Abstract:Generative AI enables personalized computer science education at scale, yet questions remain about whether such personalization supports or undermines learning. This scoping review synthesizes 32 studies (2023-2025) purposively sampled from 259 records to map personalization mechanisms and effectiveness signals in higher-education computer science contexts. We identify five application domains: intelligent tutoring, personalized materials, formative feedback, AI-augmented assessment, and code review, and analyze how design choices shape learning outcomes. Designs incorporating explanation-first guidance, solution withholding, graduated hint ladders, and artifact ground…
Abstract:Generative AI enables personalized computer science education at scale, yet questions remain about whether such personalization supports or undermines learning. This scoping review synthesizes 32 studies (2023-2025) purposively sampled from 259 records to map personalization mechanisms and effectiveness signals in higher-education computer science contexts. We identify five application domains: intelligent tutoring, personalized materials, formative feedback, AI-augmented assessment, and code review, and analyze how design choices shape learning outcomes. Designs incorporating explanation-first guidance, solution withholding, graduated hint ladders, and artifact grounding (student code, tests, and rubrics) consistently show more positive learning processes than unconstrained chat interfaces. Successful implementations share four patterns: context-aware tutoring anchored in student artifacts, multi-level hint structures requiring reflection, composition with traditional CS infrastructure (autograders and rubrics), and human-in-the-loop quality assurance. We propose an exploration-first adoption framework emphasizing piloting, instrumentation, learning-preserving defaults, and evidence-based scaling. Recurrent risks include academic integrity, privacy, bias and equity, and over-reliance, and we pair these with operational mitigation. The evidence supports generative AI as a mechanism for precision scaffolding when embedded in audit-ready workflows that preserve productive struggle while scaling personalized support.
| Comments: | Review article. 23 pages, 7 figures, 8 tables. Published in AI (MDPI), 2026 |
| Subjects: | Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Computers and Society (cs.CY); Human-Computer Interaction (cs.HC) |
| Cite as: | arXiv:2512.20714 [cs.AI] |
| (or arXiv:2512.20714v1 [cs.AI] for this version) | |
| https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2512.20714 arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration) | |
| Journal reference: | AI 2026, 7(1), Article 6 |
| Related DOI: | https://doi.org/10.3390/ai7010006 DOI(s) linking to related resources |
Submission history
From: Iman Reihanian [view email] [v1] Tue, 23 Dec 2025 19:20:34 UTC (1,192 KB)