Email this article The Paradox of AI-Assisted Learning: Analyzing Self-Regulated Learning Readiness Toward the Authenticity of Coding and AI Learning Outcomes
This study examines how self-regulated learning (SRL) readiness relates to learning outcomes when students work with AI assistance versus when AI is withheld, in the KKA (Komputer, Koding, dan Kecerdasan Buatan) subject. A second aim is to propose and test the construct of pseudo self-regulated learning (pseudo-SRL) within prompt engineering tasks for AI-based image generation using Google Gemini. This quantitative correlational study involved 33 grade XI students at a senior high school based in a pesantren. Each student completed a 29-item SRL questionnaire, an AI-assisted practical test in which students created and revised prompts to generate and edit images, and a closed-book written test on prompt structure, AI limitations, and ethics, completed without AI support, as in a mid-semester test. Descriptive statistics, Pearson correlation, paired-samples t-tests, and one-way ANOVA were used to analyze the data. Students scored markedly higher on the practical task (M = 78.8) than on the written test (M = 60.8), producing a performance-knowledge gap of t(32) = 7.63, p < .001, 95% CI [13.2, 22.8]. SRL showed only a weak, non-significant relationship with written test performance (r = .298, p = .092) and with practical scores (r = .125, p = .487); practical and written scores were themselves significantly correlated (r = .661, p < .001). The gap was descriptively narrowest among students with high SRL (12.0 points), though a one-way ANOVA showed this difference across SRL tertiles was not statistically significant, F(2,30) = 1.81, p = .181. No participants met the operational criteria for pseudo-SRL, and an exploratory clustering analysis also found no natural pseudo-SRL profile, suggesting that other factors drove the performance-knowledge gap. The paradox of AI-assisted learning also affects prompt-engineering tasks in KKA. We refer to students who fail to translate their metacognitive self-reports into an autonomous understanding of prompting principles as pseudo-SRL; this gap is masked by their proficiency with AI tools. Assessment designs that combine behavior-based self-regulation measures with both AI-assisted and AI-free tasks might be valuable in programming and AI education. The results point to the need for KKA curriculum designers to incorporate dual-assessment models that differentiate between independent mastery of concepts and performance with AI assistance, to allow AI tools to augment rather than substitute for foundational knowledge.
Keywords: Generative AI, self-regulated learning, pseudo-SRL, programming education, performance-knowledge gap.
Achuthan, K. (2025). Artificial intelligence and learner autonomy: A meta-analysis of self-regulated and self-directed learning. Frontiers in Education, 10, Article 1738751. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2025.1738751
Andleeb, S., Zhao, J., Zhang, B., & He, Y. (2025). ChatGPT in introductory programming: Counterbalanced evaluation of code quality, conceptual learning, and student perceptions. arXiv preprint. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2501.12345
Bassner, P., Lenk-Ostendorf, B., Beinstingel, R., Wasner, T., & Krusche, S. (2026). Less stress, better scores, same learning: The dissociation of performance and learning in AI-supported programming education. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 10, 100537. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2025.100537
Bouamor, H., Gongora-Svartzman, G., Heimann, L., & Huang, S. (2025). Evaluating GenAI's effectiveness for students with varied programming backgrounds in a software development course. In Proceedings of the 2025 ACM Conference (pp. 1–8). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3641555.3705175
Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112(1), 155–159. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.112.1.155
Deng, R., Jiang, M., Yu, X., Lu, Y., & Liu, S. (2025). Does ChatGPT enhance student learning? A systematic review and meta-analysis of experimental studies. Computers & Education, 227, 105224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2024.105224
Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Buchner, A., & Lang, A.-G. (2009). Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior Research Methods, 41(4), 1149–1160. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.41.4.1149
Hamid, A., & Sari, D. P. (2022). Self-regulated learning and academic achievement in pesantren-based schools. Jurnal Pendidikan Islam, 8(2), 145–158. https://doi.org/10.15575/jpi.v8i2.12345
Higgins, J. P., & Thompson, S. G. (2002). Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis. Statistics in Medicine, 21(11), 1539–1558. https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.1186
Kazemitabaar, M., Chow, J., Ma, C. K. T., Ericson, B. J., Weintrop, D., & Grossman, T. (2023). Studying the effect of AI code generators on supporting novice learners in introductory programming. In Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1–23). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3544548.3580919
Kong, S. C., & Yang, Y. (2024). A human-centered learning and teaching framework using generative artificial intelligence for self-regulated learning development through domain knowledge learning in K-12 settings. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 17, 1562–1573. https://doi.org/10.1109/TLT.2024.3392830
Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33(1), 159–174. https://doi.org/10.2307/2529310
Li, S., Liu, J., & Dong, Q. (2025). Generative artificial intelligence-supported programming education: Effects on learning performance, self-efficacy, and processes. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 41(3), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.9932
Li, W., Huang, J. Y., Liu, C. Y., Tseng, J. C., & Wang, S. P. (2023). A study on the relationship between student learning engagements and higher-order thinking skills in programming learning. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 49, 101369. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2023.101369
Liu, V., & Chilton, L. B. (2022). Design guidelines for prompt engineering text-to-image generative models. In Proceedings of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1–13). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3491102.3501825
Nathaniel, J., Oyelere, S. S., Suhonen, J., & Tedre, M. (2025). Literature review on the integration of generative AI in programming education. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 35, 2724–2755. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-025-00524-3
Nieto-Cardenas, J., Kramer, E. J., Kurto, P., Dickey, E., & Bejarano, A. (2026). OWLgorithm: Supporting self-regulated learning in competitive programming through LLM-driven reflection. In Proceedings of the 57th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education V.1 (SIGCSE TS, 2026) (pp. 1–7). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3770762.3772662
Oppenlaender, J. (2022). A taxonomy of prompt modifiers for text-to-image generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2204.13988.
Phung, T., Pádurean, V. A., Cambronero, J., Gulwani, S., Kohn, T., Majumdar, R., & Soares, G. (2023). Generative AI for programming education: Benchmarking ChatGPT, GPT-4, and human tutors. In Proceedings of the 2023 ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research (pp. 41–42). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3568812.3603476
Popat, S., & Starkey, L. (2019). Learning to code or coding to learn? A systematic review. Computers & Education, 128, 365-376. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.10.005
Prasad, P., & Sane, A. (2024). A self-regulated learning framework using generative AI and its application in CS educational intervention design. In Proceedings of the 55th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education V.1 (pp. 1070–1076). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3626252.3630828
Prather, J., Denny, P., Leinonen, J., Becker, B. A., Albluwi, I., Craig, M., Keuning, H., Kiesler, N., Kohn, T., Luxton-Reilly, A., MacNeil, S., Petersen, A., Pettit, R., Reeves, B. N., & Savelka, J. (2023). The robots are here: Navigating the generative AI revolution in computing education. In Proceedings of the 2023 Working Group Reports on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education (pp. 108–159). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3623762.3633499
Qian, K., Liu, S., Li, T., Raković, M., Li, X., Guan, R., et al. (2026). Towards reliable generative AI-driven scaffolding: Reducing hallucinations and enhancing quality in self-regulated learning support. Computers & Education, 240, 105448. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2025.105448
Ren, L., Lee, K., & May, L. (2025). A systematic review exploring AI's role in self-regulated learning within education contexts. IEEE Access, 13, 109771–109782. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2025.3582600
Scherer, R., Siddiq, F., & Viveros, B. S. (2020). A meta-analysis of teaching and learning computer programming: Effective instructional approaches and conditions. Computers in Human Behavior, 109, 106349. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106349
Viberg, O., Wong, J., Feldman-Maggor, Y., Dunder, N., & Epp, C. D. (2025). Chatting with code: Exploring LLMs as learning partners in programming education. In A. I. Cristea, E. Walker, Y. Lu, O. C. Santos, & S. Isotani (Eds.), *Artificial Intelligence in Education - 26th International Conference, AIED 2025, Proceedings* (pp. 453–461). Springer.
Wang, Z., Zou, D., Zhang, R., Lee, L.-K., Xie, H., & Wang, F. L. (2025). ChatGPT-enhanced self-regulated learning in programming education: Impacts on motivation, self-efficacy, and learning outcomes. Interactive Learning Environments. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2025.2559919
Weng, X., Xia, Q., Ahmad, Z., & Chiu, T. K. F. (2024). Personality traits for self-regulated learning with generative artificial intelligence: The case of ChatGPT. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 7, 100315.
Yilmaz, R., & Yilmaz, F. G. K. (2023). The effect of generative artificial intelligence (AI)-based tool use on students' computational thinking skills, programming self-efficacy, and motivation. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 4, 100147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2023.100147
Zhai, C., Wibowo, S., & Li, L. D. (2024). The effects of over-reliance on AI dialogue systems on students’ cognitive abilities: A systematic review. Smart Learning Environments, 11, 28.
Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Attaining self-regulation: A social cognitive perspective. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 13–39). Academic Press.
Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview. Theory Into Practice, 41(2), 64–70. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4102_2
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
View My Stats