Anticipating User Needs: Insights from Design Fiction on Conversational Agents for Computational Thinking

Computational thinking, and by extension, computer programming, is notoriously challenging to learn. Conversational agents and generative artificial intelligence (genAI) have the potential to facilitate this learning process by offering personalized guidance, interactive learning experiences, and code generation. However, current genAI-based chatbots focus on professional developers and may not adequately consider educational needs. Involving educators in conceiving educational tools is critical for ensuring usefulness and usability. We enlisted \numParticipants{} instructors to engage in design fiction sessions in which we elicited abilities such a conversational agent supported by genAI should display. Participants envisioned a conversational agent that guides students stepwise through exercises, tuning its method of guidance with an awareness of the educational background, skills and deficits, and learning preferences. The insights obtained in this paper can guide future implementations of tutoring conversational agents oriented toward teaching computational thinking and computer programming.

Tag that issue: Applying API-domain labels in issue tracking systems

Labeling issues with the skills required to complete them can help contributors to choose tasks in Open Source Software projects. However, manually labeling issues is time-consuming and error-prone, and current automated approaches are mostly limited to classifying issues as bugs/non-bugs. We investigate the feasibility and relevance of automatically labeling issues with what we call "API-domains," which are high-level categories of APIs. Therefore, we posit that the APIs used in the source code affected by an issue can be a proxy for the type of skills (e.g., DB, security, UI) needed to work on the issue. We ran a user study (n=74) to assess API-domain labels' relevancy to potential contributors, leveraged the issues' descriptions and the project history to build prediction models, and validated the predictions with contributors (n=20) of the projects. Our results show that (i) newcomers to the project consider API-domain labels useful in choosing tasks, (ii) labels can be predicted with a precision of 84% and a recall of 78.6% on average, (iii) the results of the predictions reached up to 71.3% in precision and 52.5% in recall when training with a project and testing in another (transfer learning), and (iv) project contributors consider most of the predictions helpful in identifying needed skills. These findings suggest our approach can be applied in practice to automatically label issues, assisting developers in finding tasks that better match their skills.