Integrating Generative AI into Teaching Linear Programming: Understanding Student-AI Interaction, Limitations, and Perceptions

References

• Binhammad MHY, Othman A, Abuljadayel L, Al Mheiri H, Alkaabi M, Almarri M (2024) Investigating how generative AI can create personalized learning materials tailored to individual student needs. Creative Ed. 15(7):1499–1523.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Boyer Commission on Educating Undergraduates in the Research University (1998) Reinventing undergraduate education: A blueprint for America’s research universities. Report, State University of New York at Stony Brook, Stony Brook.Google Scholar
• Cavus N (2010) The evaluation of learning management systems using an artificial intelligence fuzzy logic algorithm. Adv. Engrg. Software 41(2):248–254.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chitra A, Rajkumar A (2016) Plagiarism detection using machine learning-based paraphrase recognizer. J. Intelligent Systems 25(3):351–359.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cohen J (2013) Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (Routledge, New York).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dao XQ, Le NB (2023) Investigating the effectiveness of ChatGPT in mathematical reasoning and problem solving: Evidence from the Vietnamese national high school graduation examination. Preprint, submitted June 10, https://arxiv.org/abs/2306.06331.Google Scholar
• Davis FD (1989) Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quart. 13(3):319–340.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Deci EL, Ryan RM (2012) Self-determination theory. Van Lange PAM, Kruglanski AW, Higgins ET, eds. Handbook of Theories of Social Psychology (Sage Publications, London), 416–436.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Do TD, Shafqat UB, Ling E, Sarda N (2025) Paige: Examining learning outcomes and experiences with personalized AI-generated educational podcasts. Yamashita N, Evers V, Yatani K, Ding X(S), Lee B, Chetty M, Toups-Dugas P, eds. CHI’25: Proc. 2025 CHI Conf. Human Factors Comput. Systems (Association for Computing Machinery, New York), 1–12.Google Scholar
• Elkhatat AM, Elsaid K, Almeer S (2023) Evaluating the efficacy of AI content detection tools in differentiating between human and AI-generated text. Internat. J. Ed. Integrity 19(1):1–16.Google Scholar
• Facione P (1990) Critical thinking: A statement of expert consensus for purposes of educational assessment and instruction. Report, American Philosophical Association, Newark, DE.Google Scholar
• Farquhar S, Kossen J, Kuhn L, Gal Y (2024) Detecting hallucinations in large language models using semantic entropy. Nature 630(8017):625–630.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Flaherty C (2025) AI and threats to academic integrity: What to do. Inside Higher Ed (May 20), https://www.insidehighered.com/news/students/academics/2025/05/20/experts-weigh-everyone-cheating-college.Google Scholar
• Hashem R, Ali N, El Zein F, Fidalgo P, Khurma OA (2024) AI to the rescue: Exploring the potential of ChatGPT as a teacher ally for workload relief and burnout prevention. Res. Practice Tech. Enhanced Learn. 19:23.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Herrero F (2025) Generative AI’s impact on highly personalized learning. AMCIS 2025 Proc., vol. 4 (Association for Information Systems, New York).Google Scholar
• Hoffman RR, Mueller ST, Klein G, Litman J (2023) Measures for explainable AI: Explanation goodness, user satisfaction, mental models, curiosity, trust, and human-AI performance. Frontiers Comput. Sci. 5:1096257.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jauhiainen JS, Garagorry Guerra A (2024) Generative AI and education: Dynamic personalization of pupils’ school learning material with ChatGPT. Frontiers Ed. 9:1288723.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ji Z, Lee N, Frieske R, Yu T, Su D, Xu Y, Ishii E, Bang YJ, Madotto A, Fung P (2023) Survey of hallucination in natural language generation. ACM Comput. Surveys 55(12):1–38.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jian JY, Bisantz AM, Drury CG (2000) Foundations for an empirically determined scale of trust in automated systems. Internat. J. Cognitive Ergonomics 4(1):53–71.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kasneci E, Seβler K, Küchemann S, Bannert M, Dementieva D, Fischer F, Gasser U, et al. (2023) ChatGPT for good? On opportunities and challenges of large language models for education. Learn. Individual Differences 103:102274.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kofinas AK, Tsay CHH, Pike D (2025) The impact of generative AI on academic integrity of authentic assessments within a higher education context. British J. Ed. Tech. 56(6):2522–2549.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kosmyna N, Hauptmann E, Yuan YT, Situ J, Liao XH, Beresnitzky AV, Braunstein I, Maes P (2025) Your brain on ChatGPT: Accumulation of cognitive debt when using an AI assistant for essay writing task. Preprint, submitted June 10, https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.08872.Google Scholar
• Lee HP, Sarkar A, Tankelevitch L, Drosos I, Rintel S, Banks R, Wilson N (2025) The impact of generative AI on critical thinking: Self-reported reductions in cognitive effort and confidence effects from a survey of knowledge workers. Yamashita N, Evers V, Yatani K, Ding X(S), Lee B, Chetty M, Toups-Dugas P, eds. CHI’25: Proc. 2025 CHI Conf. Human Factors Comput. Systems (Association for Computing Machinery, New York), 1–22.Google Scholar
• Li X, Yang Z, Zhang W, Yang Z (2024) ChatGPT and teacher human-machine collaboration for personalized teaching-taking poetry writing teaching as an example. 2024 13th Internat. Conf. Ed. Inform. Tech. (ICEIT) (IEEE, Piscataway, NJ), 7–11.Google Scholar
• Li PH, Lee HY, Cheng YP, Starčič AI, Huang YM (2023) Solving the self-regulated learning problem: Exploring the performance of ChatGPT in mathematics. Huang YM, Rocha T, eds. Innovative Tech. Learn. ICITL 2023, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 14099 (Springer, Cham, Switzerland), 77–86.Google Scholar
• Lu J, Schmidt M, Lee M, Huang R (2022) Usability research in educational technology: A state-of-the-art systematic review. Ed. Tech. Res. Development 70(6):1951–1992.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lu J, Zheng R, Gong Z, Xu H (2024a) Supporting teachers’ professional development with generative AI: The effects on higher order thinking and self-efficacy. IEEE Trans. Learn. Tech. 17:1267–1277.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lu Q, Yao Y, Xiao L, Yuan M, Wang J, Zhu X (2024b) Can ChatGPT effectively complement teacher assessment of undergraduate students’ academic writing? Assessment Evaluation Higher Ed. 49(5):616–633.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Marr B (2023) The difference between generative AI and traditional AI: An easy explanation for anyone. Forbes (July 24), https://www.forbes.com/sites/bernardmarr/2023/07/24/the-difference-between-generative-ai-and-traditional-ai-an-easy-explanation-for-anyone/.Google Scholar
• Moorhouse BL, Wan Y, Wu C, Kohnke L, Ho TY, Kwong T (2024) Developing language teachers’ professional generative AI competence: An intervention study in an initial language teacher education course. System 125:103399.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nenkov N, Dimitrov G, Dyachenko Y, Koeva K (2016) Artificial intelligence technologies for personnel learning management systems. 2016 IEEE 8th Internat. Conf. Intelligent Systems (IS) (IEEE, Piscataway, NJ), 189–195.Google Scholar
• Nigam A, Pasricha R, Singh T, Churi P (2021) A systematic review on AI-based proctoring systems: Past, present and future. Ed. Inform. Tech. 26(5):6421–6445.Google Scholar
• Pascarella ET, Terenzini PT (2005) How College Affects Students: A Third Decade of Research, vol. 2 (Jossey-Bass, San Francisco).Google Scholar
• Perkins M, Roe J, Postma D, McGaughran J, Hickerson D (2024) Detection of GPT-4 generated text in higher education: Combining academic judgement and software to identify generative AI tool misuse. J. Acad. Ethics 22(1):89–113.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Qu X, Sherwood J, Liu P, Aleisa N (2025) Generative AI tools in higher education: A meta-analysis of cognitive impact. Yamashita N, Evers V, Yatani K, Ding X(S), eds. CHI EA’25: Proc. Extended Abstr. CHI Conf. Human Factors Comput. Systems (Association for Computing Machinery, New York), 1–9.Google Scholar
• Sahu M (2016) Plagiarism detection using artificial intelligence technique in multiple files. Internat. J. Sci. Tech. Res. 5(4):111–114. Google Scholar
• Slusky L (2020) Cybersecurity of online proctoring systems. J. Internat. Tech. Inform. Management 29(1):56–83.Google Scholar
• Stokel-Walker C (2022) AI bot ChatGPT writes smart essays—Should professors worry? Nature, ePub ahead of print December 9, https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-022-04397-7.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Takita H, Kabata D, Walston SL, Tatekawa H, Saito K, Tsujimoto Y, Miki Y, Ueda D (2025) A systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic performance comparison between generative AI and physicians. NPJ Digital Medicine 8(1):175.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Walsh J (2025) Everyone is cheating their way through college. New York Magazine (May 7), https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/openai-chatgpt-ai-cheating-education-college-students-school.html.Google Scholar
• Wambsganss T, Janson A, Söllner M, Koedinger K, Leimeister JM (2025) Improving students’ argumentation skills using dynamic machine-learning–based modeling. Inform. Systems Res. 36(1):474–507.Link, Google Scholar
• Wang R, Wang R, Shen Y, Wu C, Zhou Q, Chandra R (2025) Evaluation of LLMs for mathematical problem solving. Preprint, submitted May 30, https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.00309.Google Scholar
• Wu F, Dang Y, Li M (2025) A systematic review of responses, attitudes, and utilization behaviors on generative AI for teaching and learning in higher education. Behav. Sci. 15(4):467.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Xu F, Lin Q, Han J, Zhao T, Liu J, Cambria E (2025) Are large language models really good logical reasoners? A comprehensive evaluation and beyond. IEEE Trans. Knowledge Data Engrg. 37(4):1620–1634.Crossref, Google Scholar