PreprintCited by 20Teaching and Learning ProgrammingSoftware Engineering ResearchIntelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive Learning

Breaking the Programming Language Barrier: Multilingual Prompting to Empower Non-Native English Learners

Open access
Prather, James, Reeves, Brent N., Denny, Paul, Leinonen, Juho, MacNeil, Stephen, Luxton-Reilly, Andrew, Orvalho, João, Alipour, Amin +6 more·2024·arXiv

Abstract

Non-native English speakers (NNES) face multiple barriers to learning programming. These barriers can be obvious, such as the fact that programming language syntax and instruction are often in English, or more subtle, such as being afraid to ask for help in a classroom full of native English speakers. However, these barriers are frustrating because many NNES students know more about programming than they can articulate in English. Advances in generative AI (GenAI) have the potential to break down these barriers because state of the art models can support interactions in multiple languages. Moreover, recent work has shown that GenAI can be highly accurate at code generation and explanation. In this paper, we provide the first exploration of NNES students prompting in their native languages (Arabic, Chinese, and Portuguese) to generate code to solve programming problems. Our results show that students are able to successfully use their native language to solve programming problems, but not without some difficulty specifying programming terminology and concepts. We discuss the challenges they faced, the implications for practice in the short term, and how this might transform computing education globally in the long term.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.2412.12800

Cites

48 of 48 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • GenAI has the potential to equalise students with varied levels of command in English language.

    “On the other hand, it has the potential to equalise students with a varied levels of command in English language, which could be beneficial in learning exercises and assessments where English language accuracy is not a stipulated learning outcome but a medium to convey other skills (see for example Prather et al., 2024 looking at programming).”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 15

  1. Arav Agarwal, Karthik Mittal, Aidan Doyle, Pragnya Sridhar, Zipiao Wan, Ja- cob Arthur Doughty, Jaromir Savelka, and Majd Sakr. 2024. Understanding the Role of Temperature in Diverse Question Generation by GPT-4. In Proc. of the 55th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education V. 2. 1550-1551.
  2. Brett A. Becker. 2019. Parlez-vous Java? Bonjour La Monde != Hello World: Barriers to Programming Language Acquisition for Non-Native English Speakers. In 30th Workshop of the Psychology of Programming Interest Group -PPIG '19.
  3. Andre Del Carpio Gutierrez, Paul Denny, and Andrew Luxton-Reilly. 2024. Eval- uating Automatically Generated Contextualised Programming Exercises. In Proc. of the 55th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education V. 1. ACM, NY, NY, USA, 289-295.
  4. Krishno Dey, Prerona Tarannum, Md. Arid Hasan, Imran Razzak, and Usman Naseem. 2024. Better to Ask in English: Evaluation of Large Language Models on English, Low-resource and Cross-Lingual Settings. arXiv:2410.13153 [cs.CL] · arXiv
  5. Philip J. Guo. 2018. Non-Native English Speakers Learning Computer Program- ming: Barriers, Desires, and Design Opportunities. In Proc. of the 2018 CHI Conf. on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, NY, NY, USA, 1-14.
  6. In Proc. of the 55th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education V. 1. ACM, NY, NY, USA, 618-624.
  7. Chaoqun Liu, Wenxuan Zhang, Yiran Zhao, Anh Tuan Luu, and Lidong Bing. 2024. Is Translation All You Need? A Study on Solving Multilingual Tasks with Large Language Models. arXiv:2403.10258 [cs.CL] · arXiv
  8. Alexandre Magueresse, Vincent Carles, and Evan Heetderks. 2020. Low- resource Languages: A Review of Past Work and Future Challenges. arXiv:2006.07264 [cs.CL] · arXiv
  9. Ismael Villegas Molina, Audria Montalvo, Benjamin Ochoa, Paul Denny, and Leo Porter. 2024. Leveraging LLM Tutoring Systems for Non-Native English Speakers in Introductory CS Courses. arXiv:2411.02725 [cs.HC] https://arxiv.org/abs/ 2411.02725 · arXiv
  10. Michael Sheinman Orenstrakh, Oscar Karnalim, Carlos Anibal Suarez, and Michael Liut. 2024. Detecting LLM-generated text in computing education: Comparative study for ChatGPT cases. In 2024 IEEE 48th Annual Computers, Software, and Applications Conf. IEEE, 121-126.
  11. Adalbert Gerald Soosai Raj, Kasama Ketsuriyonk, Jignesh M. Patel, and Richard Halverson. 2017. What Do Students Feel about Learning Programming Using Both English and Their Native Language?. In Int. Conf. on Learning and Teaching in Computing and Engineering. 1-8.
  12. Eddie Antonio Santos and Brett A Becker. 2024. Not the Silver Bullet: LLM- enhanced Programming Error Messages are Ineffective in Practice. arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.18661 (2024). · arXiv
  13. Andrew Tran, Kenneth Angelikas, Egi Rama, Chiku Okechukwu, David H. Smith, and Stephen MacNeil. 2023. Generating multiple choice questions for computing courses using large language models. In 2023 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conf. IEEE, 1-8.
  14. Jacqueline L. Whalley, Raymond Lister, Errol Thompson, Tony Clear, Phil Robbins, P. K. Ajith Kumar, and Christine Prasad. 2006. An Australasian study of reading and comprehension skills in novice programmers, using the bloom and SOLO taxonomies. In Proc. of the 8th Australasian Conf. on Computing Education -Volume 52. Australian Computer Society, Inc., AUS, 243-252.
  15. Jun Zhao, Zhihao Zhang, Luhui Gao, Qi Zhang, Tao Gui, and Xuanjing Huang. 2024. LLaMA Beyond English: An Empirical Study on Language Capability Transfer. arXiv:2401.01055 [cs.CL] · arXiv

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Prather, J., Reeves, B. N., Denny, P., Leinonen, J., MacNeil, S., Luxton-Reilly, A., Orvalho, J., Alipour, A., Alfageeh, A., Amarouche, T., Kimmel, B., Wright, J., Blake, M., & Barbre, G.
Affiliations
  • Abilene Christian University (US)
  • University of Auckland (NZ)
  • Aalto University (FI)
  • Temple University (US)
  • University of Houston (US)
  • University of Toronto Scarborough (CA)
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2024
Pages
74-84
OpenAlex
W4409211663
Cited by
20
References
48
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 8
FWCI
28.97
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Australasian Computing Education Conference (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Aaltodoc (Aalto University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Portuguese National Funding Agency for Science, Research and Technology (RCAAP Project by FCT) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Science Applications › Teaching and Learning Programming
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Software Engineering Research
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Intelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive Learning
Keywords
non-native English speakers, programming education, generative AI, code generation, Arabic language, Chinese, Portuguese, programming terminology, code explanation, multilingual large language models

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.

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