-
Improving Steering and Verification in AI-Assisted Data Analysis with Interactive Task Decomposition
Authors:
Majeed Kazemitabaar,
Jack Williams,
Ian Drosos,
Tovi Grossman,
Austin Henley,
Carina Negreanu,
Advait Sarkar
Abstract:
LLM-powered tools like ChatGPT Data Analysis, have the potential to help users tackle the challenging task of data analysis programming, which requires expertise in data processing, programming, and statistics. However, our formative study (n=15) uncovered serious challenges in verifying AI-generated results and steering the AI (i.e., guiding the AI system to produce the desired output). We develo…
▽ More
LLM-powered tools like ChatGPT Data Analysis, have the potential to help users tackle the challenging task of data analysis programming, which requires expertise in data processing, programming, and statistics. However, our formative study (n=15) uncovered serious challenges in verifying AI-generated results and steering the AI (i.e., guiding the AI system to produce the desired output). We developed two contrasting approaches to address these challenges. The first (Stepwise) decomposes the problem into step-by-step subgoals with pairs of editable assumptions and code until task completion, while the second (Phasewise) decomposes the entire problem into three editable, logical phases: structured input/output assumptions, execution plan, and code. A controlled, within-subjects experiment (n=18) compared these systems against a conversational baseline. Users reported significantly greater control with the Stepwise and Phasewise systems, and found intervention, correction, and verification easier, compared to the baseline. The results suggest design guidelines and trade-offs for AI-assisted data analysis tools.
△ Less
Submitted 2 July, 2024;
originally announced July 2024.
-
CodeAid: Evaluating a Classroom Deployment of an LLM-based Programming Assistant that Balances Student and Educator Needs
Authors:
Majeed Kazemitabaar,
Runlong Ye,
Xiaoning Wang,
Austin Z. Henley,
Paul Denny,
Michelle Craig,
Tovi Grossman
Abstract:
Timely, personalized feedback is essential for students learning programming. LLM-powered tools like ChatGPT offer instant support, but reveal direct answers with code, which may hinder deep conceptual engagement. We developed CodeAid, an LLM-powered programming assistant delivering helpful, technically correct responses, without revealing code solutions. CodeAid answers conceptual questions, gene…
▽ More
Timely, personalized feedback is essential for students learning programming. LLM-powered tools like ChatGPT offer instant support, but reveal direct answers with code, which may hinder deep conceptual engagement. We developed CodeAid, an LLM-powered programming assistant delivering helpful, technically correct responses, without revealing code solutions. CodeAid answers conceptual questions, generates pseudo-code with line-by-line explanations, and annotates student's incorrect code with fix suggestions. We deployed CodeAid in a programming class of 700 students for a 12-week semester. A thematic analysis of 8,000 usages of CodeAid was performed, further enriched by weekly surveys, and 22 student interviews. We then interviewed eight programming educators to gain further insights. Our findings reveal four design considerations for future educational AI assistants: D1) exploiting AI's unique benefits; D2) simplifying query formulation while promoting cognitive engagement; D3) avoiding direct responses while encouraging motivated learning; and D4) maintaining transparency and control for students to asses and steer AI responses.
△ Less
Submitted 25 February, 2024; v1 submitted 20 January, 2024;
originally announced January 2024.
-
How Novices Use LLM-Based Code Generators to Solve CS1 Coding Tasks in a Self-Paced Learning Environment
Authors:
Majeed Kazemitabaar,
Xinying Hou,
Austin Henley,
Barbara J. Ericson,
David Weintrop,
Tovi Grossman
Abstract:
As Large Language Models (LLMs) gain in popularity, it is important to understand how novice programmers use them. We present a thematic analysis of 33 learners, aged 10-17, independently learning Python through 45 code-authoring tasks using Codex, an LLM-based code generator. We explore several questions related to how learners used these code generators and provide an analysis of the properties…
▽ More
As Large Language Models (LLMs) gain in popularity, it is important to understand how novice programmers use them. We present a thematic analysis of 33 learners, aged 10-17, independently learning Python through 45 code-authoring tasks using Codex, an LLM-based code generator. We explore several questions related to how learners used these code generators and provide an analysis of the properties of the written prompts and the generated code. Specifically, we explore (A) the context in which learners use Codex, (B) what learners are asking from Codex, (C) properties of their prompts in terms of relation to task description, language, and clarity, and prompt crafting patterns, (D) the correctness, complexity, and accuracy of the AI-generated code, and (E) how learners utilize AI-generated code in terms of placement, verification, and manual modifications. Furthermore, our analysis reveals four distinct coding approaches when writing code with an AI code generator: AI Single Prompt, where learners prompted Codex once to generate the entire solution to a task; AI Step-by-Step, where learners divided the problem into parts and used Codex to generate each part; Hybrid, where learners wrote some of the code themselves and used Codex to generate others; and Manual coding, where learners wrote the code themselves. The AI Single Prompt approach resulted in the highest correctness scores on code-authoring tasks, but the lowest correctness scores on subsequent code-modification tasks during training. Our results provide initial insight into how novice learners use AI code generators and the challenges and opportunities associated with integrating them into self-paced learning environments. We conclude with various signs of over-reliance and self-regulation, as well as opportunities for curriculum and tool development.
△ Less
Submitted 25 September, 2023;
originally announced September 2023.
-
Studying the effect of AI Code Generators on Supporting Novice Learners in Introductory Programming
Authors:
Majeed Kazemitabaar,
Justin Chow,
Carl Ka To Ma,
Barbara J. Ericson,
David Weintrop,
Tovi Grossman
Abstract:
AI code generators like OpenAI Codex have the potential to assist novice programmers by generating code from natural language descriptions, however, over-reliance might negatively impact learning and retention. To explore the implications that AI code generators have on introductory programming, we conducted a controlled experiment with 69 novices (ages 10-17). Learners worked on 45 Python code-au…
▽ More
AI code generators like OpenAI Codex have the potential to assist novice programmers by generating code from natural language descriptions, however, over-reliance might negatively impact learning and retention. To explore the implications that AI code generators have on introductory programming, we conducted a controlled experiment with 69 novices (ages 10-17). Learners worked on 45 Python code-authoring tasks, for which half of the learners had access to Codex, each followed by a code-modification task. Our results show that using Codex significantly increased code-authoring performance (1.15x increased completion rate and 1.8x higher scores) while not decreasing performance on manual code-modification tasks. Additionally, learners with access to Codex during the training phase performed slightly better on the evaluation post-tests conducted one week later, although this difference did not reach statistical significance. Of interest, learners with higher Scratch pre-test scores performed significantly better on retention post-tests, if they had prior access to Codex.
△ Less
Submitted 21 February, 2023; v1 submitted 14 February, 2023;
originally announced February 2023.
-
Scaffolding Progress: How Structured Editors Shape Novice Errors When Transitioning from Blocks to Text
Authors:
Majeed Kazemitabaar,
Viktar Chyhir,
David Weintrop,
Tovi Grossman
Abstract:
Transitioning from block-based programming to text-based programming environments can be challenging as it requires students to learn new programming language concepts. In this paper, we identify and classify the issues encountered when transitioning from block-based to text-based programming. In particular, we investigate differences that emerge in learners when using a structured editor compared…
▽ More
Transitioning from block-based programming to text-based programming environments can be challenging as it requires students to learn new programming language concepts. In this paper, we identify and classify the issues encountered when transitioning from block-based to text-based programming. In particular, we investigate differences that emerge in learners when using a structured editor compared to an unstructured editor. We followed 26 high school students (ages 12-16; M=14 years) as they transitioned from Scratch to Python in three phases: (i) learning Scratch, (ii) transitioning from Scratch to Python using either a structured or unstructured editor, and (iii) evaluating Python coding skills using an unstructured editor. We identify 27 distinct types of issues and show that learners who used a structured editor during the transition phase had 4.6x less syntax issues and 1.9x less data-type issues compared to those who did not. When these learners switched to an unstructured editor for evaluation, they kept a lower rate on data-type issues but faced 4x more syntax errors.
△ Less
Submitted 11 February, 2023;
originally announced February 2023.
