Informacja o cookies

Zgadzam się Nasza strona zapisuje niewielkie pliki tekstowe, nazywane ciasteczkami (ang. cookies) na Twoim urządzeniu w celu lepszego dostosowania treści oraz dla celów statystycznych. Możesz wyłączyć możliwość ich zapisu, zmieniając ustawienia Twojej przeglądarki. Korzystanie z naszej strony bez zmiany ustawień oznacza zgodę na przechowywanie cookies w Twoim urządzeniu.

Publikacje Pracowników Politechniki Lubelskiej

MNiSW
70
Lista 2024
Status:
Autorzy: Omarbekova Assel, Miłosz Marek, Bekmanova Gulmira, Rakymkan Yershin , Nazyrova Aizhan, Lamasheva Zhanar
Dyscypliny:
Aby zobaczyć szczegóły należy się zalogować.
Rok wydania: 2026
Wersja dokumentu: Drukowana | Elektroniczna
Język: angielski
Numer czasopisma: 9
Wolumen/Tom: 16
Numer artykułu: 1382
Strony: 1 - 44
Impact Factor: 3,5
Web of Science® Times Cited: 0
Scopus® Cytowania: 0
Bazy: Web of Science | Scopus
Efekt badań statutowych NIE
Materiał konferencyjny: NIE
Publikacja OA: TAK
Licencja:
Sposób udostępnienia: Witryna wydawcy
Wersja tekstu: Ostateczna wersja opublikowana
Czas opublikowania: W momencie opublikowania
Data opublikowania w OA: 27 sierpnia 2026
Abstrakty: angielski
Generative AI tools are now widely used in undergraduate programming, yet most ev- idence about how students use them comes from self-report rather than from observed behaviour. This study examined the sequential structure of students’ ChatGPT (GPT- 4o, OpenAI)-supported programming work and the cognitive complexity of their queries. Screen recordings of 363 second-year students completing an individual Python 3.12 data- visualisation assignment were coded into 3985 activity episodes and analysed using de- scriptive statistics, lag-1 sequential analysis, and cognitive network analysis; because recordings capture actions rather than cognition, the coded categories are treated as be- havioural indicators interpreted within, rather than as measurements of, the Self-Regulated Learning framework. Programming activities accounted for 63% of coded actions and ChatGPT interactions for 20%. Behaviour was organised around a troubleshooting cycle, the strongest association being between submitting error messages and reviewing ChatGPT responses (PCM → RF, Yule’s Q = 0.84, a descriptive association measure, rather than a transition probability, whose stability across students was not tested). ChatGPT use was concentrated in activities indicative of monitoring and control and was largely absent from planning and reflection. High-achieving students produced a higher proportion of deep- level submissions (32.2% vs. 19.2%) and a lower proportion of surface-level submissions (23.2% vs. 38.4%) than low-achieving students; because submissions are nested within students, this difference is reported as a property of the observed distribution rather than as an inferential finding. Comparisons computed at the level of the student were tested inferentially and reached significance with small effect sizes; comparisons computed at the level of coded actions or query submissions are reported throughout as observed properties of the aggregate distributions rather than as inferentially established differences. These episode-level findings support instructional scaffolding that structures query formulation and reflection.