Students' Perceptions and Preferences of Generative Artificial Intelligence Feedback for Programming
Authors: Zhengdong Zhang, Zihan Dong, Yang Shi, Noboru Matsuda, Thomas Price, Dongkuan Xu
AI-generated Key Points
⚠The license of the paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the key points are generated using the paper metadata rather than the full article.
- Study by Zhang et al. (2023) focuses on using large language models (LLMs), specifically ChatGPT, for automating feedback in educational settings
- Research aimed to address three key questions:
- How do students perceive LLM-generated feedback in terms of its formative nature?
- What are the advantages of feedback prompts that include students' code versus those that do not?
- What suggestions do students have for enhancing AI-generated feedback?
- Automated feedback generated using ChatGPT API for four lab assignments in a CS1 class
- Students viewed AI-generated feedback as aligning well with established formative feedback guidelines
- Preference among students for feedback that incorporated their own code into the LLM prompt due to specificity, clarity, and corrective nature
- Students generally expected specific and corrective feedback with ample code examples but had varying opinions on the tone of the feedback provided by ChatGPT
- Findings demonstrate ChatGPT's effectiveness in generating Java programming assignment feedback perceived as formative by students
- Research highlights potential of AI-driven tools like ChatGPT in educational settings and identifies improvements needed to enhance AI-generated feedback for student learning outcomes
Abstract: The rapid evolution of artificial intelligence (AI), specifically large language models (LLMs), has opened opportunities for various educational applications. This paper explored the feasibility of utilizing ChatGPT, one of the most popular LLMs, for automating feedback for Java programming assignments in an introductory computer science (CS1) class. Specifically, this study focused on three questions: 1) To what extent do students view LLM-generated feedback as formative? 2) How do students see the comparative affordances of feedback prompts that include their code, vs. those that exclude it? 3) What enhancements do students suggest for improving AI-generated feedback? To address these questions, we generated automated feedback using the ChatGPT API for four lab assignments in the CS1 class. The survey results revealed that students perceived the feedback as aligning well with formative feedback guidelines established by Shute. Additionally, students showed a clear preference for feedback generated by including the students' code as part of the LLM prompt, and our thematic study indicated that the preference was mainly attributed to the specificity, clarity, and corrective nature of the feedback. Moreover, this study found that students generally expected specific and corrective feedback with sufficient code examples, but had diverged opinions on the tone of the feedback. This study demonstrated that ChatGPT could generate Java programming assignment feedback that students perceived as formative. It also offered insights into the specific improvements that would make the ChatGPT-generated feedback useful for students.
Tools for this paper
Ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant
You can also chat with multiple papers at once here.
⚠The license of the paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the AI assistant only knows about the paper metadata rather than the full article.
The previous summary was created more than a year ago and can be re-run (if necessary) by clicking on the Run button below.
⚠The license of this specific paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the summarizing tools will be run using the paper metadata rather than the full article. However, it still does a good job, and you can also try our tools on papers with more open licenses.
Similar papers summarized with our AI tools
Navigate through even more similar papers through a
tree representationLook for similar papers (in beta version)
By clicking on the button above, our algorithm compares the title and abstract of this paper with all the papers of the same arXiv category that we have summarized, and finds the closest ones. You can rerun it from time to time: the results improve as our database grows.
Disclaimer: The AI-based summarization tool and virtual assistant provided on this website may not always provide accurate and complete summaries or responses. We encourage you to carefully review and evaluate the generated content to ensure its quality and relevance to your needs.