Exploring How Multiple Levels of GPT-Generated Programming Hints Support or Disappoint Novices

Recent studies have integrated large language models (LLMs) into diverse educational contexts, including providing adaptive programming hints, a type of feedback focuses on helping students move forward during problem-solving. However, most existing LLM-based hint systems are limited to one single hint type. To investigate whether and how different levels of hints can support students' problem-solving and learning, we conducted a think-aloud study with 12 novices using the LLM Hint Factory, a system providing four levels of hints from general natural language guidance to concrete code assistance, varying in format and granularity. We discovered that high-level natural language hints alone can be helpless or even misleading, especially when addressing next-step or syntax-related help requests. Adding lower-level hints, like code examples with in-line comments, can better support students. The findings open up future work on customizing help responses from content, format, and granularity levels to accurately identify and meet students' learning needs.

Evaluating ChatGPT's Decimal Skills and Feedback Generation in a Digital Learning Game

While open-ended self-explanations have been shown to promote robust learning in multiple studies, they pose significant challenges to automated grading and feedback in technology-enhanced learning, due to the unconstrained nature of the students' input. Our work investigates whether recent advances in Large Language Models, and in particular ChatGPT, can address this issue. Using decimal exercises and student data from a prior study of the learning game Decimal Point, with more than 5,000 open-ended self-explanation responses, we investigate ChatGPT's capability in (1) solving the in-game exercises, (2) determining the correctness of students' answers, and (3) providing meaningful feedback to incorrect answers. Our results showed that ChatGPT can respond well to conceptual questions, but struggled with decimal place values and number line problems. In addition, it was able to accurately assess the correctness of 75% of the students' answers and generated generally high-quality feedback, similar to human instructors. We conclude with a discussion of ChatGPT's strengths and weaknesses and suggest several venues for extending its use cases in digital teaching and learning.