Abstract

In the context of rapid integration of artificial intelligence (AI) into all spheres, including education, understanding its impact on the learning process, especially in the field of programming, is of paramount importance. The aim of this paper was to identify and evaluate the impact of AI on the formation of students’ programming competences and to develop recommendations for optimising its application in the academic environment. The study was conducted using empirical methods, including anonymous questionnaire survey of second-year students of two leading universities. The study found that 100% of surveyed students actively used AI in the learning process, with a significant majority (78.5%) regularly interacting with AI applications, indicating a high degree of dependence, exacerbated by insufficient fundamental training and limited access to paid resources. It was found that students often perceive AI outputs uncritically and tend to focus on getting ready-made code without delving into understanding the algorithms, potentially leading to a loss of autonomy and errors. Despite these challenges, AI is showing significant benefits such as personalising learning, increasing efficiency and engagement, positioning itself as a powerful support tool for educators. The data obtained also indicate insufficient differentiation of the concepts of “AI” and “neural networks” among the respondents, which emphasises the need for deeper theoretical training and development of analytical skills. The results of the study provided valuable information for teachers and educational programme developers, allowing them to adjust approaches to teaching programming, to strengthen the emphasis on critical thinking and independence, and to develop methods for effective integration of AI into the educational process, taking into account its advantages and limitations

Keywords

educational process; automation; platforms; ChatGPT; Gemini; DeepSeek; GitHub Copilot

References

  1. Abolnejadian, M., Alipour, S., & Taeb, K. (2024). Leveraging ChatGPT for adaptive learning through personalized prompt-based instruction: A CS1 education case study. In Extended abstracts of the CHI conference on human factors in computing systems (article number 521). New York: Association for Computing Machinery. doi: 10.1145/3613905.3637148.
  2. Bevzenko, S.A. (2024). Research of methods of automatic programming using artificial intelligence. Young Scientist, 11(510), 13-15.
  3. Cambaz, D., & Zhang, X. (2024). Use of Al-driven code generation models in teaching and learning programming: A systematic literature review. In Proceedings of the 55th ACM technical symposium on computer science education (Vol. 1, pp. 172-178). New York: Association for Computing Machinery. doi: 10.1145/3626252.3630958.
  4. Denny, P., Kumar, V., & Giacaman, N. (2023). 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 (Vol. 1, pp. 1136-1142). New York: Association for Computing Machinery. doi: 10.1145/3545945.3569823.
  5. Dolinsky, M.S. (2024). Directions of using generative artificial intelligence in initial teaching programming at universities. Computer Tools in Education, 2, 85-96. doi: 10.32603/2071-2340-2024-2-85-96.
  6. George, S.D., & Dewan, P. (2024). NotebookGPT – facilitating and monitoring explicit lightweight student GPT help requests during programming exercises. In Companion proceedings of the 29th international conference on intelligent user interfaces (pp. 62-65). New York: Association for Computing Machinery. doi: 10.1145/3640544.3645234.
  7. GitHub. (2023). The economic impact of the AI-powered developer lifecycle and lessons from GitHub Copilot. Retrieved from https://github.blog/news-insights/research/the-economic-impact-of-the-ai-powered-developer-lifecycle-and-lessons-from-github-copilot/?utm_source=chatgpt.com.
  8. Guidance Note of the European Commission on Ethics and Data Protection. (2021, July). Retrieved from https://ec.europa.eu/info/funding-tenders/opportunities/docs/2021-2027/horizon/guidance/ethics-and-data-protection_he_en.pdf.
  9. Herden, O. (2024). Integration of chatbots for generating code into introductory programming courses. Retrieved from https://conference.pixel-online.net/files/foe/ed0014/FP/9091-ICT6673-FP-FOE14.pdf.
  10. Humble, N. (2024). Risk management strategy for generative AI in computing education: How to handle the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats? International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 21, article number 61. doi: 10.1186/s41239-024-00494-x.
  11. Kaleem, M., Hassan, M.A., & Khurshid, S.K. (2024). A machine learning-based adaptive feedback system to enhance programming skill using computational thinking. IEEE Access, 12, 59431-59440. doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2024.3391873.
  12. Kuramitsu, K., Obara, Y., Sato, M., & Obara, M. (2023). KOGI: A seamless integration of ChatGPT into Jupyter environments for programming education. In Proceedings of the 2023 ACM SIGPLAN international symposium on SPLASH-E (pp. 50-59). New York: Association for Computing Machinery. doi: 10.1145/3622780.3623648.
  13. Kurbanova, K. (2025). Application of artificial intelligence in the organisation of independent learning on the example of the subject “Fundamentals of Programming”. Current Research, 6(241).
  14. Lee, C., Myung, J., Han, J., Jin, J., & Oh, A. (2023). Learning from teaching assistants to program with subgoals: Exploring the potential for AI teaching assistants. arXiv:2309.10419. doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2309.10419.
  15. Liffiton, M., Sheese, B., Savelka, J., & Denny, P. (2023). CodeHelp: Using large language models with guardrails for scalable support in programming classes. arXiv:2308.06921. doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2308.06921.
  16. Menon, P. (2023). Exploring GitHub Copilot assistance for working with classes in a programming course. Issues in Information Systems, 24(4), 66-81. doi: 10.48009/4_iis_2023_106.
  17. Pangambam, S. (2025). Transcript: The future of U.S. AI leadership with Dario Amodei of Anthropic. Retrieved from https://singjupost.com/transcript-the-future-of-u-s-ai-leadership-with-dario-amodei-of-anthropic/.
  18. Prather, J., Reeves, B., Leinonen, J., MacNeil, S., Randrianasolo, A.S., Becker, B., Kimmel, B., Wright, J., & Briggs, B. (2024). The widening gap: The benefits and harms of generative AI for novice programmers. arXiv:2405.17739. doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2405.17739.
  19. Roest, L., Keuning, H., & Jeuring, J. (2024). Next-step hint generation for introductory programming using large language models. arXiv:2312.10055. doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2312.10055.
  20. Sarshartehrani, F., Mohammadrezaei, E., Behravan, M., & Gracanin, D. (2024). Enhancing E-learning experience through embodied AI tutors in immersive virtual environments: A multifaceted approach for personalized educational adaptation. In R.A. Sottilare & J. Schwarz (Eds.), Adaptive instructional systems. HCII 2024. Lecture notes in computer science (Vol. 14727, pp. 272-287). Cham: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-3-031-60609-0_20.
  21. Sazonov, A.P. (2024). Use of AI in programming. Universum: Technical Sciences, 3(120), 46-52. doi: 10.32743/UniTech.2024.120.3.17010.
  22. Shevchuk, L., & Hunaza, L. (2025). Analysis of international experience in implementing artificial intelligence in the educational process. Scientia et Societus, 4(1), 76-85. doi: 10.69587/ss/1.2025.76.
  23. Tseplyaev, A.F. (2023). Using language models of artificial intelligence to study the basics of programming. Symbol of Science, 5(2), 58-60.
  24. Zhang, S., Yang, J., & Sang, X. (2023). Exploring the applications of EduCoder platform in blended teaching for computer major. Journal of Education and Educational Research, 4(2), 100-103. doi: 10.54097/jeer.v4i2.10819.