\textbf{Background and Context.} The prominence of Generative AI (GenAI) has led students to seek academic support from these tools, sometimes with guidance from faculty on how to use them. Since GenAI can operate as an on-demand help resource, understanding the unique value of human staff can help instructors better serve students.

\textbf{Objectives.} We seek to understand the similarities and differences in student experiences with seeking help from teaching assistants versus GenAI.

\textbf{Method.} We conducted n = 18 interviews with students from three different programming courses and performed a thematic analysis. We grounded our analysis under the theoretical lens of student engagement and sociocultural cognition.

\textbf{Findings.} Students reported engaging differently with humans and GenAI. Students appreciated the ease of access for GenAI and felt they could be less intentional and less invested during interactions. Conversely, although human help is less accessible, students value the emotional aspects of human interactions and believe human help leads to greater learning.

\textbf{Implications.} Both GenAI and human help are important components of the help-seeking landscape. We recommend that instructors facilitate interactions between students and TAs beyond the typical office hours to adapt to the presence of GenAI. We also recommend instructors provide guidelines to students on how to effectively learn from GenAI.