Search and Filter

Repository Feedback

Your feedback helps us improve the repository's content relevance and usability. Please share your thoughts to help us better serve researchers and practitioners.

Submit feedback

Submit a research study

Contribute to the repository:

Add a paper

Design Implications For Student And Educator Needs In AI-Supported Programming Learning Tools

Date
Publisher
arXiv
AI-powered coding assistants can support students in programming courses by providing on-demand explanations and debugging help. However, existing research often focuses on individual tools, leaving a gap in evidence-based design recommendations that reflect both educator and student perspectives in education settings. To ground the design of learning-oriented AI coding assistants for both sides' needs, we conducted parallel surveys of educators (N=50) and students (N=90) to compare preferences about (i) how students should request help, (ii) how AI should respond, and (iii) who should control. Our results show that educators generally favored indirect scaffolding that preserves students' reasoning, whereas students were more likely to prefer direct, actionable help. Educators further highlighted the need for course-aligned constraints and instructor-facing oversight, while students emphasized timely support and clarity when stuck. Based on these findings, we discuss the interaction-focused design space and derive design implications for learning-oriented AI coding assistants, highlighting scaffolding and control mechanisms that balance students' agency with instructional constraints.
Study at a glance
  • Question: How do educators and students differ in their preferences for AI-supported programming learning tools?
  • Setting and data: Parallel surveys of 50 educators and 90 students; location and dates not stated in the abstract.
  • Method: Parallel surveys of educators and students
Why it matters

Research often focuses on individual tools, leaving a gap in evidence-based design recommendations for AI coding assistants that reflect both educator and student perspectives.

Key findings
  • Educators generally favored indirect scaffolding that preserves students' reasoning, whereas students were more likely to prefer direct, actionable help.
  • Educators highlighted the need for course-aligned constraints and instructor-facing oversight.
  • Students emphasized the importance of timely support and clarity when they get stuck.

Summary drafted with AI from the paper’s abstract and may contain errors. See the full paper for details.

What is the application?
Who is the user?
Who age?