mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Exploring Student Behaviors and Motivations using AI TAs with Optional Guardrails

arXiv 2504.11146 ↗First posted 15 Apr 2025cs.HC cs.CYcited by 3

On the map: LLM safety and security → Safety alignment, refusal and guardrails

Abstract (arXiv)

AI-powered chatbots and digital teaching assistants (AI TAs) are gaining popularity in programming education, offering students timely and personalized feedback. Despite their potential benefits, concerns about student over-reliance and academic misconduct have prompted the introduction of "guardrails" into AI TAs - features that provide scaffolded support rather than direct solutions. However, overly restrictive guardrails may lead students to bypass these tools and use unconstrained AI models, where interactions are not observable, thus limiting our understanding of students' help-seeking behaviors. To investigate this, we designed and deployed a novel AI TA tool with optional guardrails in one lab of a large introductory programming course. As students completed three code writing and debugging tasks, they had the option to receive guardrailed help or use a "See Solution" feature which disabled the guardrails and generated a verbatim response from the underlying model. We investigate students' motivations and use of this feature and examine the association between usage and their course performance. We found that 50% of the 885 students used the "See Solution" feature for at least one problem and 14% used it for all three problems. Additionally, low-performing students were more likely to use this feature and use it close to the deadline as they started assignments later. The predominant factors that motivated students to disable the guardrails were assistance in solving problems, time pressure, lack of self-regulation, and curiosity. Our work provides insights into students' solution-seeking motivations and behaviors, which has implications for the design of AI TAs that balance pedagogical goals with student preferences.

Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Safety alignment, refusal and guardrails, one of 12 directions in LLM safety and security. Builds on 19 of its 53 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 15 Apr 2025.

Builds on

19 of 53 references.

Closest ancestors · 1

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2023CodeHelp: Using Large Language Models with Guardrails for Scalable Support in Programming Classes14 Aug

Other references · 18

  1. 2023The Robots are Here: Navigating the Generative AI Revolution in Computing Educationcited by 86
  2. 2024CodeAid: Evaluating a Classroom Deployment of an LLM-based Programming Assistant that Balances Student and Educator Needscited by 84
  3. 2023Computing Education in the Era of Generative AIcited by 52
  4. 2024The Widening Gap: The Benefits and Harms of Generative AI for Novice Programmerscited by 48
  5. 2023Exploring the Responses of Large Language Models to Beginner Programmers' Help Requestscited by 46
  6. 2024The Effects of Generative AI on Computing Students' Help-Seeking Preferencescited by 23
  7. 2023AI-TA: Towards an Intelligent Question-Answer Teaching Assistant using Open-Source LLMscited by 22
  8. 2024Open Source Language Models Can Provide Feedback: Evaluating LLMs' Ability to Help Students Using GPT-4-As-A-Judgecited by 20
  9. 2024Desirable Characteristics for AI Teaching Assistants in Programming Educationcited by 17
  10. 2024CS1-LLM: Integrating LLMs into CS1 Instructioncited by 16
  11. 2024Beyond the Hype: A Comprehensive Review of Current Trends in Generative AI Research, Teaching Practices, and Toolscited by 14
  12. 2023More Robots are Coming: Large Multimodal Models (ChatGPT) can Solve Visually Diverse Images of Parsons Problemscited by 11
6 more
  1. 2024Integrating AI Tutors in a Programming Coursecited by 3
  2. 2024Oversight in Action: Experiences with Instructor-Moderated LLM Responses in an Online Discussion Forumcited by 3
  3. 2022Challenges Faced by Teaching Assistants in Computer Science Education Across Europecited by 2
  4. 2024Howzat? Appealing to Expert Judgement for Evaluating Human and AI Next-Step Hints for Novice Programmerscited by 2
  5. 2024Seeing the Forest and the Trees: Solving Visual Graph and Tree Based Data Structure Problems using Large Multimodal Modelscited by 2
  6. 2025Prompt Programming: A Platform for Dialogue-based Computational Problem Solving with Generative AI Modelscited by 2

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 3.

3 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026Will It Teach as Intended? How Teachers Configure Educational AI Chatbots ↗
  2. 2026CodeGuard: Improving LLM Guardrails in CS Education
  3. 2026"Bespoke Bots": Diverse Instructor Needs for Customizing Generative AI Classroom Chatbots
  4. 2025Bridging the AI Adoption Gap: Designing an Interactive Pedagogical Agent for Higher Education Instructors
  5. 2026Tutor, Not Solver: Designing a Guardrailed AI Assistant for Learning in Higher Education: A Design Case of PeteChat ↗
  6. 2026An Explainable AI Assistant for Introductory Programming Education: Improving Feedback Reliability with Instructor-AI Collaboration
  7. 2025From Textbook to Talkbot: A Case Study of a Greek-Language RAG-Based Chatbot in Higher Education
  8. 2024Comparing the Utility, Preference, and Performance of Course Material Search Functionality and Retrieval-Augmented Generation Large Language Model (RAG-LLM) AI Chatbots in Information-Seeking Tasks