arXiv subjects

Natalie Kiesler

Publications and source records attributed to Natalie Kiesler.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

A Vision for the Future of an AI-Integrated Research Ecosystem

Generative AI has infiltrated every stage of the research lifecycle: how scholarship is conducted, written, published, and reviewed. Recent policy responses, such as ACM's authorship policy, address an immediate concern about responsible and transparent disclosure of AI use. We argue that a focus on authorship and disclosure, although necessary, risks obscuring and ballooning a set of entrenched problems and strains within publication systems. The central question is not about how papers and other research artifacts should incorporate AI, but how scientific communication itself should evolve when all relevant parties (authors, reviewers, readers) may rely on AI assistance. We draw on our experience within these and other roles to illustrate two contrasting but feasible visions of 2036 with four entwined questions, namely about the purpose of papers as artifacts, reviews, human reviewers, and the incentives that bind all of them. We argue for a shift from policing GenAI and other disruptive technologies to building the infrastructure of provenance, calibration, and accountability that would make trustworthy scholarship the default. We conclude with three grand challenges and invite the community to a broader conversation and research pathways.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2025

Student Engagement with GenAI's Tutoring Feedback: A Mixed Methods Study

How students utilize immediate tutoring feedback in programming education depends on various factors. Among them are the feedback quality, but also students' engagement, i.e., their perception, interpretation, and use of feedback. However, there is limited research on how students engage with various types of tutoring feedback. For this reason, we developed a learning environment that provides students with Python programming tasks and various types of immediate, AI-generated tutoring feedback. The feedback is displayed within four components. Using a mixed-methods approach (think-aloud study and eye-tracking), we conducted a study with 20 undergraduate students enrolled in an introductory programming course. Our research aims to: (1) identify what students think when they engage with the tutoring feedback components, and (2) explore the relations between the tutoring feedback components, students' visual attention, verbalized thoughts, and their immediate actions as part of the problem-solving process. The analysis of students' thoughts while engaging with 380 feedback components revealed four main themes: students express understanding or disagreement, additional information needed, and students explicitly judge the feedback. Exploring the relations between feedback, students' attention, thoughts, and actions showed a clear relationship. While expressions of understanding were associated with improvements, expressions of disagreement or need for additional information prompted students to collect another feedback component rather than act on the current information. These insights into students' engagement and decision-making processes contribute to an increased understanding of tutoring feedback and how students engage with it. Thereby, this work has implications for tool developers and educators facilitating feedback.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2025

GenAI Voice Mode in Programming Education

Real-time voice interfaces using multimodal Generative AI (GenAI) can potentially address the accessibility needs of novice programmers with disabilities (e.g., related to vision). Yet, little is known about how novices interact with GenAI tools and their feedback quality in the form of audio output. This paper analyzes audio dialogues from nine 9th-grade students using a voice-enabled tutor (powered by OpenAI's Realtime API) in an authentic classroom setting while learning Python. We examined the students' voice prompts and AI's responses (1210 messages) by using qualitative coding. We also gathered students' perceptions via the Partner Modeling Questionnaire. The GenAI Voice Tutor primarily offered feedback on mistakes and next steps, but its correctness was limited (71.4% correct out of 416 feedback outputs). Quality issues were observed, particularly when the AI attempted to utter programming code elements. Students used the GenAI voice tutor primarily for debugging. They perceived it as competent, only somewhat human-like, and flexible. The present study is the first to explore the interaction dynamics of real-time voice GenAI tutors and novice programmers, informing future educational tool design and potentially addressing accessibility needs of diverse learners.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2025

Students' Feedback Requests and Interactions with the SCRIPT Chatbot: Do They Get What They Ask For?

Building on prior research on Generative AI (GenAI) and related tools for programming education, we developed SCRIPT, a chatbot based on ChatGPT-4o-mini, to support novice learners. SCRIPT allows for open-ended interactions and structured guidance through predefined prompts. We evaluated the tool via an experiment with 136 students from an introductory programming course at a large German university and analyzed how students interacted with SCRIPT while solving programming tasks with a focus on their feedback preferences. The results reveal that students' feedback requests seem to follow a specific sequence. Moreover, the chatbot responses aligned well with students' requested feedback types (in 75%), and it adhered to the system prompt constraints. These insights inform the design of GenAI-based learning support systems and highlight challenges in balancing guidance and flexibility in AI-assisted tools.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2025

That's Not the Feedback I Need! -- Student Engagement with GenAI Feedback in the Tutor Kai

The potential of Generative AI (GenAI) for generating feedback in computing education has been the subject of numerous studies. However, there is still limited research on how computing students engage with this feedback and to what extent it supports their problem-solving. For this reason, we built a custom web application providing students with Python programming tasks, a code editor, GenAI feedback, and compiler feedback. Via a think-aloud protocol including eye-tracking and a post-interview with 11 undergraduate students, we investigate (1) how much attention the generated feedback received from learners and (2) to what extent the generated feedback is helpful (or not). In addition, students' attention to GenAI feedback is compared with that towards the compiler feedback. We further investigate differences between students with and without prior programming experience. The findings indicate that GenAI feedback generally receives a lot of visual attention, with inexperienced students spending twice as much fixation time. More experienced students requested GenAI less frequently, and could utilize it better to solve the given problem. It was more challenging for inexperienced students to do so, as they could not always comprehend the GenAI feedback. They often relied solely on the GenAI feedback, while compiler feedback was not read. Understanding students' attention and perception toward GenAI feedback is crucial for developing educational tools that support student learning.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2025

Inverted Classroom in der Einführungsveranstaltung Programmierung

Traditionally, the introductory programming course for computer science students at Nuremberg Tech had been implemented as a combination of lectures and exercise sessions. Due to high failure rates in the winter semester 2023/24, an experimental teaching concept based on the inverted classroom was implemented for one cohort in the winter semester 2024/25. Students had to prepare themselves through literature work and activating teaching and learning methods. The course was accompanied by a series of data collections (i.e., a Teaching Analysis Poll, two surveys, and a teaching diary) to gain insights into students' learning methods and behaviors. The concept was evaluated positively overall, although many detailed opportunities for improvement were identified. In this article, we document the results of the surveys and discuss the implications.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2025

The Data Dilemma: Authors' Intentions and Recognition of Research Data in Educational Technology Research

Educational Technology (EdTec) research is conducted by multiple disciplines, some of which annually meet at the DELFI conference. Due to the heterogeneity of involved researchers and communities, it is our goal to identify categories of research data overseen in the context of EdTec research. Therefore, we analyze the author's perspective provided via EasyChair where authors specified whether they had research data to share. We compared this information with an analysis of the submitted articles and the contained research data. We found that not all research data was recognized as such by the authors, especially software and qualitative data, indicating a prevailing lack of awareness, and other potential barriers. In addition, we analyze the 2024 DELFI proceedings to learn what kind of data was subject to research, and where it is published. This work has implications for training future generations of EdTec researchers. It further stresses the need for guidelines and recognition of research data publications (particularly software, and qualitative data).

cs.CY↗

arXiv2025

Open, Small, Rigmarole -- Evaluating Llama 3.2 3B's Feedback for Programming Exercises

Large Language Models (LLMs) have been subject to extensive research in the past few years. This is particularly true for the potential of LLMs to generate formative programming feedback for novice learners at university. In contrast to Generative AI (GenAI) tools based on LLMs, such as GPT, smaller and open models have received much less attention. Yet, they offer several benefits, as educators can let them run on a virtual machine or personal computer. This can help circumvent some major concerns applicable to other GenAI tools and LLMs (e. g., data protection, lack of control over changes, privacy). Therefore, this study explores the feedback characteristics of the open, lightweight LLM Llama 3.2 (3B). In particular, we investigate the models' responses to authentic student solutions to introductory programming exercises written in Java. The generated output is qualitatively analyzed to help evaluate the feedback's quality, content, structure, and other features. The results provide a comprehensive overview of the feedback capabilities and serious shortcomings of this open, small LLM. We further discuss the findings in the context of previous research on LLMs and contribute to benchmarking recently available GenAI tools and their feedback for novice learners of programming. Thereby, this work has implications for educators, learners, and tool developers attempting to utilize all variants of LLMs (including open, and small models) to generate formative feedback and support learning.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2025

Unlimited Practice Opportunities: Automated Generation of Comprehensive, Personalized Programming Tasks

Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) offers new possibilities for generating personalized programming exercises, addressing the need for individual practice. However, the task quality along with the student perspective on such generated tasks remains largely unexplored. Therefore, this paper introduces and evaluates a new feature of the so-called Tutor Kai for generating comprehensive programming tasks, including problem descriptions, code skeletons, unit tests, and model solutions. The presented system allows students to freely choose programming concepts and contextual themes for their tasks. To evaluate the system, we conducted a two-phase mixed-methods study comprising (1) an expert rating of 200 automatically generated programming tasks w.r.t. task quality, and (2) a study with 26 computer science students who solved and rated the personalized programming tasks. Results show that experts classified 89.5% of the generated tasks as functional and 92.5% as solvable. However, the system's rate for implementing all requested programming concepts decreased from 94% for single-concept tasks to 40% for tasks addressing three concepts. The student evaluation further revealed high satisfaction with the personalization. Students also reported perceived benefits for learning. The results imply that the new feature has the potential to offer students individual tasks aligned with their context and need for exercise. Tool developers, educators, and, above all, students can benefit from these insights and the system itself.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2025

The Role of Generative AI in Software Student CollaborAItion

Collaboration is a crucial part of computing education. The increase in AI capabilities over the last couple of years is bound to profoundly affect all aspects of systems and software engineering, including collaboration. In this position paper, we consider a scenario where AI agents would be able to take on any role in collaborative processes in computing education. We outline these roles, the activities and group dynamics that software development currently include, and discuss if and in what way AI could facilitate these roles and activities. The goal of our work is to envision and critically examine potential futures. We present scenarios suggesting how AI can be integrated into existing collaborations. These are contrasted by design fictions that help demonstrate the new possibilities and challenges for computing education in the AI era.

cs.SE↗

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

You're (Not) My Type -- Can LLMs Generate Feedback of Specific Types for Introductory Programming Tasks?

Background: Feedback as one of the most influential factors for learning has been subject to a great body of research. It plays a key role in the development of educational technology systems and is traditionally rooted in deterministic feedback defined by experts and their experience. However, with the rise of generative AI and especially Large Language Models (LLMs), we expect feedback as part of learning systems to transform, especially for the context of programming. In the past, it was challenging to automate feedback for learners of programming. LLMs may create new possibilities to provide richer, and more individual feedback than ever before. Objectives: This paper aims to generate specific types of feedback for introductory programming tasks using LLMs. We revisit existing feedback taxonomies to capture the specifics of the generated feedback, such as randomness, uncertainty, and degrees of variation. Methods: We iteratively designed prompts for the generation of specific feedback types (as part of existing feedback taxonomies) in response to authentic student programs. We then evaluated the generated output and determined to what extent it reflected certain feedback types. Results and Conclusion: The present work provides a better understanding of different feedback dimensions and characteristics. The results have implications for future feedback research with regard to, for example, feedback effects and learners' informational needs. It further provides a basis for the development of new tools and learning systems for novice programmers including feedback generated by AI.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2024

How Novice Programmers Use and Experience ChatGPT when Solving Programming Exercises in an Introductory Course

This research paper contributes to the computing education research community's understanding of Generative AI (GenAI) in the context of introductory programming, and specifically, how students utilize related tools, such as ChatGPT. An increased understanding of students' use is mandatory for educators and higher education institutions, as GenAI is here to stay, and its performance is likely to improve rapidly in the near future. Learning about students' use patterns is not only crucial to support their learning, but to develop adequate forms of instruction and assessment. With the rapid advancement of AI, its broad availability, and ubiquitous presence in educational environments, elaborating how AI can enhance learning experiences, especially in courses such as introductory programming is important. To date, most studies have focused on the educator's perspective on GenAI, its performance, characteristics, and limitations. However, the student perspective, and how they actually use GenAI tools in course contexts, has not been subject to a great number of studies. Therefore, this study is guided by the following research questions: (1) What do students report on their use pattern of ChatGPT in the context of introductory programming exercises? and (2) How do students perceive ChatGPT in the context of introductory programming exercises? To address these questions, computing students at a large German university were asked to solve programming tasks with the assistance of ChatGPT as part of their introductory programming course. Students (n=298) provided information regarding the use of ChatGPT, and their evaluation of the tool via an online survey. This research provides a comprehensive evaluation of ChatGPT-3.5's application by novice programmers in a higher education context...

cs.AI↗

arXiv2024

Feedback-Generation for Programming Exercises With GPT-4

Ever since Large Language Models (LLMs) and related applications have become broadly available, several studies investigated their potential for assisting educators and supporting students in higher education. LLMs such as Codex, GPT-3.5, and GPT 4 have shown promising results in the context of large programming courses, where students can benefit from feedback and hints if provided timely and at scale. This paper explores the quality of GPT-4 Turbo's generated output for prompts containing both the programming task specification and a student's submission as input. Two assignments from an introductory programming course were selected, and GPT-4 was asked to generate feedback for 55 randomly chosen, authentic student programming submissions. The output was qualitatively analyzed regarding correctness, personalization, fault localization, and other features identified in the material. Compared to prior work and analyses of GPT-3.5, GPT-4 Turbo shows notable improvements. For example, the output is more structured and consistent. GPT-4 Turbo can also accurately identify invalid casing in student programs' output. In some cases, the feedback also includes the output of the student program. At the same time, inconsistent feedback was noted such as stating that the submission is correct but an error needs to be fixed. The present work increases our understanding of LLMs' potential, limitations, and how to integrate them into e-assessment systems, pedagogical scenarios, and instructing students who are using applications based on GPT-4.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2024

Analyzing Chat Protocols of Novice Programmers Solving Introductory Programming Tasks with ChatGPT

Large Language Models (LLMs) have taken the world by storm, and students are assumed to use related tools at a great scale. In this research paper we aim to gain an understanding of how introductory programming students chat with LLMs and related tools, e.g., ChatGPT-3.5. To address this goal, computing students at a large German university were motivated to solve programming exercises with the assistance of ChatGPT as part of their weekly introductory course exercises. Then students (n=213) submitted their chat protocols (with 2335 prompts in sum) as data basis for this analysis. The data was analyzed w.r.t. the prompts, frequencies, the chats' progress, contents, and other use pattern, which revealed a great variety of interactions, both potentially supportive and concerning. Learning about students' interactions with ChatGPT will help inform and align teaching practices and instructions for future introductory programming courses in higher education.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2024

Student Perspectives on Using a Large Language Model (LLM) for an Assignment on Professional Ethics

The advent of Large Language Models (LLMs) started a serious discussion among educators on how LLMs would affect, e.g., curricula, assessments, and students' competencies. Generative AI and LLMs also raised ethical questions and concerns for computing educators and professionals. This experience report presents an assignment within a course on professional competencies, including some related to ethics, that computing master's students need in their careers. For the assignment, student groups discussed the ethical process by Lennerfors et al. by analyzing a case: a fictional researcher considers whether to attend the real CHI 2024 conference in Hawaii. The tasks were (1) to participate in in-class discussions on the case, (2) to use an LLM of their choice as a discussion partner for said case, and (3) to document both discussions, reflecting on their use of the LLM. Students reported positive experiences with the LLM as a way to increase their knowledge and understanding, although some identified limitations. The LLM provided a wider set of options for action in the studied case, including unfeasible ones. The LLM would not select a course of action, so students had to choose themselves, which they saw as coherent. From the educators' perspective, there is a need for more instruction for students using LLMs: some students did not perceive the tools as such but rather as an authoritative knowledge base. Therefore, this work has implications for educators considering the use of LLMs as discussion partners or tools to practice critical thinking, especially in computing ethics education.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2023

The Robots are Here: Navigating the Generative AI Revolution in Computing Education

Recent advancements in artificial intelligence (AI) are fundamentally reshaping computing, with large language models (LLMs) now effectively being able to generate and interpret source code and natural language instructions. These emergent capabilities have sparked urgent questions in the computing education community around how educators should adapt their pedagogy to address the challenges and to leverage the opportunities presented by this new technology. In this working group report, we undertake a comprehensive exploration of LLMs in the context of computing education and make five significant contributions. First, we provide a detailed review of the literature on LLMs in computing education and synthesise findings from 71 primary articles. Second, we report the findings of a survey of computing students and instructors from across 20 countries, capturing prevailing attitudes towards LLMs and their use in computing education contexts. Third, to understand how pedagogy is already changing, we offer insights collected from in-depth interviews with 22 computing educators from five continents who have already adapted their curricula and assessments. Fourth, we use the ACM Code of Ethics to frame a discussion of ethical issues raised by the use of large language models in computing education, and we provide concrete advice for policy makers, educators, and students. Finally, we benchmark the performance of LLMs on various computing education datasets, and highlight the extent to which the capabilities of current models are rapidly improving. Our aim is that this report will serve as a focal point for both researchers and practitioners who are exploring, adapting, using, and evaluating LLMs and LLM-based tools in computing classrooms.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2023

Exploring the Potential of Large Language Models to Generate Formative Programming Feedback

Ever since the emergence of large language models (LLMs) and related applications, such as ChatGPT, its performance and error analysis for programming tasks have been subject to research. In this work-in-progress paper, we explore the potential of such LLMs for computing educators and learners, as we analyze the feedback it generates to a given input containing program code. In particular, we aim at (1) exploring how an LLM like ChatGPT responds to students seeking help with their introductory programming tasks, and (2) identifying feedback types in its responses. To achieve these goals, we used students' programming sequences from a dataset gathered within a CS1 course as input for ChatGPT along with questions required to elicit feedback and correct solutions. The results show that ChatGPT performs reasonably well for some of the introductory programming tasks and student errors, which means that students can potentially benefit. However, educators should provide guidance on how to use the provided feedback, as it can contain misleading information for novices.

cs.AI↗