cs.SEAug 17, 2026

Revisiting the Performance of Generative Artificial Intelligence on Introductory Object-Oriented Programming Assessments: Insights from 2026

Authors: Marina Lepp, Joosep Kaimre

Organizations: Institute of Computer Science, University of Tartu, Estonia

Read PDF
Ask AI
Cite

Copy citation

DOINot available for this paper

Abstract

Recent advances in Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) have substantially improved the ability of large language models (LLMs) to generate and explain source code. However, their performance on authentic object-oriented programming (OOP) assessments remains insufficiently understood. This study evaluates five widely used GenAI systems, ChatGPT-5.2, DeepSeek-V3, Gemini 2.5 Flash, Claude Sonnet 4.5, and M365 Copilot, using programming tests and examination tasks from an introductory university OOP course. The generated solutions were assessed using the same grading criteria applied to students and compared with historical student results from the same course, as well as findings from the previous year. Common errors were also analyzed to identify recurring limitations across models. All evaluated GenAI systems achieved higher scores than the average student cohort and frequently obtained full marks on longer programming tasks. Nevertheless, they occasionally produced non-compiling code and continued to struggle with advanced OOP concepts, particularly interfaces, abstract classes, and certain inheritance-related tasks. Performance was also limited on graphics-related questions involving image interpretation. Compared with the previous year, the evaluated systems demonstrated noticeable improvements across most assessments while exhibiting several recurring error patterns. The findings provide an updated evaluation of the capabilities and limitations of contemporary GenAI systems on authentic introductory OOP assessments. They also offer evidence that can inform the design of programming assessments, the responsible integration of GenAI tools into software engineering education, and future studies evaluating the evolution of AI-assisted programming.

More in this topic

Code Generation Evaluation

Code generation evaluation measures whether AI-produced programs are correct, reliable, secure, efficient, and faithful to their specifications.

See all 215 papers

Explore similar work

CardsList
Sep 15, 2025

Generative AI performance in core undergraduate mathematics: a curriculum-level case study

Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) tools such as OpenAI's ChatGPT are transforming the educational landscape, prompting reconsideration of traditional assessment practices. In parallel, universities are exploring alternatives to in-person, closed-book examinations, raising concerns about academic integrity and pedagogical alignment in uninvigilated settings. This study systematically investigates the performance of GenAI on typical mathematics questions from across a first-year mathematics curriculum. Adopting an empirical approach and utilising current examination questions as a proxy for course content, we generate, transcribe, and blind-mark GenAI submissions to eight undergraduate mathematics assessments, spanning the entirety of the first-year curriculum. By combining independent GenAI responses to individual questions, we enable a meaningful evaluation of GenAI performance, both at the level of modules and across the first-year curriculum. We find that GenAI attainment is at the level of a first-class degree, though current performance can vary between modules. Further, we find that GenAI performance is remarkably consistent when viewed across the entire curriculum, significantly more so than that of students in invigilated examinations. Our findings evidence the pressing need for redesigning assessments in mathematics in the era of generative artificial intelligence.

Benjamin J. Walker, Nikoleta Kalaydzhieva, Beatriz Navarro Lameda +1

Department of Mathematics, University College London, Gordon Street, WC1H 0AY, London, UK

Educational AssessmentGenerative AI in EducationLLM Mathematical ReasoningGenerative AI Evaluation
AskPDF
Oct 3, 2026

Understanding Generative AI Use in Programming MOOCs: The Role of Course Context and Learner Characteristics

The increasing availability of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) tools, such as ChatGPT and code-completion assistants, raises questions about how learners integrate these tools into learning activities, particularly in MOOCs that attract diverse participant populations. This study examines the use of GenAI in two programming MOOCs taught in Estonian that differ in duration, workload, topic complexity, and assignment volume: About Programming (4 weeks, 26 expected hours, n = 187) and Introduction to Programming (8 weeks, 78 expected hours, n = 182). Post-course questionnaire data were analyzed using non-parametric statistical methods to examine self-reported adoption, usage frequency, and purposes of GenAI use across courses and learner backgrounds. The results show that GenAI adoption was widespread in both MOOCs, with no statistically significant differences by gender, age, education level, or prior programming experience. However, participants in the longer, more extensive MOOC reported significantly higher usage frequency and were more likely to use GenAI for debugging and idea generation. Reported usage frequency for code explanation and debugging was also higher in the longer course. Exploratory analyses found limited relationships between GenAI use and learning-related outcomes. The findings suggest that course context may play a greater role than learner characteristics in shaping how GenAI tools are used. These results provide implications for instructional design and guidance in programming education.

Marina Lepp

Institute of Computer Science University of Tartu Tartu, Estonia

Generative AI in EducationProgramming EducationOnline Learning
AskPDF
Oct 26, 2026

Can AI Guide Testing Without Generating Tests? A Comparative Study of AI-Assisted Unit Testing

Recent advances in generative AI have enabled assistants to generate increasingly sophisticated executable unit tests. However, novices may accept these outputs without independently identifying what to test, evaluating test-suite completeness, or verifying correctness, potentially limiting opportunities to develop essential testing skills. Although prior work has explored AI-assisted test generation and feedback-oriented programming tutors, little is known about whether AI can support novices' testing practices without generating tests for them. To investigate this, we introduce TestCompass, a generative AI tutor that provides targeted feedback on weaknesses in students' test suites without generating executable tests. In a classroom study with 18 students, we compared TestCompass with a general AI assistant across two Java unit-testing tasks, examining students' testing behaviors, test-suite quality, and subjective experiences. We found that participants using the general-purpose AI assistant produced more tests, whereas TestCompass participants spent more time developing and verifying tests themselves. However, most test-suite quality measures were comparable between conditions, and TestCompass participants achieved similar requirement coverage with significantly fewer test methods (p=0.012p=0.012) in one task. Neither group reported short-term improvements in perceived testing knowledge or confidence. These findings suggest that feedback-oriented AI can support meaningful testing outcomes while preserving opportunities for hands-on testing practice, offering a complementary approach to AI-assisted testing education.

Zihan Fang, Ron Asoulin-Handelman, Helen Wu +2

Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA

Computer Science EducationGenerative AI in EducationAutomated Software TestingIntelligent Tutoring SystemsEducational Feedback Generation
AskPDF