Skip to content
aiqbench takeMachine Learning

aiqbench analysis

This research finds that while students leverage GenAI primarily for debugging and conceptual explanations rather than direct code generation, these self-directed usage patterns do not correlate with improved assessment performance or measurable learning gains in object-oriented programming. The findings underscore a critical gap between high-frequency AI tool adoption and actual educational outcomes, suggesting that unguided integration of generative models may fail to enhance student understanding without structured pedagogical support.
Source coveringarXiv
What this isA model's reading of the article and related coverage, written for aiqbench. Not the publisher's words.

Patterns of Learner-AI Interaction and Academic Performance in an Object-Oriented Programming Course

arXiv3 min read

arXiv:2607.24755v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: This full research paper examines how different forms of learner-AI interaction relate to learning outcomes in object-oriented programming (OOP) courses. Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) tools are increasingly used by students in programming education, yet evidence on their educational impact remains mixed. In particular, little is known about how students integrate GenAI tools when learning OOP, and how different patterns of use relate to students' learning experiences and outcomes. This study investigates patterns of students' self-directed GenAI use and their relationship with academic performance, perceived difficulty, understanding, and trust. Survey data were collected from 210 undergraduate students enrolled in a first-year OOP course in which the use of GenAI tools was permitted for coursework but prohibited in assessments. Results show that students used GenAI significantly more often for explanation seeking and debugging than for code generation. Cluster analysis identified five distinct learner-AI interaction profiles, including a "smart" high-usage pattern characterized by low reliance on code generation and high use for conceptual support and debugging. While usage patterns were associated with differences in perceived assignment difficulty, self-assessed understanding, trust in AI-generated code, and norm-related attitudes, no significant differences in assessment performance were found across clusters. These findings suggest that self-directed GenAI use alone does not lead to measurable learning gains, underscoring the need for pedagogically guided and process-aware AI support. The study contributes empirical evidence on learner-AI interaction patterns and highlights the importance of pedagogically guided AI use in programming education.

Abstract:This full research paper examines how different forms of learner-AI interaction relate to learning outcomes in object-oriented programming (OOP) courses. Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) tools are increasingly used by students in programming education, yet evidence on their educational impact remains mixed. In particular, little is known about how students integrate GenAI tools when learning OOP, and how different patterns of use relate to students' learning experiences and outcomes. This study investigates patterns of students' self-directed GenAI use and their relationship with academic performance, perceived difficulty, understanding, and trust. Survey data were collected from 210 undergraduate students enrolled in a first-year OOP course in which the use of GenAI tools was permitted for coursework but prohibited in assessments. Results show that students used GenAI significantly more often for explanation seeking and debugging than for code generation. Cluster analysis identified five distinct learner-AI interaction profiles, including a "smart" high-usage pattern characterized by low reliance on code generation and high use for conceptual support and debugging. While usage patterns were associated with differences in perceived assignment difficulty, self-assessed understanding, trust in AI-generated code, and norm-related attitudes, no significant differences in assessment performance were found across clusters. These findings suggest that self-directed GenAI use alone does not lead to measurable learning gains, underscoring the need for pedagogically guided and process-aware AI support. The study contributes empirical evidence on learner-AI interaction patterns and highlights the importance of pedagogically guided AI use in programming education.

This work has been accepted for publication at the IEEE Frontiers in Education (FIE) 2026 Conference. Copyright may be transferred without notice, after which this version may no longer be accessible

Human-Computer Interaction (cs.HC); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Computers and Society (cs.CY)

arXiv:2607.24755 [cs.HC]

(or arXiv:2607.24755v1 [cs.HC] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2607.24755 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Full text under the publisher's open licence · 369 words

Related coverage