Estefanía Martín-Barroso

arXiv2026

Prediction Model of Motivators and Demotivators of Integrating Large Language Models in Software Engineering Education: An Empirical Study

Context: Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly influencing software engineering practice and education. While prior studies examine their technical performance and classroom use, limited research provides cost-aware and empirically grounded models for systematic institutional integration. Objective: This study develops and validates a prediction model to identify cost-efficient strategies for integrating LLMs into software engineering education using motivating and demotivating factors. Method: Based on our previously developed literature survey taxonomies [1], we operationalized 19 validated factors (9 motivators and 10 demotivators) into a structured survey completed by 126 stakeholders from multiple countries. Likert-scale responses were encoded and used to train probabilistic models (Naive Bayes and Logistic Regression) to estimate the likelihood of high LLM familiarity. The probability estimates were integrated into a Genetic Algorithm (GA)-based optimization framework to model trade-offs between predicted familiarity and implementation cost at global and category levels. Results: Respondents perceived strong benefits in Programming Assistance and Debugging Support and Personalized and Adaptive Learning. Major concerns included Plagiarism and Intellectual Property Concerns, Over-Reliance on AI in Learning, and Reduced Critical Thinking and Problem Solving. Optimization results indicate that governance-related mechanisms, particularly integrity and ethical safeguards, should be prioritized under cost constraints. Conclusions: The study introduces an optimization-informed decision support framework linking stakeholder perceptions with probabilistic modeling and cost-effort analysis. The model supports staged and cost-aware LLM integration grounded in governance stability and pedagogically meaningful development.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2024

The competent Computational Thinking test (cCTt): a valid, reliable and gender-fair test for longitudinal CT studies in grades 3-6

The introduction of computing education into curricula worldwide requires multi-year assessments to evaluate the long-term impact on learning. However, no single Computational Thinking (CT) assessment spans primary school, and no group of CT assessments provides a means of transitioning between instruments. This study therefore investigated whether the competent CT test (cCTt) could evaluate learning reliably from grades 3 to 6 (ages 7-11) using data from 2709 students. The psychometric analysis employed Classical Test Theory, Item Response Theory, Measurement Invariance analyses which include Differential Item Functioning, normalised z-scoring, and PISA's methodology to establish proficiency levels. The findings indicate that the cCTt is valid, reliable and gender-fair for grades 3-6, although more complex items would be beneficial for grades 5-6. Grade-specific proficiency levels are provided to help tailor interventions, with a normalised scoring system to compare students across and between grades, and help establish transitions between instruments. To improve the utility of CT assessments among researchers, educators and practitioners, the findings emphasise the importance of i) developing and validating gender-fair, grade-specific, instruments aligned with students' cognitive maturation, and providing ii) proficiency levels, and iii) equivalency scales to transition between assessments. To conclude, the study provides insight into the design of longitudinal developmentally appropriate assessments and interventions.

cs.CY↗