Document Open Access Logo

From Repositories to Practice: LLM-Based Personalization in Programming Education

Authors Marek Horváth , Michaela Ďurkovičová, Lenka Bubeňková , Emília Pietriková

PDF

File

Thumbnail PDF
PDF
OASIcs.ICPEC.2026.9.pdf
  • Filesize: 1.45 MB
  • 13 pages

Document Identifiers

Subject Classification

ACM Subject Classification
  • Applied computing → Computer-assisted instruction
  • Applied computing → Interactive learning environments
  • Software and its engineering → Software creation and management
Keywords
  • Programming Education
  • Personalized Programming Practice
  • Student Profiles
  • Formative Assessment
  • Automated Feedback
  • Learning Analytics
  • Software Engineering Education

Metrics

Abstract

Many programming education systems personalize practice mainly from test results, progress indicators, or explicitly selected user parameters. This paper instead uses students' existing source-code repositories as evidence for personalized programming practice. It presents the design and implementation of a web application that connects to a university version control system, analyzes student-selected repositories, and generates programming challenges targeted at weaknesses identified in the submitted source code. The prototype analyzes the current state of the selected repositories using LLM-based assessment of code-quality indicators such as readability, modularity, duplication, input handling, edge-case handling, and algorithmic complexity. Students can also generate parameterized tests, submit solutions to programming challenges, and receive an automated score with textual feedback. The system stores student activity, test history, challenge history, achieved scores, and generated feedback as an operational student profile shown to students and teachers. The prototype was evaluated with 11 students at the Technical University of Košice. The evaluation demonstrates technical feasibility, usability, and functional operation of the prototype, but it does not measure learning gains, retention, or improvement in programming performance.

Cite As Get BibTex

Marek Horváth, Michaela Ďurkovičová, Lenka Bubeňková, and Emília Pietriková. From Repositories to Practice: LLM-Based Personalization in Programming Education. In 7th International Computer Programming Education Conference (ICPEC 2026). Open Access Series in Informatics (OASIcs), Volume 145, pp. 9:1-9:13, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2026) https://doi.org/10.4230/OASIcs.ICPEC.2026.9

Author Details

Marek Horváth
  • Department of Computers and Informatics, Technical University of Košice, Slovakia
Michaela Ďurkovičová
  • Department of Computers and Informatics, Technical University of Košice, Slovakia
Lenka Bubeňková
  • Department of Computers and Informatics, Technical University of Košice, Slovakia
Emília Pietriková
  • Department of Computers and Informatics, Technical University of Košice, Slovakia

Funding

This work was supported by project KEGA No. 061TUKE-4/2025 "Building Bridges between University and High School ICT Education".

References

  1. Kirsti M. Ala-Mutka. A survey of automated assessment approaches for programming assignments. Computer Science Education, 15(2):83-102, 2005. URL: https://doi.org/10.1080/08993400500150747.
  2. Norbert Baláž, Jaroslav Porubän, Marek Horváth, and Tomáš Kormaník. Using chatgpt during implementation of programs in education. In 5th International Computer Programming Education Conference (ICPEC 2024), pages 18-1. Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik, 2024. URL: https://doi.org/10.4230/OASIcs.ICPEC.2024.18.
  3. John Brooke. Sus: A quick and dirty usability scale. In Patrick W. Jordan, Bruce Thomas, Bernard A. Weerdmeester, and Ian L. McClelland, editors, Usability Evaluation in Industry, pages 189-194. Taylor and Francis, 1996. Google Scholar
  4. Peter Brusilovsky and Christoph Peylo. Adaptive and intelligent web-based educational systems. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 13(2-4):159-172, 2003. URL: https://doi.org/10.3233/IRG-2003-13(2-4)02.
  5. Marilza Antunes de Lemos and Roseli de Deus Lopes. Challenges of programming apprentice. In Proceeding of the International Conference on e-Education, Entertainment and e-Management, pages 320-325. IEEE, 2011. URL: https://doi.org/10.1109/iceeem.2011.6137816.
  6. Paul Denny, Viraj Kumar, and Nasser Giacaman. Conversing with copilot: Exploring prompt engineering for solving cs1 problems using natural language. In Proceedings of the 54th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education V. 1, pages 1136-1142. Association for Computing Machinery, 2023. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/3545945.3569823.
  7. Salvador Espana-Boquera, David Guerrero-Lopez, Alvaro Hermida-Perez, Josep Silva, and Jose V. Benlloch-Dualde. Analyzing the learning process (in programming) by using data collected from an online ide. In 2017 16th International Conference on Information Technology Based Higher Education and Training (ITHET), pages 1-4. IEEE, 2017. URL: https://doi.org/10.1109/ithet.2017.8067822.
  8. Marek Horváth, Tomáš Kormaník, and Jaroslav Porubän. Adaptation of automated assessment system for large programming courses. In 5th International Computer Programming Education Conference (ICPEC 2024), pages 4-1. Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik, 2024. URL: https://doi.org/10.4230/OASIcs.ICPEC.2024.4.
  9. Marek Horváth and Emília Pietriková. An experimental comparison of three code similarity tools on over 1,000 student projects. In 2024 IEEE 22nd World Symposium on Applied Machine Intelligence and Informatics (SAMI), pages 000423-000428. IEEE, 2024. Google Scholar
  10. Marek Horváth, Emília Pietriková, and Filip Gurbál'. Personalized learning analytics through static code analysis in computer science education. Acta Informatica Pragensia, 2026(1):54-71, 2026. Google Scholar
  11. Marek Horvath, Lukas Tomascik, Nikola Geciova, Norbert Adam, and Emilia Pietrikova. Benchmarking ai models for grading cs assignments across multiple domains. Acta Polytechnica Hungarica, 23(5):207-226, 2026. Google Scholar
  12. Petri Ihantola, Arto Vihavainen, Alireza Ahadi, Matthew Butler, Jürgen Börstler, Stephen H. Edwards, Essi Isohanni, Ari Korhonen, Andrew Petersen, Kelly Rivers, Miguel Á. Rubio, Judy Sheard, Barbara Skupas, Jaime Spacco, Claudia Szabo, and Daniel Toll. Educational data mining and learning analytics in programming: Literature review and case studies. In Proceedings of the 2015 ITiCSE Conference on Working Group Reports, pages 41-63. Association for Computing Machinery, 2015. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/2858796.2858798.
  13. Majeed Kazemitabaar, Justin Chow, Carl Ka To Ma, Barbara J. Ericson, David Weintrop, and Tovi Grossman. Studying the effect of ai code generators on supporting novice learners in introductory programming. In Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pages 1-23. Association for Computing Machinery, 2023. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/3544548.3580919.
  14. Hieke Keuning, Johan Jeuring, and Bastiaan Heeren. A systematic literature review of automated feedback generation for programming exercises. ACM Transactions on Computing Education, 19(1):3:1-3:43, 2018. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/3231711.
  15. Mark Liffiton, Brad Sheese, Jaromir Savelka, and Paul Denny. Codehelp: Using large language models with guardrails for scalable support in programming classes. In Proceedings of the 23rd Koli Calling International Conference on Computing Education Research. Association for Computing Machinery, 2023. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/3631802.3631830.
  16. Rongxin Liu, Carter Zenke, Charlie Liu, Andrew Holmes, Patrick Thornton, and David J. Malan. Teaching cs50 with ai: Leveraging generative artificial intelligence in computer science education. In Proceedings of the 55th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education V. 1, SIGCSE 2024, pages 750-756, New York, NY, USA, 2024. Association for Computing Machinery. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/3626252.3630938.
  17. Stephen Nutbrown and Colin Higgins. Static analysis of programming exercises: Fairness, usefulness and a method for application. Computer Science Education, 26(2-3):104-128, 2016. URL: https://doi.org/10.1080/08993408.2016.1179865.
  18. Ivica Pesovski, Daniela Vorkel, and Vladimir Trajkovik. Ai-powered education: Rethinking the way programming is taught using ai tools and reversed bloom’s taxonomy. In 2024 21st International Conference on Information Technology Based Higher Education and Training (ITHET), pages 1-6. IEEE, 2024. URL: https://doi.org/10.1109/ithet61869.2024.10837604.
  19. Igor Skoric, Boris Pein, and Tihomir Orehovacki. Selecting the most appropriate web ide for learning programming using ahp. In 2016 39th International Convention on Information and Communication Technology, Electronics and Microelectronics (MIPRO), pages 877-882. IEEE, 2016. URL: https://doi.org/10.1109/mipro.2016.7522263.
  20. Annapurna Vadaparty, Daniel Zingaro, David H. Smith IV, Mounika Padala, Christine Alvarado, Jamie Gorson Benario, and Leo Porter. Cs1-llm: Integrating llms into cs1 instruction. In Proceedings of the 2024 on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education V. 1, ITiCSE 2024, pages 297-303, New York, NY, USA, 2024. Association for Computing Machinery. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/3649217.3653584.
  21. Kurt VanLehn. The relative effectiveness of human tutoring, intelligent tutoring systems, and other tutoring systems. Educational Psychologist, 46(4):197-221, 2011. URL: https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2011.611369.
  22. Murad Zeer, Rawan Wael Siaj, Jiries Abu Ghannam, and Mohammad Kanan. Ethics of artificial intelligence in university education. In 2023 2nd International Engineering Conference on Electrical, Energy, and Artificial Intelligence (EICEEAI), pages 1-4. IEEE, 2023. URL: https://doi.org/10.1109/eiceeai60672.2023.10590285.
  23. He Zhi-guo and Zhou Chao-xuan. The reformation of teaching methods and curriculum system for software courses. In 2012 International Symposium on Information Technologies in Medicine and Education, pages 1041-1045. IEEE, 2012. URL: https://doi.org/10.1109/itime.2012.6291479.
Any Issues?
X

Feedback on the Current Page

CAPTCHA

Thanks for your feedback!

Feedback submitted to Dagstuhl Publishing

Could not send message

Please try again later or send an E-mail
© 2023-2026 Schloss Dagstuhl – LZI GmbH Schloss Dagstuhl – LZI GmbH About DROPS Imprint Privacy Contact