher; LLM responses were manually categorized on seven aspects, first comparing 120 responses across models/languages, then analyzing all 150 GPT-3.5 English responses and thematically analyzing researcher notes.
Limitations
- The paper states that findings are limited by the specific context: Dart is relatively new for LLMs, the course is fully online with an atypical scope and student cohort, and only a minority of submissions had associated help requests.
- The authors state that newer LLMs already existed (GPT-4 was not programmatically available), that qualitative analysis used a single coder, and that they relied on a single request rather than an ongoing conversational interaction.
- Evident from the text: Codex API discontinuation makes replication of those results nearly impossible, and the prompt engineering plus manual cleanup of Codex responses may affect comparability.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
0 of 8 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged
- Findingown data
There was a clear difference in performance between GPT-3.5 and Codex.
“The table shows a clear difference in performance between GPT-3.5 and Codex.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingnone given
Model solutions are frequently provided even when the LLM is prompted not to.
“Model solutions are frequently provided even when the LLM is prompted not to.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim- Rests on an assumption: The teacher's annotation of issues in student code is a valid ground truth for what issues are actually present.
- Rests on an assumption: The 15 exercises with the most help requests and 10 randomly sampled help requests per exercise are representative of help requests in the course.
- Findingown data
Logic errors were the most common theme, present in 108 help requests (72%).
“From most to least common, they are: (1) logic errors, present in 108 help requests, 72%;”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim- Rests on an assumption: The teacher's annotation of issues in student code is a valid ground truth for what issues are actually present.
- Rests on an assumption: The 15 exercises with the most help requests and 10 randomly sampled help requests per exercise are representative of help requests in the course.
- Findingown data
All of the LLM responses were phrased as actual attempts to help.
“All of the LLM responses were phrased as actual attempts to help.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data
Arithmetic was a logic error sub-theme in 23 requests.
“• Arithmetic (23).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim- Rests on an assumption: The teacher's annotation of issues in student code is a valid ground truth for what issues are actually present.
- Rests on an assumption: The 15 exercises with the most help requests and 10 randomly sampled help requests per exercise are representative of help requests in the course.
- Findingown data
GPT-3.5 outperforms Codex in most respects.
“GPT-3.5 outperforms Codex in most respects.”
- Also stated in: § 3.4.2 Analysis of Responses and Issues. · boosted
“Since the initial analysis suggested that GPT-3.5 clearly outperforms Codex and that its performance is similar in English and Finnish, we focused our subsequent efforts on GPT-3.5'sresponses to English prompts.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim- Rests on an assumption: The teacher's annotation of issues in student code is a valid ground truth for what issues are actually present.
- Rests on an assumption: The 15 exercises with the most help requests and 10 randomly sampled help requests per exercise are representative of help requests in the course.
- Also stated in: § 3.4.2 Analysis of Responses and Issues. · boosted
- Findingown data
For missing outputs, GPT-3.5 addresses all the issues in 50% of cases.
“For the input/output theme, the proportions are somewhat lower: 44%, 54%, and 50% for formatting issues, unwanted outputs, and missing outputs, respectively.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data
Almost every GPT-3.5 response included code.
“Almost every response included code”
- Also stated in: § 5.2.1 The Problem of Model Solutions. · plain
“almost every response did include code”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Also stated in: § 5.2.1 The Problem of Model Solutions. · plain
- Findingown data
Fewer than ten of the 150 responses were considered presentable without editing, assuming the objective was to help students in a pedagogically sensible way.
“fewer than ten of the 150 responses were considered presentable without editing, assuming that the objective was to help students in a pedagogically sensible way.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
GPT-3.5 identified and mentioned at least one actual issue in 90% of cases in both English and Finnish.
“GPT-3.5 identified and mentioned at least one actual issue in 90% of the cases in both languages.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
The fifteen exercises with the most help requests account for more than 65% of all help requests during the year.
“The fifteen exercises, which are summarized in Table 1, account for more than 65% of all the help requests during the year.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim- Rests on an assumption: The 15 exercises with the most help requests and 10 randomly sampled help requests per exercise are representative of help requests in the course.
- Findingown data
For formatting issues, GPT-3.5 addresses all the issues in 44% of cases.
“For the input/output theme, the proportions are somewhat lower: 44%, 54%, and 50% for formatting issues, unwanted outputs, and missing outputs, respectively.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data
LLM responses to prompts in a non-English language are only slightly worse than responses to English prompts.
“LLM responses to prompts in a non-English language are only slightly worse than responses to English prompts.”
- Also stated in: § 3.4.2 Analysis of Responses and Issues. · hedged
“Since the initial analysis suggested that GPT-3.5 clearly outperforms Codex and that its performance is similar in English and Finnish, we focused our subsequent efforts on GPT-3.5'sresponses to English prompts.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim- Rests on an assumption: The teacher's annotation of issues in student code is a valid ground truth for what issues are actually present.
- Rests on an assumption: The 15 exercises with the most help requests and 10 randomly sampled help requests per exercise are representative of help requests in the course.
- Also stated in: § 3.4.2 Analysis of Responses and Issues. · hedged
- Findingown data
In the best-case exercise, GPT-3.5 responses addressed all issues in ten out of ten sampled responses.
“in the best case, all issues are addressed in ten of ten responses.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data
A large majority of LLM responses had a confident tone, even where the advice was completely wrong.
“A large majority had a confident tone; this was the case even where the advice was completely wrong.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data
When Conditionals issues are present, GPT-3.5 addresses all the issues in 35% of cases.
“When issues related to Conditionals are present, the LLM addresses all the issues in 35% cases”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data
Iteration was a logic error sub-theme in 30 requests.
“• Iteration (30).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim- Rests on an assumption: The teacher's annotation of issues in student code is a valid ground truth for what issues are actually present.
- Rests on an assumption: The 15 exercises with the most help requests and 10 randomly sampled help requests per exercise are representative of help requests in the course.
- Findingown data
No negativity was observed in any of the LLM responses.
“We observed no negativity in any of the responses.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data
Conditionals were a logic error sub-theme in 37 requests.
“• Conditionals (in 37 requests).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim- Rests on an assumption: The teacher's annotation of issues in student code is a valid ground truth for what issues are actually present.
- Rests on an assumption: The 15 exercises with the most help requests and 10 randomly sampled help requests per exercise are representative of help requests in the course.
- Findingown data
GPT-3.5 identified all issues present in approximately 55% of cases in both languages.
“GPT-3.5 succeeded approximately 55% of the time in both languages”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
In the extended dataset of 150 GPT-3.5 English responses, GPT-3.5 correctly identified and mentioned at least one actual issue in 123 help requests (82%).
“For 123 help requests out of 150, GPT-3.5 correctly identified and mentioned at least one actual issue”
- Also stated in: § 5.1 LLM Performance on Help Requests · plain
“the model identified and mentioned at least one actual issue in 82% of the help requests”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Also stated in: § 5.1 LLM Performance on Help Requests · plain
- Findingown data
In the worst-case exercise, GPT-3.5 responses addressed all issues in only one out of ten sampled responses.
“In the worst-case scenario, the responses address all of the issues in only one response out of the ten that we sampled”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data
78 responses attributed actions to the student.
“78 responses attributed actions to the student”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data
In 17 of the responses (over 10%), the LLM suggested adding functionality that had not been covered in the course and was not in the course plan.
“in 17 of the responses (over 10%), the LLM suggested adding functionality that had not been covered in the course and was not in the course plan”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
The code in GPT-3.5 responses was model-solution quality in roughly two responses out of three.
“the code was model-solution quality in roughly two responses out of three.”
- Also stated in: § 5.2.1 The Problem of Model Solutions. · plain
“two responses out of three essentially provided a model solution for the exercise.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Also stated in: § 5.2.1 The Problem of Model Solutions. · plain
- Findingown data
Syntax errors were present in 12 help requests (8.0%).
“(3) syntax errors, 12, 8.0%;”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim- Rests on an assumption: The teacher's annotation of issues in student code is a valid ground truth for what issues are actually present.
- Rests on an assumption: The 15 exercises with the most help requests and 10 randomly sampled help requests per exercise are representative of help requests in the course.
- Findingown data
When Iteration issues are present, GPT-3.5 addresses all the issues in 73% of cases.
“with Iteration issues are present, the same proportion is 73%”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data
Problems with input and output were present in 51 help requests (34%).
“(2) problems with input and output, 51 requests, 34%;”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim- Rests on an assumption: The teacher's annotation of issues in student code is a valid ground truth for what issues are actually present.
- Rests on an assumption: The 15 exercises with the most help requests and 10 randomly sampled help requests per exercise are representative of help requests in the course.
- Findingown data
At least twenty of the 150 responses featured a discrepancy between the explanation and the code in the response.
“At least twenty of the 150 responses featured a discrepancy between the explanation and the code in the response.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data
When Arithmetic issues are present, GPT-3.5 addresses all the issues in 57% of cases.
“and when Arithmetic issues are present, it is 57%.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data
Fewer than ten of the 150 responses had a somewhat non-confident tone.
“Fewer than ten of the responses had a somewhat non-confident tone”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data
Very incomplete solutions where the student was far from a working program were present in 8 help requests (5.3%).
“(4) very incomplete solutions where the student was far from a working program, 8, 5.3%;”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim- Rests on an assumption: The teacher's annotation of issues in student code is a valid ground truth for what issues are actually present.
- Rests on an assumption: The 15 exercises with the most help requests and 10 randomly sampled help requests per exercise are representative of help requests in the course.
- Findingown data
For unwanted outputs, GPT-3.5 addresses all the issues in 54% of cases.
“For the input/output theme, the proportions are somewhat lower: 44%, 54%, and 50% for formatting issues, unwanted outputs, and missing outputs, respectively.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data
Codex identified all issues present in around 15% of cases.
“Codex's performance was around a mere 15%.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingnone given
The advice that the LLMs provide on the issues is often sensible.
“The advice that the LLMs provide on the issues is often sensible.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim- Rests on an assumption: The teacher's annotation of issues in student code is a valid ground truth for what issues are actually present.
- Rests on an assumption: The 15 exercises with the most help requests and 10 randomly sampled help requests per exercise are representative of help requests in the course.
- Findingown data
The LLMs perform better on issues involving program logic rather than on output formatting.
“The LLMs perform better on issues involving program logic rather than on output formatting.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim- Rests on an assumption: The teacher's annotation of issues in student code is a valid ground truth for what issues are actually present.
- Rests on an assumption: The 15 exercises with the most help requests and 10 randomly sampled help requests per exercise are representative of help requests in the course.
- Findingown data
For input/output errors, formatting of output was a dominant sub-theme, with 25 requests.
“Formatting of output (25 requests).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data
Even in the best-case exercise, four of the ten responses featured false positives.
“Even in the latter case, however, four of the ten responses featured false positives.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data
For all six help requests where the student's code was classified as very incomplete, the response was pedagogically unsuitable in that it did not focus on what would be relevant to the student at such a stage.
“for all the six help requests where we classified the student's code as very incomplete (i.e., far from the actual solution), the response was pedagogically unsuitable in that it did not focus on what would be relevant to the student at such a stage.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
Students infrequently asked for help even when their code submissions were failing.
“students infrequently asked for help even when their code submissions were failing”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
The responses from GPT-3.5 very often included model-solution-like code.
“very often included model-solution-like code”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
Non-existing issues were the rarest (23% of help requests) when GPT-3.5 was prompted in Finnish.
“They were the rarest (23% of help requests) when GPT-3.5 was prompted in Finnish.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data
Most issues involved program logic or input/output.
“most issues involved program logic or input/output”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
Codex less commonly included code or model-solution-like code than GPT-3.5.
“This was less common for Codex”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
In one exercise, many students had incorrect formatting apparently because they had copied the output format not from the exercise handout but from a similar-looking worked example that immediately preceded the exercise.
“in one exercise, many students had incorrect formatting apparently because they had copied the output format not from the exercise handout but from a similar-looking worked example that immediately preceded the exercise.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data
Only 56,855 submissions (47%) passed all the tests.
“only 56,855 submissions (47%) passed all the tests.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
Many of the help requests involved input and output (with the theme present in 34% of the requests).
“Many of the help requests involved input and output (with the theme present in 34% of the requests).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data
The LLMs' performance in following instructions not to provide sample code or tests was poor across the board.
“As for whether the LLMs followed our instructions not to provide sample code or tests, performance was poor across the board.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
The responses from GPT-3.5 practically always included code.
“The responses from GPT-3.5 practically always included code”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
All issues in the semicolons theme involved semicolons immediately after if statements.
“all these issues involved semicolons immediately after if statements, as in if (condition); {...}.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data
Non-existing issues (false positives) were fairly common in all LLM-language pairings.
“Non-existing issues (false positives) were fairly common in all LLM-language pairings.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
Codex did produce automated tests for some of the help requests.
“which however did produce automated tests for some of the help requests.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data
Students asked for help with only 1.3% of the 63,728 failed submissions.
“the students asked for help with only 1.3% of the 63,728 failed submissions.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data
These I/O issues were especially common very early on in the course, when students were practicing I/O.
“These issues were especially common very early on in the course, when students were practicing I/O.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingcitation
This omission was present especially in the more complex 'Rainfall-problem-like' exercises of the course.
“This was present especially in the more complex 'Rainfall-problem-like' exercises of the course”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data
In some cases, it was evident that a student had correctly interpreted what they were supposed to achieve overall, but had omitted a part of the solution.
“In some cases, it was evident that a student had correctly interpreted what they were supposed to achieve overall, but had omitted a part of the solution”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingnone given
Codex was prone to producing superfluous content.
“Codex was also prone to producing superfluous content.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Premisenone given
There is no prior work on how LLMs perform on responding to help requests on programming problems.
“To the best of our knowledge, there is no prior work on how LLMs perform on responding to help requests on programming problems-that is, scenarios where students have explicitly signaled that they require help.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Interpretationown data
The low proportion of help requests underlines that nearly all failing submissions are such where students do not explicitly request for help.
“the low proportion of help requests underlines that nearly all failing submissions are such where students do not explicitly request for help.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationreasoning
The particular features of our context limit the generalizability of our findings.
“The particular features of our context limit the generalizability of our findings.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim- Rests on an assumption: The course uses a relatively recent programming language (Dart), which the LLMs will not have 'seen' as much as some other programming languages.
- Rests on an assumption: The course is fully online, and its scope and student cohort are different from many typical introductory programming courses at the university level.
- Interpretationreasoning
This renders our results on Codex performance nearly impossible to replicate.
“This renders our results on Codex performance nearly impossible to replicate.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Interpretationreasoning
The confident tone of the LLM responses may exacerbate the problem.
“The confident tone of the LLM responses-we observed just a handful of responses in less-than-confident tonesmay exacerbate the problem.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Interpretationown data
Our results suggest that the evolution of large language models is also visible in performance on the task of responding to student help requests.
“Our results suggest that this evolution is also visible in performance on the task we are interested in, responding to student help requests.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationown data
This suggests that responses from large language models are potentially viable in non-English-speaking classrooms.
“This suggests that responses from large language models are potentially viable in non-English-speaking classrooms.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
- May combine two claims. 31
- Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 33
- The quote only partly states this claim. 4
May combine two claims.
Findingown dataIncluding the model solution in the prompt often led to a response explaining that solution and increased the chance of the solution being echoed in the response.
“Another observation was that including the model solution in the prompt often led to a response explaining that solution and increased the chance of the solution being echoed in the response.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Findingown dataIn many cases, a help request had more than one issue (1.9 on average).
“In many cases, a help request had more than one issue (1.9 on average)”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimClassified as probably not a substantial claim.
Findingown dataThe help request texts were unnecessary, as they were generally uninformative beyond indicating that the student was struggling.
“During prompt engineering, we observed that the help request texts were unnecessary, as they were generally uninformative beyond indicating that the student was struggling.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Findingown dataIn 9 responses, the LLM itself was given agency.
“In nine responses, the LLM itself was given agency”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimMay combine two claims.
Findingown dataBoth LLMs frequently find at least one actual issue in each student program; GPT-3.5 does so in 90% of cases.
“Both LLMs frequently find at least one actual issue in each student program (GPT-3.5 in 90% of the cases).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim- Rests on an assumption: The teacher's annotation of issues in student code is a valid ground truth for what issues are actually present.
- Rests on an assumption: The 15 exercises with the most help requests and 10 randomly sampled help requests per exercise are representative of help requests in the course.
The quote only partly states this claim.
Findingown dataThe vast majority of logic errors fell under one of three sub-themes: conditionals, iteration, and arithmetic.
“The vast majority of logic errors fell under one of three sub-themes:”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim- Rests on an assumption: The teacher's annotation of issues in student code is a valid ground truth for what issues are actually present.
- Rests on an assumption: The 15 exercises with the most help requests and 10 randomly sampled help requests per exercise are representative of help requests in the course.
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Findingown dataFor input/output errors, missing printouts was a dominant sub-theme, with 10 requests.
“Missing printouts (10).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimThe quote only partly states this claim.
Findingown dataFor 82 of those 123 help requests, GPT-3.5 identified and mentioned all actual issues (55%).
“for 82 of those, it identified and mentioned all actual issues.”
- Also stated in: § 5.1 LLM Performance on Help Requests · plain
“all were identified and mentioned in 55% of the cases.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim- Also stated in: § 5.1 LLM Performance on Help Requests · plain
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Findingown data109 of the 150 GPT-3.5 English responses received at least one annotation.
“For further insight, we annotated the LLM responses with freeform notes, noting any phenomena that appeared potentially interesting from a pedagogical point of view; 109 of the 150 responses received at least one annotation.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim- Rests on an assumption: The teacher's annotation of issues in student code is a valid ground truth for what issues are actually present.
- Rests on an assumption: The 15 exercises with the most help requests and 10 randomly sampled help requests per exercise are representative of help requests in the course.
May combine two claims.
Findingown dataNeither LLM excels at finding all issues; GPT-3.5 finds all issues 57% of the time.
“Neither LLM excels at finding all the issues (GPT-3.5 finding them 57% of the time).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim- Rests on an assumption: The teacher's annotation of issues in student code is a valid ground truth for what issues are actually present.
- Rests on an assumption: The 15 exercises with the most help requests and 10 randomly sampled help requests per exercise are representative of help requests in the course.
May combine two claims.
Findingown dataFalse positives are common; GPT-3.5 has a 40% chance of identifying a non-existent issue.
“False positives are common (40% chance for GPT-3.5).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim- Rests on an assumption: The teacher's annotation of issues in student code is a valid ground truth for what issues are actually present.
- Rests on an assumption: The 15 exercises with the most help requests and 10 randomly sampled help requests per exercise are representative of help requests in the course.
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Findingown dataFailing to meet hidden requirements in automated tests was present in 3 help requests (2.0%).
“(6) failing to meet hidden requirements in automated tests, 3, 2.0%.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim- Rests on an assumption: The teacher's annotation of issues in student code is a valid ground truth for what issues are actually present.
- Rests on an assumption: The 15 exercises with the most help requests and 10 randomly sampled help requests per exercise are representative of help requests in the course.
The quote only partly states this claim.
Findingown dataFor input/output errors, unwanted printouts was a dominant sub-theme, with 24 requests.
“Unwanted printouts (24).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Findingown dataThere was considerable variation between exercises in the issues that arose.
“As expected, there was considerable variation between exercises.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimMay combine two claims.
Findingown dataDuring 2022, the course had 4,247 distinct students, who made 120,583 submissions to programming exercises, and 831 help requests were submitted.
“During the year, there were 4,247 distinct students in the course, who collectively made 120,583 submissions to programming exercises.831 help requests were submitted.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimMay combine two claims.
Findingown dataAll programs associated with a help request had at least one issue; the maximum was six.
“All programs associated with a help request had at least one issue; the maximum was six.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim- Rests on an assumption: The teacher's annotation of issues in student code is a valid ground truth for what issues are actually present.
- Rests on an assumption: The 15 exercises with the most help requests and 10 randomly sampled help requests per exercise are representative of help requests in the course.
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Findingown dataProblems with semicolons were present in 4 help requests (2.7%).
“(5) problems with semicolonsfoot_7 , 4, 2.7%;”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim- Rests on an assumption: The teacher's annotation of issues in student code is a valid ground truth for what issues are actually present.
- Rests on an assumption: The 15 exercises with the most help requests and 10 randomly sampled help requests per exercise are representative of help requests in the course.
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing).
Findingnone givenIt appeared unnecessary to include trivial starter code (an empty function).
“Moreover, it appeared unnecessary to include trivial starter code (an empty function).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimThe quote only partly states this claim.
Findingown dataGPT-3.5 identified non-existing issues in 72 help requests (48%).
“The LLM identified non-existing issues in 72 help requests.”
- Also stated in: § 5.1 LLM Performance on Help Requests · plain
“48% of them reported on issues that did not actually exist in the student's code.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim- Also stated in: § 5.1 LLM Performance on Help Requests · plain
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.
Findingown dataTypically, a single subtheme was prevalent in a particular exercise, but some exercises had a varied mix of issues.
“Typically, a single subtheme was prevalent in a particular exercise (e.g., conditionals in the Verification of input exercise; formatting issues in First and last name), but there were some exercises with a varied mix of issues.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimMay combine two claims.
Findingown dataCodex identified and mentioned at least one actual issue in 70% of English cases and 33% of Finnish cases.
“Codex succeeded 70% of the time in English, with Finnish performance far behind at 33%.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimMay combine two claims.
Findingown dataThere are exercise-specific differences in the extent to which GPT-3.5 responses address the issues, with no obvious pattern.
“there are exercise-specific differences in the extent to which the responses address the issues; there is no obvious pattern, however.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimMay combine two claims.
Findingown dataIn 150 help requests, there were a total of 275 issues, an average of 1.9 issues per help request.
“In 150 help requests, we identified a total of 275 issues, for an average of 1.9 issues per help request.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim- Rests on an assumption: The teacher's annotation of issues in student code is a valid ground truth for what issues are actually present.
- Rests on an assumption: The 15 exercises with the most help requests and 10 randomly sampled help requests per exercise are representative of help requests in the course.
May combine two claims.
Findingown dataOther, less common logic errors included misusing function parameters, printing in a function when expected to return a value, misplacing logic, and placing variables outside of functions.
“Other, less common logic errors included misusing function parameters, printing in a function when expected to return a value, misplacing logic, and placing variables outside of functions (leading, e.g., to a sum variable getting incremented over multiple function calls).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim- Rests on an assumption: The teacher's annotation of issues in student code is a valid ground truth for what issues are actually present.
- Rests on an assumption: The 15 exercises with the most help requests and 10 randomly sampled help requests per exercise are representative of help requests in the course.
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Findingown dataAnecdotally, our dataset had several instances of the dreaded semicolon-in-conditional: if (foo); { ... }.
“Anecdotally, our dataset had several instances of the dreaded semicolon-in-conditional: if (foo); { ... }.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimMay combine two claims.
Findingown dataDuring 2022, there were 120,583 submissions but only 831 (0.7%) of them had a help request.
“During 2022, we got 120,583 submissions but only 831 (0.7%) of them had a help request.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimMay combine two claims.
Findingown dataIn comparison with some prior studies that have reported data on syntax errors, our sample had relatively few: syntax errors featured in only 8.0% of the help requests.
“our sample had relatively few: syntax errors featured in only 8.0% of the help requests.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Findingnone givenThese syntax errors were often jointly present with other types of issues.
“These syntax errors were often jointly present with other types of issues.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimClassified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.
Findingown dataThe Finnish in the LLM's responses was in general understandable and could have been shown to students, as far as language quality was concerned.
“The Finnish in the LLM's responses was also in general understandable and could have been shown to students, as far as language quality was concerned.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.
FindingreasoningSuch struggles with I/O reduced later on in the course, perhaps suggesting that students learned to pay closer attention to the handouts.
“Such struggles with I/O reduced later on in the course, perhaps suggesting that students learned to pay closer attention to the handouts.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimMay combine two claims.
Findingown dataAlthough the LLM responses sought to address the technical issues and at times provided positive feedback, we saw little indication of the feedback being adjusted to the beginner level of the programming exercises being solved or to the context.
“we saw little indication of the feedback being adjusted to the (beginner) level of the programming exercises being solved or to the context (the introductory course that we mentioned in the prompt).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).
Study design and conductnone givenThe research was conducted in compliance with local ethical principles and guidelines.
“The research was conducted in compliance with the local ethical principles and guidelines.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.
PremisecitationTemperature 0 should yield the most deterministic responses and has been found to work well for feedback in prior work.
“For temperature, a parameter that controls randomness in LLM responses, we used 0, which should yield the most deterministic responses and has been found to work well for feedback in prior work [45].”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites [45] source
Not checked in the free run.
May combine two claims.
InterpretationreasoningLLMs make some of the same mistakes that students do, perhaps especially when formatting output as required by automated assessment systems.
“the results highlight the unreliability of LLMs: LLMs make some of the same mistakes that students do, perhaps especially when formatting output as required by automated assessment systems.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim- Rests on an assumption: The simulated scenario of feeding actual help requests to LLMs outside the course is representative of how LLMs would respond to student help requests in actual programming courses.
- Rests on an assumption: The teacher's annotation of issues in student code is a valid ground truth for what issues are actually present.
- Rests on an assumption: The 15 exercises with the most help requests and 10 randomly sampled help requests per exercise are representative of help requests in the course.
Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.
Study design and conductown dataThe source code from the 150 help requests was annotated with issues that a teacher would provide feedback on by one researcher who is the teacher responsible for the course, has more than a decade of experience in teaching introductory programming, and has specific experience of answering help requests in this course.
“We annotated the source code from the 150 help requests with issues that a teacher would provide feedback on.This was carried out by one of the researchers, who is the teacher responsible for the course, has more than a decade of experience in teaching introductory programming, and has specific experience of answering help requests in this course.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimClassified as probably not a substantial claim.
Study design and conductreasoningThe help requests were annotated again instead of using existing answers to ensure a consistent baseline for the present analysis.
“We chose to annotate the help requests again instead of using existing answers to these help requests, as the help requests had been previously answered by a pool of teachers and teaching assistants, and we wanted a consistent baseline for the present analysis.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimClassified as probably not a substantial claim.
Interpretationown dataThe results highlight the utility of LLMs in programming education.
“Our results continue to highlight the utility of LLMs in programming education.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim- Rests on an assumption: The simulated scenario of feeding actual help requests to LLMs outside the course is representative of how LLMs would respond to student help requests in actual programming courses.
- Rests on an assumption: The teacher's annotation of issues in student code is a valid ground truth for what issues are actually present.
- Rests on an assumption: The 15 exercises with the most help requests and 10 randomly sampled help requests per exercise are representative of help requests in the course.
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Study design and conductnone givenTo avoid leaking personal information to third-party services, the inputs fed to the LLMs were manually vetted during prompt engineering and final generation.
“To avoid leaking any personal information to third-party services, we manually vetted the inputs that we fed to the LLMs, both during prompt engineering and during the final generation of the responses.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimClassified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.
PremisecitationInstructional guidance should attend to the student's current level of domain knowledge; a mismatch will result in poorer learning outcomes.
“Instructional guidance should attend to the student's current level of domain knowledge; a mismatch will result in poorer learning outcomes [37].”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites [37]
Not checked in the free run.
May combine two claims.
PremisecitationPraising on easy tasks may lead students simply to dismiss the feedback; at worst, it may implicitly suggest that the student lacks ability and demotivate the student.
“Praising on easy tasks may lead students simply to dismiss the feedback; at worst, it may implicitly suggest that the student lacks ability [8] and demotivate the student.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites [8]
Not checked in the free run.
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).
Interpretationnone givenThe I/O issues might stem from worked examples in the course materials.
“the I/O issues might stem from worked examples in the course materials”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.
Interpretationnone givenThese findings are specific to the studied context and their generalizability remains to be determined.
“These findings, too, are specific to the studied context and their generalizability remains to be determined.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.
PremisecitationThere are cases where model solutions are useful: model solutions have been deliberately provided to students in some prior research, and they are also often provided in automated learning environments that are not focused on grading.
“model solutions have been deliberately provided to students in some prior research [62,63], and they are also often provided in automated learning environments that are not focused on grading [34].”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checkedMay combine two claims.
Interpretationown dataGPT-3.5 might be described as quite effective at issue-hunting, but it is far from reliable in terms of finding all the issues, and false positives are common.
“Overall, GPT-3.5 might be described as quite effective at issue-hunting, but it is far from reliable in terms of finding all the issues, and false positives are common as well.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
InterpretationreasoningThe issues that students request help with might thus differ from other courses.
“the issues that students request help with might thus differ from other courses.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim- Rests on an assumption: The course uses a relatively recent programming language (Dart), which the LLMs will not have 'seen' as much as some other programming languages.
- Rests on an assumption: The course is fully online, and its scope and student cohort are different from many typical introductory programming courses at the university level.
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.
InterpretationreasoningThe vast majority of prior research has not explicitly collected information on whether students want help, so some earlier findings about student 'failure' may in fact be related to students employing the submission system as a feedback mechanism, not necessarily needing help but simply checking whether they are on the right path.
“the vast majority of prior research has not explicitly collected information on whether students want help, so some earlier findings about student 'failure' may in fact be related to students employing the submission system as a feedback mechanism, not necessarily needing help but simply checking whether they are on the right path.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Study design and conductnone givenWhile working on this article, the authors had no access to the GPT-4 API.
“While working on this article, we had no access to the GPT-4 API.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.
InterpretationreasoningPrior research such as the reported mismatch between educators' beliefs about students' mistakes and logged data about mistakes might be explained in part by students asking for help from educators only when they really need help, which might differ from how they employ automated systems.
“prior research such as the reported mismatch between educators' beliefs about students' mistakes and logged data about mistakes [9] might be explained in part by students asking for help from educators only when they really need help, which might differ from how they employ automated systems.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites [9] source
Not checked in the free run.
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.
PremisecitationPrior research on a help request platform for programming noted that only one third of the students who open up a help request dialog end up writing a help request, and that even the prompts used in the help request dialog can influence whether a help request gets sent.
“Prior research on a help request platform for programming noted that only one third of the students who open up a help request dialog end up writing a help request, and that even the prompts used in the help request dialog can influence whether a help request gets sent [77].”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites [77] source
Not checked in the free run.
May combine two claims.
Interpretationown dataBoth large language models were able to identify some issues in the help requests, but GPT-3.5 was considerably more accurate than Codex.
“Both large language models were able to identify some issues in the help requests, but GPT-3.5 was considerably more accurate than Codex.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Study design and conductnone givenIn the present study, we relied on a single request to the model.
“In the present study, we relied on a single request to the model.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable). May combine two claims.
InterpretationreasoningLLMs are a potentially excellent supplement for programming teachers and teaching assistants, available at scale to serve the ever-increasing numbers of programming students.
“We see LLMs as a potentially excellent supplement for programming teachers and teaching assistants, available at scale to serve the ever-increasing numbers of programming students.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).
InterpretationreasoningLLMs are not a replacement for teachers.
“Not as a replacement for teachers, however.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.
Study design and conductnone givenOur qualitative analysis employed a single coder, which is a threat to reliability.
“Our qualitative analysis employed a single coder, which is a threat to reliability.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimMay combine two claims.
Interpretationown dataOverall, the LLMs' responses are usually sensible and potentially helpful.
“Overall, we find that the LLMs' responses are usually sensible and potentially helpful (RQ2).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
The paper relies on this without support.
The simulated scenario of feeding actual help requests to LLMs outside the course is representative of how LLMs would respond to student help requests in actual programming courses.
“we study a simulacrum of such a scenario: we take actual help requests collected during a programming course (and answered then by humans) and feed the requests as input to LLMs so that we the researchers may explore the responses.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The teacher's annotation of issues in student code is a valid ground truth for what issues are actually present.
“We annotated the source code from the 150 help requests with issues that a teacher would provide feedback on.This was carried out by one of the researchers, who is the teacher responsible for the course, has more than a decade of experience in teaching introductory programming, and has specific experience of answering help requests in this course.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The 15 exercises with the most help requests and 10 randomly sampled help requests per exercise are representative of help requests in the course.
“we focus on the fifteen programming exercises with the most help requests (out of 64 exercises in total).”
“For each of the 15 exercises with the most help requests, we randomly sampled ten, which yielded a body of 150 help requests in total.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The course uses a relatively recent programming language (Dart), which the LLMs will not have 'seen' as much as some other programming languages.
“The course uses a relatively recent programming language (Dart), which the LLMs will not have 'seen' as much as some other programming languages.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The course is fully online, and its scope and student cohort are different from many typical introductory programming courses at the university level.
“the course is fully online, and its scope and student cohort are different from many typical introductory programming courses at the university level”
The paper relies on this without support.
The proliferation of LLMs and their inevitable use by both novices and professional programmers.
“The proliferation of LLMs and their inevitable use by both novices and professional programmers”
The paper relies on this without support.
Modern LLMs perform fairly well in various languages but best in English.
“modern LLMs perform fairly well in various languages but best in English”
The paper relies on this without support.
Large language models are already a part of programming education today and will be in the future.
“they will be a part of programming education in the futurethey are already a part of it today”
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Unless explicitly instructed otherwise, GPT-3.5 has a tendency to be verbose and confident.
“Unless explicitly instructed otherwise, GPT-3.5 has a tendency to be verbose [Kabir et al. 2024] and confident [Hellas et al. 2023].”
From How Do Programming Students Use Generative AI? (2025) · cites this paper as Hellas et al. 2023
LLMs tended to hallucinate issues in student code, which could cause students to focus on non-existent issues instead of actual issues in their code.
“Hellas et al. [94] found that LLMs tended to hallucinate issues in student code which could cause students to focus on these non-existent issues instead of the actual issues in their code.”
From The Robots Are Here: Navigating the Generative AI Revolution in Computing Education (2023) · cites this paper as [94]
AI-generated content is not curated for specific courses, so generated learning material could include syntax, programming constructs, or other content inappropriate for students in a given course.
“AI generated content is not curated for specific courses, so learning material generated could potentially include syntax, programming constructs, or other content that is inappropriate for students in a given course [33,94].”
From The Robots Are Here: Navigating the Generative AI Revolution in Computing Education (2023) · cites this paper as [94]
LLMs can generate good explanations of code.
“LLMs can also generate good explanations of code [94,123,137,174].”
From The Robots Are Here: Navigating the Generative AI Revolution in Computing Education (2023) · cites this paper as [94]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Average issues per help request is misstated
MinorDividing 275 issues by 150 help requests gives about 1.83, which rounds to 1.8 rather than 1.9 issues per request.
Reported 1.9 · recomputed 1.833333
“In 150 help requests, we identified a total of 275 issues, for an average of 1.9 issues per help request.”
Number of very incomplete submissions changes from eight to six
MinorThe issue classification reports eight requests with very incomplete solutions, but the later discussion says there were six requests in that classification.
“(4) very incomplete solutions where the student was far from a working program, 8, 5.3%;”
“for all the six help requests where we classified the student's code as very incomplete (i.e., far from the actual solution)”
Cites
Neural Machine Translation by Jointly Learning to Align and Translate
Bahdanau, D., Cho, K., & Bengio, Y. (2014) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1409.0473 · Cited by 16,213 · see citing works
Liu, P., Yuan, W., Fu, J., Jiang, Z., Hayashi, H., & Neubig, G. (2023) · ACM Computing Surveys · doi:10.1145/3560815 · Cited by 4,361 · see citing works
Liu, P., Yuan, W., Fu, J., Jiang, Z., Hayashi, H., & Neubig, G. (2021) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2107.13586 · Cited by 4,352 · see citing works
Training language models to follow instructions with human feedback
Ouyang, L., Wu, J., Jiang, X., Almeida, D., Wainwright, C. L., Mishkin, P., Zhang, C., Agarwal, S., Slama, K., Ray, A., et al. (2022) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2203.02155 · Cited by 4,208 · see citing works
Vaithilingam, P., Zhang, T., & Glassman, E. L. (2022) · CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems Extended Abstracts · doi:10.1145/3491101.3519665 · Cited by 660 · see citing works
Review of recent systems for automatic assessment of programming assignments
Ihantola, P., Ahoniemi, T., Karavirta, V., & Seppälä, O. (2010) · Koli Calling International Conference on Computing Education Research · doi:10.1145/1930464.1930480 · Cited by 561 · see citing works
Automatic Generation of Programming Exercises and Code Explanations Using Large Language Models
Sarsa, S., Denny, P., Hellas, A., & Leinonen, J. (2022) · Proceedings of the 2022 ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research - Volume 1 · doi:10.1145/3501385.3543957 · Cited by 497 · see citing works
Self-citationAutomatic test-based assessment of programming
Douce, C., Livingstone, D., & Orwell, J. (2005) · Journal on Educational Resources in Computing · doi:10.1145/1163405.1163409 · Cited by 416 · see citing works
Becker, B. A., Denny, P., Finnie-Ansley, J., Luxton-Reilly, A., Prather, J., & Santos, E. A. (2023) · Proceedings of the 54th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education V. 1 · doi:10.1145/3545945.3569759 · Cited by 401 · see citing works
A systematic literature review of automated feedback generation for programming exercises
Keuning, H., Jeuring, J., & Heeren, B. (2019) · ACM Transactions on Computing Education · doi:10.1145/3231711 · Cited by 370 · see citing works
Cognitive strategies and looping constructs
Soloway, E. M., Bonar, J. G., & Ehrlich, K. (1983) · Communications of the ACM · doi:10.1145/182.358436 · Cited by 338 · see citing works
Educational Data Mining and Learning Analytics in Programming
Ihantola, P., Vihavainen, A., Ahadi, A., Butler, M., Börstler, J., Edwards, S. H., Isohanni, E., Korhonen, A., Petersen, A., Rivers, K., et al. (2015) · doi:10.1145/2858796.2858798 · Cited by 332 · see citing works
Novice mistakes: are the folk wisdoms correct?
Spohrer, J., & Soloway, E. M. (1986) · Communications of the ACM · doi:10.1145/6138.6145 · Cited by 310 · see citing works
Methods and tools for exploring novice compilation behaviour
Jadud, M. C. (2006) · ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research (ICER) · doi:10.1145/1151588.1151600 · Cited by 297 · see citing works
Denny, P., Kumar, V., & Giacaman, N. (2023) · Proceedings of the 54th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education V. 1 · doi:10.1145/3545945.3569823 · Cited by 287 · see citing works
Altadmri, A., & Brown, N. C. C. (2015) · ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (SIGCSE) · doi:10.1145/2676723.2677258 · Cited by 261 · see citing works
Using Large Language Models to Enhance Programming Error Messages
Leinonen, J., Hellas, A., Sarsa, S., Reeves, B., Denny, P., Prather, J., & Becker, B. A. (2023) · Proceedings of the 54th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education V. 1 · doi:10.1145/3545945.3569770 · Cited by 235 · see citing works
Self-citationExploring Machine Learning Methods to Automatically Identify Students in Need of Assistance
Ahadi, A., Lister, R., Haapala, H., & Vihavainen, A. (2015) · ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research (ICER) · doi:10.1145/2787622.2787717 · Cited by 234 · see citing works
Programming, Problem Solving, and Self-Awareness: Effects of Explicit Guidance
Loksa, D., Ko, A. J., Jernigan, W., Oleson, A., Mendez, C. J., & Burnett, M. M. (2016) · Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/2858036.2858252 · Cited by 223 · see citing works
Watson, C., Li, F. W. B., & Godwin, J. L. (2013) · IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT) · doi:10.1109/icalt.2013.99 · Cited by 206 · see citing works
Generating Diverse Code Explanations using the GPT-3 Large Language Model
MacNeil, S., Tran, A., Mogil, D., Bernstein, S., Ross, E., & Huang, Z. (2022) · Proceedings of the 2022 ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research - Volume 2 · doi:10.1145/3501709.3544280 · Cited by 200 · see citing works
Becker, B. A., Denny, P., Pettit, R., Bouchard, D., Bouvier, D. J., Harrington, B., Kamil, A., Karkare, A., McDonald, C., Osera, P.-M., et al. (2019) · Proceedings of the Working Group Reports on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education · doi:10.1145/3344429.3372508 · Cited by 199 · see citing works
MacNeil, S., Tran, A., Hellas, A., Kim, J., Sarsa, S., Denny, P., Bernstein, S., & Leinonen, J. (2023) · Proceedings of the 54th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education V. 1 · doi:10.1145/3545945.3569785 · Cited by 195 · see citing works
Self-citationUsing GitHub Copilot to Solve Simple Programming Problems
Wermelinger, M. (2023) · Proceedings of the 54th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education V. 1 · doi:10.1145/3545945.3569830 · Cited by 191 · see citing works
My AI Wants to Know if This Will Be on the Exam: Testing OpenAI’s Codex on CS2 Programming Exercises
Finnie-Ansley, J., Denny, P., Luxton-Reilly, A., Santos, E. A., Prather, J., & Becker, B. A. (2023) · Proceedings of the 25th Australasian Computing Education Conference · doi:10.1145/3576123.3576134 · Cited by 186 · see citing works
Glassman, E. L., Scott, J., Singh, R., Guo, P. J., & Miller, R. C. (2015) · ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction · doi:10.1145/2699751 · Cited by 178 · see citing works
All syntax errors are not equal
Denny, P., Luxton-Reilly, A., & Tempero, E. (2012) · Proceedings of the 17th ACM annual conference on Innovation and technology in computer science education · doi:10.1145/2325296.2325318 · Cited by 144 · see citing works
The Normalized Programming State Model
Carter, A. S., Hundhausen, C. D., & Adesope, O. (2015) · ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research (ICER) · doi:10.1145/2787622.2787710 · Cited by 144 · see citing works
A First Look at Novice Compilation Behaviour Using BlueJ
Jadud, M. C. (2005) · Computer Science Education · doi:10.1080/08993400500056530 · Cited by 142 · see citing works
Marwan, S., Gao, G., Fisk, S. R., Price, T., & Barnes, T. (2020) · International Computing Education Research Workshop · doi:10.1145/3372782.3406264 · Cited by 131 · see citing works
Writing Reusable Code Feedback at Scale with Mixed-Initiative Program Synthesis
Head, A., Glassman, E. L., Soares, G., et al. (2017) · doi:10.1145/3051457.3051467 · Cited by 118 · see citing works
Nguyen, A., Piech, C., Huang, J., & Guibas, L. J. (2014) · International World Wide Web Conference (WWW) · doi:10.1145/2566486.2568023 · Cited by 108 · see citing works
Translating Principles of Effective Feedback for Students into the CS1 Context
Ott, C., Robins, A. V., & Shephard, K. L. (2016) · ACM Transactions on Computing Education · doi:10.1145/2737596 · Cited by 106 · see citing works
(2019) · doi:10.1145/3287324.3287374 · Cited by 104 · see citing works
Meaningful categorisation of novice programmer errors
McCall, D., & Kölling, M. (2014) · IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE) · doi:10.1109/fie.2014.7044420 · Cited by 103 · see citing works
Novice Java Programming Mistakes
Brown, N. C. C., & Altadmri, A. (2017) · ACM Transactions on Computing Education · doi:10.1145/2994154 · Cited by 100 · see citing works
Do we know how difficult the rainfall problem is?
Seppälä, O., Ihantola, P., Isohanni, E., Sorva, J., & Vihavainen, A. (2015) · Koli Calling International Conference on Computing Education Research · doi:10.1145/2828959.2828963 · Cited by 93 · see citing works
Self-citationInvestigating novice programming mistakes: educator beliefs vs. student data
Brown, N. C. C., & Altadmri, A. (2014) · Proceedings of the tenth annual conference on International computing education research · doi:10.1145/2632320.2632343 · Cited by 89 · see citing works
A New Metric to Quantify Repeated Compiler Errors for Novice Programmers
Becker, B. A. (2016) · ACM Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education (ITiCSE) · doi:10.1145/2899415.2899463 · Cited by 81 · see citing works
A New Look at Novice Programmer Errors
McCall, D., & Kölling, M. (2019) · ACM Transactions on Computing Education · doi:10.1145/3335814 · Cited by 77 · see citing works
Common logic errors made by novice programmers
Ettles, A., Luxton-Reilly, A., & Denny, P. C. (2018) · Australasian Computing Education Conference · doi:10.1145/3160489.3160493 · Cited by 70 · see citing works
On Designing Programming Error Messages for Novices: Readability and its Constituent Factors
Denny, P., Prather, J., Becker, B. A., Mooney, C., Homer, J., Albrecht, Z. C., & Powell, G. B. (2021) · Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3411764.3445696 · Cited by 60 · see citing works
Automatically detectable indicators of programming assignment difficulty
Ihantola, P., Sorva, J., & Vihavainen, A. (2014) · Conference on Information Technology Education · doi:10.1145/2656450.2656476 · Cited by 58 · see citing works
Self-citationSeamark, D., & Gabriel, L. (2018) · British Journal of Guidance & Counselling · doi:10.1080/03069885.2016.1213372 · Cited by 50 · see citing works
Plagiarism in Take-home Exams: Help-seeking, Collaboration, and Systematic Cheating
Hellas, A., Leinonen, J., & Ihantola, P. (2017) · Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education · doi:10.1145/3059009.3059065 · Cited by 50 · see citing works
Self-citationAutomatically Generating CS Learning Materials with Large Language Models
MacNeil, S., Tran, A., Leinonen, J., Denny, P. C., Kim, J., Hellas, A., Bernstein, S., & Sarsa, S. (2022) · ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (SIGCSE) · doi:10.1145/3545947.3569630 · Cited by 48 · see citing works
Self-citationHow novices tackle their first lines of code in an IDE
Vihavainen, A., Helminen, J., & Ihantola, P. (2014) · Koli Calling International Conference on Computing Education Research · doi:10.1145/2674683.2674692 · Cited by 46 · see citing works
Behaviors of Higher and Lower Performing Students in CS1
Liao, S. N., Valstar, S., Thai, K., Alvarado, C., Zingaro, D., Griswold, W. G., & Porter, L. (2019) · Proceedings of the 2019 ACM Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education · doi:10.1145/3304221.3319740 · Cited by 44 · see citing works
Comparison of Time Metrics in Programming
Leinonen, J., Leppänen, L., Ihantola, P., & Hellas, A. (2017) · ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research (ICER) · doi:10.1145/3105726.3106181 · Cited by 41 · see citing works
Self-citationAn exploration of error quotient in multiple contexts
Petersen, A., Spacco, J. W., & Vihavainen, A. (2015) · Koli Calling International Conference on Computing Education Research · doi:10.1145/2828959.2828966 · Cited by 41 · see citing works
Towards Giving Timely Formative Feedback and Hints to Novice Programmers
Jeuring, J., Keuning, H., Marwan, S., Bouvier, D., Izu, C., Kiesler, N., Lehtinen, T., Lohr, D., Peterson, A., & Sarsa, S. (2022) · Proceedings of the 2022 Working Group Reports on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education · doi:10.1145/3571785.3574124 · Cited by 40 · see citing works
Self-citationA Comparison of Immediate and Scheduled Feedback in Introductory Programming Projects
Leinonen, J., Denny, P., & Whalley, J. (2022) · Proceedings of the 53rd ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education · doi:10.1145/3478431.3499372 · Cited by 32 · see citing works
Self-citationBenefits of Self-explanation in Introductory Programming
Vihavainen, A., Miller, C. S., & Settle, A. (2015) · ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (SIGCSE) · doi:10.1145/2676723.2677260 · Cited by 30 · see citing works
Smith, R., & Rixner, S. (2019) · ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (SIGCSE) · doi:10.1145/3287324.3287394 · Cited by 30 · see citing works
A detector for non-literal Java errors
Dy, T. T., & Rodrigo, M. M. T. (2010) · Koli Calling International Conference on Computing Education Research · doi:10.1145/1930464.1930485 · Cited by 28 · see citing works
Social Help-seeking Strategies in a Programming MOOC
Nelimarkka, M., & Hellas, A. (2018) · ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (SIGCSE) · doi:10.1145/3159450.3159495 · Cited by 22 · see citing works
Self-citationRobosourcing Educational Resources -- Leveraging Large Language Models for Learnersourcing
Denny, P., Sarsa, S., Hellas, A., & Leinonen, J. (2022) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2211.04715 · Cited by 21 · see citing works
Self-citationTime-on-Task Metrics for Predicting Performance
Leinonen, J., Castro, F. E. V., & Hellas, A. (2022) · Proceedings of the 53rd ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education · doi:10.1145/3478431.3499359 · Cited by 18 · see citing works
Self-citationExploring Novice Programmers' Homework Practices
Muller, S., Babeş-Vroman, M., Emenike, M. E., & Nguyen, T. D. (2020) · ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (SIGCSE) · doi:10.1145/3328778.3366885 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
Translation from Problem to Code in Seven Steps
Hilton, A. D., Lipp, G. M., & Rodger, S. H. (2019) · doi:10.1145/3300115.3309508 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
Computing Education in the Era of Generative AIPreprint
Denny, P. C., Prather, J. E., Becker, B. A., Finnie-Ansley, J., Hellas, A., Leinonen, J., Luxton-Reilly, A., Reeves, B. N., Santos, E. A., & Sarsa, S. (2023) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2306.02608 · Cited by 9 · see citing works
Self-citationNon-restricted Access to Model Solutions: A Good Idea?
Nygren, H., Leinonen, J., & Hellas, A. (2019) · Proceedings of the 2019 ACM Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education · doi:10.1145/3304221.3319768 · Cited by 7 · see citing works
Self-citationExperimenting with Model Solutions as a Support Mechanism
Nygren, H., Leinonen, J., Pirttinen, N., Leinonen, A., & Hellas, A. (2019) · Proceedings of the 1st UK & Ireland Computing Education Research Conference on - UKICER · doi:10.1145/3351287.3351288 · Cited by 4 · see citing works
Self-citation"It's Weird That it Knows What I Want": Usability and Interactions with Copilot for Novice Programmers
Prather, J., Reeves, B. N., Denny, P., Becker, B. A., Leinonen, J., Luxton-Reilly, A., Powell, G., Finnie-Ansley, J., & Santos, E. A. (2023) · arXiv · cited 1×
“Challenges include student over-reliance and plagiarism [6, 16, 22, 71] as well as biases in generated content [6, 59].”
BackgroundSelf-citationOpenAI, Achiam, J., Adler, S., Agarwal, S., Ahmad, L., Akkaya, I., Aleman, F. L., Almeida, D., Altenschmidt, J., Altman, S., et al. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2303.08774
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 23
- Kirsti M Ala-Mutka . 2005. A survey of automated assessment approaches for programming assignments. Computer science education 15, 2 ( 2005 ), 83–102. Kirsti M Ala-Mutka. 2005. A survey of automated assessment approaches for programming assignments. Computer science education 15, 2 (2005), 83–102.
- Tom Brown , Benjamin Mann , Nick Ryder , Melanie Subbiah , Jared D Kaplan , Prafulla Dhariwal , Arvind Neelakantan , Pranav Shyam , Girish Sastry , Amanda Askell , 2020. Language models are few-shot learners. Advances in neural information processing systems 33 ( 2020 ), 1877–1901. Tom Brown, Benjamin Mann, Nick Ryder, Melanie Subbiah, Jared D Kaplan, Prafulla Dhariwal, Arvind Neelakantan, Pranav Shyam, Girish Sastry, Amanda Askell, 2020. Language models are few-shot learners. Advances in neural information processing systems 33 (2020), 1877–1901.
- Ruth Butler . 1998. Determinants of help seeking: Relations between perceived reasons for classroom help-avoidance and help-seeking behaviors in an experimental context.J. of Educ. Psychology 90, 4 ( 1998 ). Ruth Butler. 1998. Determinants of help seeking: Relations between perceived reasons for classroom help-avoidance and help-seeking behaviors in an experimental context.J. of Educ. Psychology 90, 4 (1998).
- James Finnie-Ansley , Paul Denny , Brett A. Becker , Andrew Luxton-Reilly , and James Prather . 2022 . The Robots Are Coming: Exploring the Implications of OpenAI Codex on Introductory Programming. In Australasian Computing Education Conf.ACM, 10–19 . James Finnie-Ansley, Paul Denny, Brett A. Becker, Andrew Luxton-Reilly, and James Prather. 2022. The Robots Are Coming: Exploring the Implications of OpenAI Codex on Introductory Programming. In Australasian Computing Education Conf.ACM, 10–19.
- Sepp Hochreiter and Jürgen Schmidhuber . 1997. Long short-term memory. Neural computation 9, 8 ( 1997 ), 1735–1780. Sepp Hochreiter and Jürgen Schmidhuber. 1997. Long short-term memory. Neural computation 9, 8 (1997), 1735–1780.
- Ziwei Ji , Nayeon Lee , Rita Frieske , Tiezheng Yu , Dan Su , Yan Xu , Etsuko Ishii , Yejin Bang , Andrea Madotto , and Pascale Fung . 2022. Survey of hallucination in natural language generation. Comput. Surveys ( 2022 ). Ziwei Ji, Nayeon Lee, Rita Frieske, Tiezheng Yu, Dan Su, Yan Xu, Etsuko Ishii, Yejin Bang, Andrea Madotto, and Pascale Fung. 2022. Survey of hallucination in natural language generation. Comput. Surveys (2022).
- W. Lewis Johnson , Elliot Soloway , Benjamin Cutler , and Steven Draper . 1983 . Bug Catalogue: I. Technical Report . Yale University , YaleU/CSD/ RR #286. W. Lewis Johnson, Elliot Soloway, Benjamin Cutler, and Steven Draper. 1983. Bug Catalogue: I. Technical Report. Yale University, YaleU/CSD/RR #286.
- Slava Kalyuga . 2007. Expertise reversal effect and its implications for learner-tailored instruction. Educational psychology review 19 ( 2007 ), 509–539. Slava Kalyuga. 2007. Expertise reversal effect and its implications for learner-tailored instruction. Educational psychology review 19 (2007), 509–539.
- Stuart A Karabenick . 2004. Perceived achievement goal structure and college student help seeking.J of educational psychology 96, 3 ( 2004 ). Stuart A Karabenick. 2004. Perceived achievement goal structure and college student help seeking.J of educational psychology 96, 3 (2004).
- Majeed Kazemitabaar , Justin Chow , Carl Ka To Ma , Barbara J Ericson, David Weintrop, and Tovi Grossman. 2023 . Studying the effect of AI Code Generators on Supporting Novice Learners in Introductory Programming . arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.07427 (2023). Majeed Kazemitabaar, Justin Chow, Carl Ka To Ma, Barbara J Ericson, David Weintrop, and Tovi Grossman. 2023. Studying the effect of AI Code Generators on Supporting Novice Learners in Introductory Programming. arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.07427 (2023). · arXiv
- Teemu Koivisto and Arto Hellas . 2022 . Evaluating CodeClusters for Effectively Providing Feedback on Code Submissions. In 2022 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE). IEEE, 1–9. Teemu Koivisto and Arto Hellas. 2022. Evaluating CodeClusters for Effectively Providing Feedback on Code Submissions. In 2022 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE). IEEE, 1–9.
- Juho Leinonen , Paul Denny , Stephen MacNeil , Sami Sarsa , Seth Bernstein , Joanne Kim , Andrew Tran , and Arto Hellas . 2023. Comparing Code Explanations Created by Students and Large Language Models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.03938 ( 2023 ). Juho Leinonen, Paul Denny, Stephen MacNeil, Sami Sarsa, Seth Bernstein, Joanne Kim, Andrew Tran, and Arto Hellas. 2023. Comparing Code Explanations Created by Students and Large Language Models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.03938 (2023). · arXiv
- Leo Leppänen , Arto Hellas , and Juho Leinonen . 2022 . Piloting Natural Language Generation for Personalized Progress Feedback. In 2022 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE). IEEE, 1–8. Leo Leppänen, Arto Hellas, and Juho Leinonen. 2022. Piloting Natural Language Generation for Personalized Progress Feedback. In 2022 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE). IEEE, 1–8.
- Ye Mao . 2019 . One minute is enough: Early prediction of student success and event-level difficulty during novice programming tasks . In In: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Educational Data Mining (EDM 2019). Ye Mao. 2019. One minute is enough: Early prediction of student success and event-level difficulty during novice programming tasks. In In: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Educational Data Mining (EDM 2019).
- Moin Nadeem , Anna Bethke , and Siva Reddy . 2020. StereoSet: Measuring stereotypical bias in pretrained language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2004.09456 ( 2020 ). Moin Nadeem, Anna Bethke, and Siva Reddy. 2020. StereoSet: Measuring stereotypical bias in pretrained language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2004.09456 (2020). · arXiv
- Daniel FO Onah , Jane Sinclair , and Russell Boyatt . 2014 . Dropout rates of massive open online courses: behavioural patterns . EDULEARN14 proceedings (2014), 5825–5834. Daniel FO Onah, Jane Sinclair, and Russell Boyatt. 2014. Dropout rates of massive open online courses: behavioural patterns. EDULEARN14 proceedings (2014), 5825–5834.
- José Carlos Paiva , José Paulo Leal , and Álvaro Figueira . 2022. Automated Assessment in Computer Science Education: A State-of-the-Art Review. ACM Transactions on Computing Education (TOCE) ( 2022 ). José Carlos Paiva, José Paulo Leal, and Álvaro Figueira. 2022. Automated Assessment in Computer Science Education: A State-of-the-Art Review. ACM Transactions on Computing Education (TOCE) (2022).
- Alec Radford , Jeffrey Wu , Rewon Child , David Luan , Dario Amodei , Ilya Sutskever , 2019. Language models are unsupervised multitask learners. OpenAI blog 1, 8 ( 2019 ), 9. Alec Radford, Jeffrey Wu, Rewon Child, David Luan, Dario Amodei, Ilya Sutskever, 2019. Language models are unsupervised multitask learners. OpenAI blog 1, 8 (2019), 9.
- Allison M Ryan , Margaret H Gheen , and Carol Midgley . 1998. Why do some students avoid asking for help? An examination of the interplay among students ’ academic efficacy, teachers’ social–emotional role, and the classroom goal structure.J. of educational psychology 90, 3 ( 1998 ). Allison M Ryan, Margaret H Gheen, and Carol Midgley. 1998. Why do some students avoid asking for help? An examination of the interplay among students’ academic efficacy, teachers’ social–emotional role, and the classroom goal structure.J. of educational psychology 90, 3 (1998).
- Allison M Ryan , Paul R Pintrich , and Carol Midgley . 2001. Avoiding seeking help in the classroom: Who and why?Educational Psychology Review 13, 2 ( 2001 ), 93–114. Allison M Ryan, Paul R Pintrich, and Carol Midgley. 2001. Avoiding seeking help in the classroom: Who and why?Educational Psychology Review 13, 2 (2001), 93–114.
- Sami Sarsa , Jesper Pettersson , and Arto Hellas . 2022 . How to Help to Ask for Help? Help Request Prompt Structure Influence on Help Request Quantity and Course Retention. In 2022 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE). IEEE, 1–9. Sami Sarsa, Jesper Pettersson, and Arto Hellas. 2022. How to Help to Ask for Help? Help Request Prompt Structure Influence on Help Request Quantity and Course Retention. In 2022 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE). IEEE, 1–9.
- Elliot Soloway , Kate Ehrlich , Jeffrey G. Bonar , and Judith Greenspan . 1982. What do novices know about programming? In Directions in Human–Computer Interactions, Albert Badre and Ben Shneiderman (Eds.). Vol. 6 . Ablex Publishing , 27–54. Elliot Soloway, Kate Ehrlich, Jeffrey G. Bonar, and Judith Greenspan. 1982. What do novices know about programming? In Directions in Human–Computer Interactions, Albert Badre and Ben Shneiderman (Eds.). Vol. 6. Ablex Publishing, 27–54.
- Ashish Vaswani , Noam Shazeer , Niki Parmar , Jakob Uszkoreit , Llion Jones , Aidan N Gomez , Łukasz Kaiser , and Illia Polosukhin . 2017. Attention is all you need. Advances in neural information processing systems 30 ( 2017 ). Ashish Vaswani, Noam Shazeer, Niki Parmar, Jakob Uszkoreit, Llion Jones, Aidan N Gomez, Łukasz Kaiser, and Illia Polosukhin. 2017. Attention is all you need. Advances in neural information processing systems 30 (2017).
Cited by
Sorted by citations
A Survey on Evaluation of Large Language Models
Chang, Y., Wang, X., Wang, J., Wu, Y., Yang, L., Zhu, K., Chen, H., Yi, X., Wang, C., Wang, Y., et al. (2024) · ACM Transactions on Intelligent Systems and Technology · doi:10.1145/3641289 · Cited by 2,842 · see citing works
“Additionally, the study conducted by Hellas et al. [61] revealed that LLMs can successfully identify at least one actual problem in student code, although instances of misjudgment are also observed.”
MethodThe Robots Are Here: Navigating the Generative AI Revolution in Computing Education
Prather, J., Denny, P., Leinonen, J., Becker, B. A., Albluwi, I., Craig, M., Keuning, H., Kiesler, N., Kohn, T., Luxton-Reilly, A., et al. (2023) · Proceedings of the 2023 Working Group Reports on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education · doi:10.1145/3623762.3633499 · Cited by 396 · see citing works
Self-citationUsing an LLM to Help With Code Understanding
Nam, D., Macvean, A., Hellendoorn, V., Vasilescu, B., & Myers, B. (2024) · Proceedings of the IEEE/ACM 46th International Conference on Software Engineering · doi:10.1145/3597503.3639187 · Cited by 345 · see citing works
A review of large language models and autonomous agents in chemistry
Ramos, M. C., Collison, C. J., & White, A. D. (2025) · Chemical Science · doi:10.1039/d4sc03921a · Cited by 274 · see citing works
The Widening Gap: The Benefits and Harms of Generative AI for Novice Programmers
Prather, J., Reeves, B. N., Leinonen, J., MacNeil, S., Randrianasolo, A. S., Becker, B. A., Kimmel, B., Wright, J., & Briggs, B. (2024) · Proceedings of the 2024 ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research - Volume 1 · doi:10.1145/3632620.3671116 · Cited by 196 · see citing works
“Due to good performance on these tasks, there have been calls to integrate LLMs into the classroom [9, 72] (albeit with guardrails [23]).”
Self-citationCodeHelp: Using Large Language Models with Guardrails for Scalable Support in Programming Classes
Liffiton, M., Sheese, B. E., Savelka, J., & Denny, P. (2023) · Proceedings of the 23rd Koli Calling International Conference on Computing Education Research · doi:10.1145/3631802.3631830 · Cited by 192 · see citing works
Pardos, Z. A., & Bhandari, S. (2024) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0304013 · Cited by 97 · see citing works
Zhang, X., Zhang, P., Shen, Y., Liu, M., Wang, Q., Gašević, D., & Fan, Y. (2024) · Frontiers of Digital Education · doi:10.1007/s44366-024-0028-5 · Cited by 83 · see citing works
How Do Programming Students Use Generative AI?
Rahe, C., & Maalej, W. (2025) · Proceedings of the ACM on Software Engineering · doi:10.1145/3715762 · Cited by 45 · see citing works
“Prior work found ChatGPT to struggle with identifying issues in code, especially for logic errors [Hellas et al. 2023; Tian et al. 2024].”
Rubric Is All You Need: Enhancing LLM-based Code Evaluation With Question-Specific Rubrics
Pathak, A., Gandhi, R., Uttam, V., Ramamoorthy, A., Ghosh, P., Jindal, A. R., Verma, S., Mittal, A., Ased, A., Khatri, C., et al. (2025) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2503.23989 · Cited by 30
Prather, J., Reeves, B. N., Denny, P., Leinonen, J., MacNeil, S., Luxton-Reilly, A., Orvalho, J., Alipour, A., Alfageeh, A., Amarouche, T., et al. (2024) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2412.12800 · Cited by 20 · see citing works
Self-citationHow Much Does AI Impact Development Speed? an Enterprise-Based Randomized Controlled Trial
Paradis, E., Grey, K., Madison, Q., Nam, D., Macvean, A., Meimand, V., Zhang, N., Ferrari-Church, B., & Chandra, S. (2025) · 2025 IEEE/ACM 47th International Conference on Software Engineering: Software Engineering in Practice (ICSE-SEIP) · doi:10.1109/icse-seip66354.2025.00060 · Cited by 20 · see citing works
“Researchers and educators have also developed prototype tools to assist novice programmers and students [8], [9], [10], [11].”
Navigating the Ethical and Societal Impacts of Generative AI in Higher Computing Education
Mak, J., Nakatumba-Nabende, J., Clear, T., Clear, A., Abluwi, I., Andrei, O., Angeli, L., MacNeil, S., Oyelere, S. S., Hale Rattigan, M., et al. (2025) · Proceedings of the 2025 Working Group Reports on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education · doi:10.1145/3760545.3783975 · Cited by 12 · see citing works
The Widening Gap: The Benefits and Harms of Generative AI for Novice Programmers
Prather, J., Reeves, B., Leinonen, J., MacNeil, S., Randrianasolo, A. S., Becker, B., Kimmel, B., Wright, J., & Briggs, B. (2024) · arXiv · Cited by 196 · see citing works
“Due to good performance on these tasks, there have been calls to integrate LLMs into the classroom [9, 72] (albeit with guardrails [23]).”
Self-citationMapeamento Sistemático sobre o Uso de IAs Generativas no Ensino de Programação
Ferreira de Sousa, J., & Silveira, F. R. D. V. (2026) · Revista Eletrônica de Iniciação Científica em Computação · doi:10.5753/reic.2026.7169
- Authors
- Hellas, A., Leinonen, J., Sarsa, S., Koutcheme, C., Kujanpää, L., & Sorva, J.
- Affiliations
- Aalto University (FI)
- University of Auckland (NZ)
- Venue
- Proceedings of the 2023 ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research V.1
- Publisher
- ACM
- Published
- 2023-08-07
- Pages
- 93-105
- OpenAlex
- W4380353816
- Semantic Scholar
- 87bd28003ca39c7ce5a2d7ca6a03446b2e482a4f
- Cited by
- 145
- References
- 65
- Citations by year
- 2026: 28 · 2025: 57 · 2024: 50 · 2023: 10
- FWCI
- 43.85
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research (ICER) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Aaltodoc (Aalto University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
- Funders
- Ulla Tuominen Foundation
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Science Applications › Teaching and Learning Programming
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Artificial Intelligence in Education
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Software Engineering Research
- Keywords
- large language models, novice programmers, help requests, programming education, AI-assisted programming
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-10-06.
Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-06.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review