John Edwards

Gavin Eddington, Christopher Warren, Seth Poulsen et al.

Background and Context. Computer programming often involves extended periods of sustained activity and mobile phone notifications introduce frequent opportunities for interruption. Prior work demonstrates that suppressing phone notifications may reduce these disruptions. Objectives. Our primary research question is: How does suppressing phone notifications affect students' task engagement and productivity while programming? Method. We report on a replication and methodological extension study conducted in a CS1 course involving 22 students. Using a within-subject design, selected programming assignments were randomly designated for enabling notification suppression. Phone state logs were synchronized with millisecond-resolution IDE keystroke data to measure student attention and focus when in the control and notification-suppression conditions. Findings. Assignments completed with notification suppression enabled significantly lower break rates and longer intervals of focus compared to assignments completed in the control condition for many, but not all, students. This study provides evidence that notification suppression is associated with measurable differences in programming engagement and behavior. We also find a remarkable bimodality in the effect across students -- many students are positively affected, a small number are negatively affected, and very few experience little or no effect. This finding is consistent with other studies in diverse disciplines. Implications. Our results show that, for many students, phone notification suppression tools, such as Do Not Disturb, can improve attention and focus. Implications apply to educational settings (do-not-disturb as an intervention) and scholarship (understanding the effects of phone distraction).

Peter Fowles, Erik Falor, Sulove Bhattarai et al.

Background and Context: Large Language Models (LLMs) are more accessible and accurate than ever before, raising significant concerns for computing educators. One major concern is students using LLMs to bypass the effort needed to understand concepts and metacognitive strategies essential for success in computer science. Objectives: We contribute a unique approach to assessing and building up student understanding through weekly oral code review assessments. These formative assessments incentivize students to understand their submitted code, regardless of whether or not the code was generated by AI tools. We also use a flipped classroom to provide time for students to learn concepts outside of class and provide ample time for students to schedule code review interviews. Methods: For this paper, we collected data from three semesters. We analyze student exam scores, keystroke logs, and surveys to understand how the new course policies affected student learning, behavior, and attitudes. Findings: Pairwise comparison of exam results reveals a statistically insignificant increase in average scores for Fall 2025 compared to previous semesters. Keystroke logs show a significant increase in characters pasted per total characters input into coding assignments in Fall 2025, pointing towards higher AI usage. Survey results show positive student sentiment towards code reviews at the end of Fall 2025, with nearly all negative feedback being addressable through better scheduling and more rigorous TA training. Implications: Oral code reviews with a flipped classroom appear to be effective at mitigating harms of LLM use while providing space for students to freely experiment with these tools. Our work suggests that students in Fall 2025 still show adequate understanding of material covered in written exams, despite dramatic increases in LLM usage for coding assignments.

Aashish Ghimire, James Prather, John Edwards

The rapid advancement of artificial intelligence (AI) and the expanding integration of large language models (LLMs) have ignited a debate about their application in education. This study delves into university instructors' experiences and attitudes toward AI language models, filling a gap in the literature by analyzing educators' perspectives on AI's role in the classroom and its potential impacts on teaching and learning. The objective of this research is to investigate the level of awareness, overall sentiment towardsadoption, and the factors influencing these attitudes for LLMs and generative AI-based tools in higher education. Data was collected through a survey using a Likert scale, which was complemented by follow-up interviews to gain a more nuanced understanding of the instructors' viewpoints. The collected data was processed using statistical and thematic analysis techniques. Our findings reveal that educators are increasingly aware of and generally positive towards these tools. We find no correlation between teaching style and attitude toward generative AI. Finally, while CS educators show far more confidence in their technical understanding of generative AI tools and more positivity towards them than educators in other fields, they show no more confidence in their ability to detect AI-generated work.

Aashish Ghimire, John Edwards

Emerging technologies like generative AI tools, including ChatGPT, are increasingly utilized in educational settings, offering innovative approaches to learning while simultaneously posing new challenges. This study employs a survey methodology to examine the policy landscape concerning these technologies, drawing insights from 102 high school principals and higher education provosts. Our results reveal a prominent policy gap: the majority of institutions lack specialized guide-lines for the ethical deployment of AI tools such as ChatGPT. Moreover,we observed that high schools are less inclined to work on policies than higher educational institutions. Where such policies do exist, they often overlook crucial issues, including student privacy and algorithmic transparency. Administrators overwhelmingly recognize the necessity of these policies, primarily to safeguard student safety and mitigate plagiarism risks. Our findings underscore the urgent need for flexible and iterative policy frameworks in educational contexts.

Aashish Ghimire, John Edwards

The burgeoning development of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) and the widespread adoption of large language models (LLMs) in educational settings have sparked considerable debate regarding their efficacy and acceptability.Despite the potential benefits, the assimilation of these cutting-edge technologies among educators exhibits a broad spectrum of attitudes, from enthusiastic advocacy to profound skepticism.This study aims to dissect the underlying factors influencing educators' perceptions and acceptance of GenAI and LLMs.We conducted a survey among educators and analyzed the data through the frameworks of the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) and Innovation Diffusion Theory (IDT). Our investigation reveals a strong positive correlation between the perceived usefulness of GenAI tools and their acceptance, underscoring the importance of demonstrating tangible benefits to educators. Additionally, the perceived ease of use emerged as a significant factor, though to a lesser extent, influencing acceptance. Our findings also show that the knowledge and acceptance of these tools is not uniform, suggesting that targeted strategies are required to address the specific needs and concerns of each adopter category to facilitate broader integration of AI tools.in education.

John Edwards, Arto Hellas, Juho Leinonen

Computing educators and researchers have used programming process data to understand how programs are constructed and what sorts of problems students struggle with. Although such data shows promise for using it for feedback, fully automated programming process feedback systems have still been an under-explored area. The recent emergence of large language models (LLMs) have yielded additional opportunities for researchers in a wide variety of fields. LLMs are efficient at transforming content from one format to another, leveraging the body of knowledge they have been trained with in the process. In this article, we discuss opportunities of using LLMs for analyzing programming process data. To complement our discussion, we outline a case study where we have leveraged LLMs for automatically summarizing the programming process and for creating formative feedback on the programming process. Overall, our discussion and findings highlight that the computing education research and practice community is again one step closer to automating formative programming process-focused feedback.