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
+  One factor influencing retention is students’ self-perception of their
-  retention and increases the rate of students that drop out \cite{lewis2011} in
+  programming ability. Negative perceptions can reduce retention and increase
-  their first stage.
+  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.
+  found them in most cases to be worse than the alternatives
-  \cite{Pechorina2023}. Though recent literature has found that there is a
+  \cite{Pechorina2023}.
-  benefit to providing code explanation outside business hours
-  \cite{Renzella2025}.
-
   %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
+  Several measurement instruments, typically questionnaires, have been developed
-  through tools like Likert scales \cite{likert1932} and thematic analysis
+  and validated for measuring self-beliefs in introductory programming contexts
-  \cite{Braun2006} of feedback. 
+  (e.g., \cite{Scott2014}) and these are often complemented through thematic analysis of
-  \newline
+  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
+  %Both of these methods require careful planning to avoid the influence of bias.
-  \cite{Mitchell2021, Mitchell2022}, and I am confident in the GA's ability to
+  %I've interacted with them before in papers I've contributed to in the past
-  guide me through the process of making sure I collect this data correctly.
+  %\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}