aiqbench analysis
This study finds that course context, such as duration and workload, significantly influences how learners adopt GenAI for debugging and idea generation in programming education, outweighing demographic factors like age or prior experience. While adoption is widespread across diverse learner groups, the research notes limited direct correlations between AI usage frequency and specific learning outcomes, offering critical insights for instructional designers adapting curricula to AI integration.
Understanding Generative AI Use in Programming MOOCs: The Role of Course Context and Learner Characteristics
arXiv:2610.04447v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: The increasing availability of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) tools, such as ChatGPT and code-completion assistants, raises questions about how learners integrate these tools into learning activities, particularly in MOOCs that attract diverse participant populations. This study examines the use of GenAI in two programming MOOCs taught in Estonian that differ in duration, workload, topic complexity, and assignment volume: About Programming (4 weeks, 26 expected hours, n = 187) and Introduction to Programming (8 weeks, 78 expected hours, n = 182). Post-course questionnaire data were analyzed using non-parametric statistical methods to examine self-reported adoption, usage frequency, and purposes of GenAI use across courses and learner backgrounds. The results show that GenAI adoption was widespread in both MOOCs, with no statistically significant differences by gender, age, education level, or prior programming experience. However, participants in the longer, more extensive MOOC reported significantly higher usage frequency and were more likely to use GenAI for debugging and idea generation. Reported usage frequency for code explanation and debugging was also higher in the longer course. Exploratory analyses found limited relationships between GenAI use and learning-related outcomes. The findings suggest that course context may play a greater role than learner characteristics in shaping how GenAI tools are used. These results provide implications for instructional design and guidance in programming education.
Abstract:The increasing availability of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) tools, such as ChatGPT and code-completion assistants, raises questions about how learners integrate these tools into learning activities, particularly in MOOCs that attract diverse participant populations. This study examines the use of GenAI in two programming MOOCs taught in Estonian that differ in duration, workload, topic complexity, and assignment volume: About Programming (4 weeks, 26 expected hours, n = 187) and Introduction to Programming (8 weeks, 78 expected hours, n = 182). Post-course questionnaire data were analyzed using non-parametric statistical methods to examine self-reported adoption, usage frequency, and purposes of GenAI use across courses and learner backgrounds. The results show that GenAI adoption was widespread in both MOOCs, with no statistically significant differences by gender, age, education level, or prior programming experience. However, participants in the longer, more extensive MOOC reported significantly higher usage frequency and were more likely to use GenAI for debugging and idea generation. Reported usage frequency for code explanation and debugging was also higher in the longer course. Exploratory analyses found limited relationships between GenAI use and learning-related outcomes. The findings suggest that course context may play a greater role than learner characteristics in shaping how GenAI tools are used. These results provide implications for instructional design and guidance in programming education.
Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Computers and Society (cs.CY); Human-Computer Interaction (cs.HC)
arXiv:2610.04447 [cs.AI]
(or arXiv:2610.04447v1 [cs.AI] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2610.04447 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
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 · 315 words
Related coverage
What's Continual Learning, and Why Might We Expect To See It In Advanced LLM Agents?
LessWrong · Jun 12, 2026

Building AI Literacy: Frameworks, Tools, and Practices
Databricks · Jul 27, 2026

The Alignment Problem: Computer Science Meets Analytic Philosophy
LessWrong · Oct 18, 2026

Master AI Chip Principles With New IEEE Design Program
IEEE Spectrum · Oct 9, 2026