Last draft without more images I think

slides.tex

@@ -32,6 +32,7 @@
 
 % Referencing
 \bibliographystyle{IEEEtran}
+\setbeamertemplate{bibliography item}{\insertbiblabel}
 
 \title{Can the use of a virtual avatar and scaffolding with AI agents improve
 first-stage programming students' debugging ability?}
@@ -51,9 +52,10 @@ first-stage programming students' debugging ability?}
   of retention.
   \newline
 
-  Students self perceptions about their programming ability affects student
-  retention and increases the rate of students that drop out \cite{lewis2011} in
-  their first stage.
+  One factor influencing retention is students’ self-perception of their
+  programming ability. Negative perceptions can reduce retention and increase
+  the likelihood that students drop out in their first stage.
+  \cite{lewis2011}.
   \newline
 
   A particular point of frustration for novice programmers is attempting to
@@ -67,11 +69,8 @@ first-stage programming students' debugging ability?}
   \newline
 
   Recent literature has begun exploring the use of LLMs but out of the box,
-  found them in most cases to be worse than the alternatives.
-  \cite{Pechorina2023}. Though recent literature has found that there is a
-  benefit to providing code explanation outside business hours
-  \cite{Renzella2025}.
-
+  found them in most cases to be worse than the alternatives
+  \cite{Pechorina2023}.
   %Recent literature has identified this as a problem space that AI
   %can attempt to help resolve. Renzella et al's work \cite{renzella2025}
   %demonstrates that there are aspects of learning that traditionally could only
@@ -127,7 +126,7 @@ first-stage programming students' debugging ability?}
   \begin{figure}
     \centering
     \includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{progprac}
-    \caption{Figure 2 provided by Scott et al. \cite{Scott2014}}
+    \caption{Provided by Scott et al. \cite{Scott2014}}
     \label{fig:question}
   \end{figure}
   This figure shows how programming self-concept influences programming anxiety
@@ -220,6 +219,39 @@ first-stage programming students' debugging ability?}
   fill these gaps when structured effectively.
 \end{frame}
 
+\begin{frame}
+  \frametitle{Aims and objectives}
+  {\small
+  Question:
+
+  Can we use traditional pedagogic strategies to improve the
+  effectiveness of conversational AI agents in helping first stage
+  programming students believe in their ability to debug programs?
+  \newline
+
+  Aims:
+  \begin{itemize}
+    \item Improve first stage self perception on their ability to solve bugs.
+    \item Improve first stage students debugging ability. \newline
+  \end{itemize}
+
+  Objectives:
+  \begin{itemize}
+    \item Evaluate the changes in first stage programming students
+      self-efficacy. 
+      \begin{itemize}
+        \item Both before and post intervention
+      \end{itemize}
+    \item Investigate factors that improve students self perceptions of their
+      programming ability.
+    \item To develop a tool that helps students improve at a rate that makes
+      their self perception of programming ability higher.
+    \item To develop a tool that students can fall back to when they can't seek
+      help elsewhere.
+  \end{itemize}
+  }
+\end{frame}
+
 \begin{frame}
   \frametitle{Methodology}
   Due to the nature of using a software tool to improve outcomes, an
@@ -240,7 +272,7 @@ first-stage programming students' debugging ability?}
   \cite[p.~224]{Coe2025}.
   \begin{itemize}
     \item Year 1 -- Pre-intervention Cohort
-    \item Year 2 -- intervention Cohort
+    \item Year 2 -- Intervention Cohort
   \end{itemize}
 \end{frame}
 
@@ -251,15 +283,16 @@ first-stage programming students' debugging ability?}
   from communicating with the participants. 
   \newline
 
-  There are however several methods we can use to quantify qualitative data
-  through tools like Likert scales \cite{likert1932} and thematic analysis
-  \cite{Braun2006} of feedback. 
-  \newline
-
-  Both of these methods require careful planning to avoid the influence of bias.
-  I've interacted with them before in papers I've contributed to in the past
-  \cite{Mitchell2021, Mitchell2022}, and I am confident in the GA's ability to
-  guide me through the process of making sure I collect this data correctly.
+  Several measurement instruments, typically questionnaires, have been developed
+  and validated for measuring self-beliefs in introductory programming contexts
+  (e.g., \cite{Scott2014}) and these are often complemented through thematic analysis of
+  post-intervention interviews \cite{Braun2006}.
+  %\newline
+  %
+  %Both of these methods require careful planning to avoid the influence of bias.
+  %I've interacted with them before in papers I've contributed to in the past
+  %\cite{Mitchell2021, Mitchell2022}, and I am confident in the GA's ability to
+  %guide me through the process of making sure I collect this data correctly.
 \end{frame}
 
 %\section{Technology stacks and ethical considerations}
@@ -269,7 +302,7 @@ first-stage programming students' debugging ability?}
 %\end{frame}
 
 \begin{frame}
-  \frametitle{AI Ethical Concerns}
+  \frametitle{AI \& Ethical Concerns}
   This research immediately falls into at least medium risk in Falmouth
   University's ethics policy as it involves human participants. Due to the
   nature of interacting with generative AI addition measures will be necessary.