Some students described confidence in programming that depended on AI being available¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · qualitative r3 · q2
Currency · no dated study recorded · checked against its sources 2026-10-20 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

Reading the evidence codes

q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.

This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.

q2 i? Five students described confidence that appeared to depend on AI being available, reporting substantial expected drops in confidence or skill without AI. → expectancy-1

Evidence¶

expectancy-1¶

Keith Tran, Colton Harper, and Thomas Price. 2026. "Why Put in This Much Effort?": How AI Availability Shapes Students' Motivation in Introductory Programming. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research Vol. 1 (ICER 2026 Vol. 1). https://doi.org/10.1145/3765964.3811653

q2 · i? · qualitative · r3

In the expectancy findings of this interview study, five students tied confidence to AI availability. P10 said "if I was to not use AI at all, I would probably fail the class," and P8 estimated skills would drop from an eight to a six.

"Five students (P6, P8, P10, P11, P13) described confidence that appeared to depend on AI being available."

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

Self-Efficacy — outcome: instruction changes it

Self-efficacy judgments correspond less well to behavior in learning settings than in performance settings — the general claim this finding bears on, with the studies behind it
Learners' task-specific self-efficacy beliefs predict whether they initiate, persist through, and recover from difficulty on academic tasks. — a broader claim this one bears on
Peer AI use diminished some students' sense of their own effort's value through social comparison, independent of their own AI use — related
AI availability led some students to question the long-term value of programming skills, while others saw programming as equally or more valuable — related
Qualitative themes: efficiency and peer influence drive AI use, while confidence and rule ambiguity shape students' perceptions of dependence — related

Page metadata

Field	Value
`type`	`claim`
`id`	`ai-dependent-confidence-expectancy`
`title`	`Some students described confidence in programming that depended on AI being available`
`description`	`Some students described confidence in programming that depended on AI being available`
`status`	`review`
`evidence_strength`	`weak`
`source_checked`	`2026-10-20`
`generated`	by `process:wiki-ingest` on `2026-10-10`
`trust`	unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content
`sources`	1 — `expectancy-1`

Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.