arXiv subjects

Leo Porter

Publications and source records attributed to Leo Porter.

12 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

Mapping the Emerging Curriculum for AI-Assisted Software Engineering via Syllabus Analysis

As Generative AI coding tools reshape professional software development, universities have begun designing courses to prepare students for AI-assisted development workflows. By analyzing the syllabi of these courses, we can gather empirical evidence about these courses, reveal how this emerging curricular area is being defined, and gain guidance for future curriculum design. We analyzed 23 publicly available syllabi and course materials of upper-division, credit-bearing courses that meet specific criteria, including explicitly addressing Generative AI in software engineering. Through iterative qualitative coding, we characterized courses' learning objectives, assessments, topics, and documented AI tools. Our analysis reveals commonalities and differences among these courses that allow researchers and educators to study and develop future courses.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2026

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↗

arXiv2026

Drawing Your Programs: Exploring the Applications of Visual-Prompting with GenAI for Teaching and Assessment

When designing a program, both novice programmers and seasoned developers alike often sketch out -- or, perhaps more famously, whiteboard -- their ideas. Yet despite the introduction of natively multimodal Generative AI models, work on Human-GenAI collaborative coding has remained overwhelmingly focused on textual prompts -- largely ignoring the visual and spatial representations that programmers naturally use to reason about and communicate their designs. In this proposal and position paper, we argue and provide tentative evidence that this text-centric focus overlooks other forms of prompting GenAI models, such as problem decomposition diagrams functioning as prompts for code generation in their own right enabling new types of programming activities and assessments. To support this position, we present findings from a large introductory Python programming course, where students constructed decomposition diagrams that were used to prompt GPT-4.1 for code generation. We demonstrate that current models are very successful in their ability to generate code from student-constructed diagrams. We conclude by exploring the implications of embracing multimodal prompting for computing education, particularly in the context of assessment.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2025

Assessing Problem Decomposition in CS1 for the GenAI Era

Problem decomposition--the ability to break down a large task into smaller, well-defined components--is a critical skill for effectively designing and creating large programs, but it is often not included in introductory computer science curricula. With the rise of generative AI (GenAI), students even at the introductory level are able to generate large quantities of code, and it is becoming increasingly important to equip them with the ability to decompose problems. There is not yet a consensus among educators on how to best teach and assess the skill of decomposition, particularly in introductory computing. This practitioner paper details the development of questions to assess the skill of problem decomposition, and impressions about how these questions were received by students. A challenge unique to problem decomposition questions is their necessarily lengthy context, and we detail our approach to addressing this problem using Question Suites: scaffolded sequences of questions that help students understand a question's context before attempting to decompose it. We then describe the use of open-ended drawing of decomposition diagrams as another form of assessment. We outline the learning objectives used to design our questions and describe how we addressed challenges encountered in early iterations. We present our decomposition assessment materials and reflections on them for educators who wish to teach problem decomposition to beginner programmers.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2025

Integrating Large Language Models and Evaluating Student Outcomes in an Introductory Computer Science Course

Generative AI (GenAI) models have broad implications for education in general, impacting the foundations of what we teach and how we assess. This is especially true in computing, where LLMs tuned for coding have demonstrated shockingly good performance on the types of assignments historically used in introductory CS (CS1) courses. As a result, CS1 courses will need to change what skills are taught and how they are assessed. Computing education researchers have begun to study student use of LLMs, but there remains much to be understood about the ways that these tools affect student outcomes. In this paper, we present the design and evaluation of a new CS1 course at a large research-intensive university that integrates the use of LLMs as a learning tool for students. We describe the design principles used to create our new CS1-LLM course, our new course objectives, and evaluation of student outcomes and perceptions throughout the course as measured by assessment scores and surveys. Our findings suggest that 1) student exam performance outcomes, including differences among demographic groups, are largely similar to historical outcomes for courses without integration of LLM tools, 2) large, open-ended projects may be particularly valuable in an LLM context, and 3) students predominantly found the LLM tools helpful, although some had concerns regarding over-reliance on the tools.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2025

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↗

arXiv2025

Exploring Student-AI Interactions in Vibe Coding

Background and Context. Chat-based and inline-coding-based GenAI has already had substantial impact on the CS Education community. The recent introduction of ``vibe coding'' may further transform how students program, as it introduces a new way for students to create software projects with minimal oversight. Objectives. The purpose of this study is to understand how students in introductory programming and advanced software engineering classes interact with a vibe coding platform (Replit) when creating software and how the interactions differ by programming background. Methods. Interview participants were asked to think-aloud while building a web application using Replit. Thematic analysis was then used to analyze the video recordings with an emphasis on the interactions between the student and Replit. Findings. For both groups, the majority of student interactions with Replit were to test or debug the prototype and only rarely did students visit code. Prompts by advanced software engineering students were much more likely to include relevant app feature and codebase contexts than those by introductory programming students.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2025

Exploring Student Behaviors and Motivations using AI TAs with Optional Guardrails

AI-powered chatbots and digital teaching assistants (AI TAs) are gaining popularity in programming education, offering students timely and personalized feedback. Despite their potential benefits, concerns about student over-reliance and academic misconduct have prompted the introduction of "guardrails" into AI TAs - features that provide scaffolded support rather than direct solutions. However, overly restrictive guardrails may lead students to bypass these tools and use unconstrained AI models, where interactions are not observable, thus limiting our understanding of students' help-seeking behaviors. To investigate this, we designed and deployed a novel AI TA tool with optional guardrails in one lab of a large introductory programming course. As students completed three code writing and debugging tasks, they had the option to receive guardrailed help or use a "See Solution" feature which disabled the guardrails and generated a verbatim response from the underlying model. We investigate students' motivations and use of this feature and examine the association between usage and their course performance. We found that 50% of the 885 students used the "See Solution" feature for at least one problem and 14% used it for all three problems. Additionally, low-performing students were more likely to use this feature and use it close to the deadline as they started assignments later. The predominant factors that motivated students to disable the guardrails were assistance in solving problems, time pressure, lack of self-regulation, and curiosity. Our work provides insights into students' solution-seeking motivations and behaviors, which has implications for the design of AI TAs that balance pedagogical goals with student preferences.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2024

Beyond the Hype: A Comprehensive Review of Current Trends in Generative AI Research, Teaching Practices, and Tools

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

cs.CY↗

arXiv2024

Leveraging LLM Tutoring Systems for Non-Native English Speakers in Introductory CS Courses

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

cs.HC↗

arXiv2024

Desirable Characteristics for AI Teaching Assistants in Programming Education

Providing timely and personalized feedback to large numbers of students is a long-standing challenge in programming courses. Relying on human teaching assistants (TAs) has been extensively studied, revealing a number of potential shortcomings. These include inequitable access for students with low confidence when needing support, as well as situations where TAs provide direct solutions without helping students to develop their own problem-solving skills. With the advent of powerful large language models (LLMs), digital teaching assistants configured for programming contexts have emerged as an appealing and scalable way to provide instant, equitable, round-the-clock support. Although digital TAs can provide a variety of help for programming tasks, from high-level problem solving advice to direct solution generation, the effectiveness of such tools depends on their ability to promote meaningful learning experiences. If students find the guardrails implemented in digital TAs too constraining, or if other expectations are not met, they may seek assistance in ways that do not help them learn. Thus, it is essential to identify the features that students believe make digital teaching assistants valuable. We deployed an LLM-powered digital assistant in an introductory programming course and collected student feedback ($n=813$) on the characteristics of the tool they perceived to be most important. Our results highlight that students value such tools for their ability to provide instant, engaging support, particularly during peak times such as before assessment deadlines. They also expressed a strong preference for features that enable them to retain autonomy in their learning journey, such as scaffolding that helps to guide them through problem-solving steps rather than simply being shown direct solutions.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2024

CS1-LLM: Integrating LLMs into CS1 Instruction

The recent, widespread availability of Large Language Models (LLMs) like ChatGPT and GitHub Copilot may impact introductory programming courses (CS1) both in terms of what should be taught and how to teach it. Indeed, recent research has shown that LLMs are capable of solving the majority of the assignments and exams we previously used in CS1. In addition, professional software engineers are often using these tools, raising the question of whether we should be training our students in their use as well. This experience report describes a CS1 course at a large research-intensive university that fully embraces the use of LLMs from the beginning of the course. To incorporate the LLMs, the course was intentionally altered to reduce emphasis on syntax and writing code from scratch. Instead, the course now emphasizes skills needed to successfully produce software with an LLM. This includes explaining code, testing code, and decomposing large problems into small functions that are solvable by an LLM. In addition to frequent, formative assessments of these skills, students were given three large, open-ended projects in three separate domains (data science, image processing, and game design) that allowed them to showcase their creativity in topics of their choosing. In an end-of-term survey, students reported that they appreciated learning with the assistance of the LLM and that they interacted with the LLM in a variety of ways when writing code. We provide lessons learned for instructors who may wish to incorporate LLMs into their course.

cs.CY↗