REVIEW 1 cited by
Towards Integrating Emerging AI Applications in SE Education
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
Signed reviews
read the original abstract
Artificial Intelligence (AI) approaches have been incorporated into modern learning environments and software engineering (SE) courses and curricula for several years. However, with the significant rise in popularity of large language models (LLMs) in general, and OpenAI's LLM-powered chatbot ChatGPT in particular in the last year, educators are faced with rapidly changing classroom environments and disrupted teaching principles. Examples range from programming assignment solutions that are fully generated via ChatGPT, to various forms of cheating during exams. However, despite these negative aspects and emerging challenges, AI tools in general, and LLM applications in particular, can also provide significant opportunities in a wide variety of SE courses, supporting both students and educators in meaningful ways. In this early research paper, we present preliminary results of a systematic analysis of current trends in the area of AI, and how they can be integrated into university-level SE curricula, guidelines, and approaches to support both instructors and learners. We collected both teaching and research papers and analyzed their potential usage in SE education, using the ACM Computer Science Curriculum Guidelines CS2023. As an initial outcome, we discuss a series of opportunities for AI applications and further research areas.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Perspective of Software Engineering Researchers on Machine Learning Practices Regarding Research, Review, and Education
SE researchers recommend best practices like hyperparameter tuning and human-in-the-loop evaluation, but these appear in under 20% of the 110 analyzed SE/ML papers.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.