We study instructor perspectives on LLM-generated programming feedback in an introductory Python course. LLM tutors predominantly offered debugging help, while human instructors preferred more diverse feedback types, including conceptual reminders, revisiting the problem, and examples. Cases where LLM tutor feedback diverged from human instructors' intent required major edits with different feedback types, while cases with closer alignment needed only minor changes with similar feedback types. Findings highlight the need for LLM tutors to reflect on instructor intent to ensure pedagogically aligned feedback.

Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly used as programming tutors, but their feedback is often generic and prone to solution leakage. To address these issues, we present MisconceptionTutor, which grounds feedback in common student misconceptions. Through both pre-deployment analyses and a real-classroom deployment, we find that even simple prompting frameworks can meaningfully steer tutor behavior to be more pedagogically oriented and noticeably more satisfying to students.

We present a reproducible pipeline that aligns CS1 textbook sections with problems from a public dataset via a Knowledge Component (KC) -a single conceptual skill required for problem solving- ontology. It assigns KCs to sections and problems, respects the prerequisite order to avoid inserting problems too early, and generates tips for not-yet-taught concepts. We evaluate three KC assignment strategies: embedding-only, embedding with a Large Language Model (LLM) tie-breaker, and direct LLM assignment. We find direct assignment matches or exceeds human annotators. Our results show that constrained LLMs can enrich CS1 textbooks with curriculum-aware practice problems.

Gauging a student's understanding of course concepts, at an arbitrary point during a course, can be challenging. Standardized exams offer only a snapshot of performance rather than a deep understanding of progress. However, with Large Language Models (LLMs) now deployed at scale in CS1 courses, we can track multiple attempts from each student for every homework problem. This data provides insights into how students learn and deploy concepts over time, presenting a unique opportunity to rethink how we track changes in individual student knowledge. Traditional Knowledge Tracing (KT) methods often lack explainability and are computationally expensive. In contrast, our framework leverages an LLM to identify student progress on labeled, problem-level concepts from a student homework code submission. Our initial results show that the student's knowledge state can be dynamically updated. This knowledge state can then be used to provide more targeted, effective feedback and create tailored study materials.