Students' Feedback Requests and Interactions with the SCRIPT Chatbot: Do They Get What They Ask For?

Andreas Scholl, Natalie Kiesler
7/23/2025
cs.AI

No confident code implementation found for this paper. 2 possible matches can be shown below.

Abstract

Building on prior research on Generative AI (GenAI) and related tools for programming education, we developed SCRIPT, a chatbot based on ChatGPT-4o-mini, to support novice learners. SCRIPT allows for open-ended interactions and structured guidance through predefined prompts. We evaluated the tool via an experiment with 136 students from an introductory programming course at a large German university and analyzed how students interacted with SCRIPT while solving programming tasks with a focus on their feedback preferences. The results reveal that students' feedback requests seem to follow a specific sequence. Moreover, the chatbot responses aligned well with students' requested feedback types (in 75%), and it adhered to the system prompt constraints. These insights inform the design of GenAI-based learning support systems and highlight challenges in balancing guidance and flexibility in AI-assisted tools.

View on arXivView PDF

Code Implementations

No confident code match yet

We couldn't find an author-owned or strongly-evidenced community implementation for this paper. 2 weaker matches are hidden by default — verify before relying on them.

No code implementations found yet.

Know of an implementation? Let us know in the comments below!

Similar Papers

Cite this paper

@article{scholl2025students,
  title  = {Students' Feedback Requests and Interactions with the SCRIPT Chatbot: Do They Get What They Ask For?},
  author = {Andreas Scholl and Natalie Kiesler},
  year   = {2025},
  eprint = {2507.17258},
  archivePrefix = {arXiv},
  url    = {http://arxiv.org/abs/2507.17258v1}
}

Add a badge to your README

Shows whether official code is linked for this paper.

Code of Paper badge
[![Code of Paper](https://codeofpaper.com/badge/2507.17258.svg)](https://codeofpaper.com/paper/2507.17258)

Discussion