Searcharxiv⌕ Search

arXiv subjects

Adalbert Gerald Soosai Raj

Publications and source records attributed to Adalbert Gerald Soosai Raj.

2 recordsLinked to original sources

Planning on Paper: Problem Decomposition with Diagrams in Introductory Computing

Background and Context. Problem decomposition is a core concern of computing education. It has also become increasingly relevant: in response to GenAI, many CS1 educators are advocating for shifting instructional emphasis away from code writing and towards decomposition and higher-level planning. Currently, there is a lack of knowledge in how novices do decomposition in large, multifunction tasks. Objectives. In this study, we describe how students represent solutions to a decomposition task, and characterize common issues that arise in those representations. Method. In a 50-minute lab, students were given a description of a word game and asked to draw (with pencil and paper) a decomposition diagram for a program that would implement this game. We performed an inductive thematic analysis with negotiated agreement on 55 of the diagrams, coding salient elements (e.g. functions and the relationships between them) and issues that arose. Findings. Students used multiple representational strategies, including hierarchical function calls and sequencing (order of execution). We identified issues in notation (including use of differing, incompatible notations within the same diagram), order of execution, abstraction and reuse, encapsulation, clarity, and problem-specific misunderstandings. Implications. These findings suggest that novice decomposition is shaped by multiple underlying models of program behavior, with tensions between structural and sequence-focused reasoning. We discuss implications for decomposition instruction and future work, including clarifying representational constraints and plan tracing as simulation.

cs.CY↗

Evolution of Programmers' Trust in Generative AI Programming Assistants

Motivation. Trust in generative AI programming assistants is a vital attitude that impacts how programmers use those programming assistants. Programmers that are over-trusting may be too reliant on their tools, leading to incorrect or vulnerable code; programmers that are under-trusting may avoid using tools that can improve their productivity and well-being. Methods. Since trust is a dynamic attitude that may change over time, this study aims to understand programmers' evolution of trust after immediate (one hour) and extended (10 days) use of GitHub Copilot. We collected survey data from 71 upper-division computer science students working on a legacy code base, representing a population that is about to enter the workforce. In this study, we quantitatively measure student trust levels and qualitatively uncover why student trust changes. Findings. Student trust, on average, increased over time. After completing a project with Copilot, however, students felt that Copilot requires a competent programmer to complete some tasks manually. Students mentioned that seeing Copilot's correctness, understanding how Copilot uses context from the code base, and learning some basics of natural language processing contributed to their elevated trust. Implications. Our study helps instructors and industry managers understand the factors that influence how students calibrate their trust with AI assistants. We make four pedagogical recommendations, which are that CS educators should 1) provide opportunities for students to work with Copilot on challenging software engineering tasks to calibrate their trust, 2) teach traditional skills of comprehending, debugging, and testing so students can verify output, 3) teach students about the basics of natural language processing, and 4) explicitly introduce and demonstrate the range of features available in Copilot.

cs.HC↗