There is still considerable debate about the value generative AI adds to teaching and learning. However, one area where it offered an interesting opportunity was coding. For many students, the mere mention of coding can be intimidating. Yet coding is a mandatory component of the Stage 4 Technology syllabus, requiring all students to develop fundamental programming skills. One of the challenges teachers faces is helping students persist through the inevitable problems and errors that arise when learning to code. Students can quickly become stuck, lose confidence, or become reliant on teachers to provide solutions.

This raised an important pedagogical question:

How can we support students to become more independent problem-solvers while they are learning to code?

To explore this question, our new Year 7 Digital Technologies unit combined design thinking, creativity, and coding through the BBC micro:bit and the Python programming language.

Students first completed the Grok for Beginners: micro:bit Python tutorials, developing foundational coding skills through guided instruction. They then applied this knowledge independently by designing and programming their own digital solution, such as a game, quiz, simulation, or virtual pet.

It was during this second phase of the project that we introduced generative AI.

Rather than using AI to generate solutions for students, we wanted it to act as a learning scaffold. To support student independence, we created an AI agent using Cogniti AI, a platform that allows teachers to build and manage a dedicated AI environment. This also provided teachers with visibility of student interactions, enabling them to monitor engagement, identify misconceptions, and better support learning.

Importantly, the AI agent was deliberately designed not to provide answers., but to support students' learning process.

Instead, it guided students through troubleshooting by asking questions and prompting them to think critically about their code. When students encountered problems, the AI encouraged them to test ideas, identify potential causes, and work through possible solutions rather than simply providing the correct answer. By providing immediate feedback the agent assisted with troubleshooting, and helped students work through common coding errors.

This allowed many students to persevere with challenges before seeking teacher assistance and encouraged them to take greater ownership of solving problems independently.

Students were also required to document and reflect on each interaction with the AI agent. These reflections encouraged them to think about the strategies they used, the decisions they made, and the changes they implemented to improve their solutions. In doing so, students developed greater awareness of their own learning processes and strengthened important metacognitive skills.

From a teaching perspective, this approach also offered significant advantages.

By modelling and demonstrating appropriate AI use during problem-solving and troubleshooting activities, teachers were able to facilitate learning without needing to have every answer immediately available. This was particularly valuable within a Stage 4 course taught by teachers from a range of specialist backgrounds, many of whom have varying levels of coding experience.

The value of AI was in helping to create the conditions where students could continue learning, experimenting, and troubleshooting independently.

By keeping these learning goals at the centre of the design process, AI became a scaffold that helped students develop confidence, capability, and ownership of their learning. This highlights an important pedagogical principle: once we are clear about what we want students to learn, AI can be thoughtfully integrated to support that learning.

Kim Mahoney

Kim Mahoney (MEd) is a highly experienced Technology Teacher with more than 36 years of teaching experience across the Independent, Catholic, and Government sectors in New South Wales. Currently based in the Design and Technology Department at Barker College, Kim has published and presented papers at international conferences evaluating the impact of educational technologies.