More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/

research-article

Learning to Program is Easy

Author:

Andrew Luxton-ReillyAuthors Info & Claims

ITiCSE '16: Proceedings of the 2016 ACM Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education

Pages 284 - 289

https://doi.org/10.1145/2899415.2899432

Published: 11 July 2016 Publication History

Abstract

The orthodox view that "programming is difficult to learn" leads to uncritical teaching practices and poor student outcomes. It may also impact negatively on diversity and equity within the Computer Science discipline. But learning to program is easy --- so easy that children can do it. We make our introductory courses difficult by establishing unrealistic expectations for novice programming students. By revisiting the expected norms for introductory programming we may be able to substantially improve outcomes for novice programmers, address negative impressions of disciplinary practices and create a more equitable environment.

References

[1]

ACM/IEEE-CS Joint Task Force on Computing Curricula. Computer science curricula 2013. Technical report, ACM Press and IEEE Computer Society Press, December 2013.

[2]

L. J. Barker, C. McDowell, and K. Kalahar. Exploring factors that influence computer science introductory course students to persist in the major. In Proceedings of the 40th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, SIGCSE '09, pages 153--157, New York, NY, USA, 2009. ACM.

Digital Library

[3]

T. Beaubouef and J. Mason. Why the high attrition rate for computer science students: Some thoughts and observations. SIGCSE Bull., 37(2):103--106, June 2005.

Digital Library

[4]

T. Bell. Establishing a nationwide cs curriculum in new zealand high schools. Commun. ACM, 57(2):28--30, Feb. 2014.

Digital Library

[5]

J. Bennedsen and M. E. Caspersen. Failure rates in introductory programming. SIGCSE Bull., 39(2):32--36, June 2007.

Digital Library

[6]

S. Bergin and R. Reilly. The influence of motivation and comfort-level on learning to program. In P. Romero, J. Good, E. A. Chaparro, and S. Bryant, editors, Proceedings of 17th Workshop of the Psychology of Programming Interest Group, pages 293--304, Sussex University, June 2005.

[7]

M. Biggers, A. Brauer, and T. Yilmaz. Student perceptions of computer science: A retention study comparing graduating seniors with cs leavers. In Proceedings of the 39th SIGCSE Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, SIGCSE '08, pages 402--406, New York, NY, USA, 2008. ACM.

Digital Library

[8]

J. B. Biggs and K. F. Collis. Evaluating the quality of learning: The SOLO taxonomy (Structure of the Observed Learning Outcome). Academic Press, New York, 1982.

[9]

S. Bloch. Re: Motivating students: Was survey results. SIGCSE [email protected], 14th October 2014.

[10]

R. Bornat, S. Dehnadi, and Simon. Mental models, consistency and programming aptitude. In Proceedings of the Tenth Conference on Australasian Computing Education - Volume 78, ACE '08, pages 53--61, Darlinghurst, Australia, Australia, 2008. Australian Computer Society, Inc.

Digital Library

[11]

N. C. C. Brown, S. Sentance, T. Crick, and S. Humphreys. Restart: The resurgence of computer science in uk schools. Trans. Comput. Educ., 14(2):9:1--9:22, June 2014.

Digital Library

[12]

M. E. Caspersen and P. Nowack. Computational thinking and practice: A generic approach to computing in danish high schools. In Proceedings of the Fifteenth Australasian Computing Education Conference - Volume 136, ACE '13, pages 137--143, Darlinghurst, Australia, Australia, 2013. Australian Computer Society, Inc.

Digital Library

[13]

K. Falkner, R. Vivian, and N. Falkner. The australian digital technologies curriculum: Challenge and opportunity. In Proceedings of the Sixteenth Australasian Computing Education Conference - Volume 148, ACE '14, pages 3--12, Darlinghurst, Australia, Australia, 2014. Australian Computer Society, Inc.

Digital Library

[14]

M. Guzdial. Is learning to program inherently hard? Retrieved from: https://computinged.wordpress.com/2010/04/14/is-learning-to-program-inherently-hard/, April 2010.

[15]

D. Horton and M. Craig. Drop, fail, pass, continue: Persistence in cs1 and beyond in traditional and inverted delivery. In Proceedings of the 46th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, SIGCSE '15, pages 235--240, New York, NY, USA, 2015. ACM.

Digital Library

[16]

C. Kelleher and R. Pausch. Lowering the barriers to programming: A taxonomy of programming environments and languages for novice programmers. ACM Comput. Surv., 37(2):83--137, June 2005.

Digital Library

[17]

P. Kinnunen and L. Malmi. Why students drop out cs1 course? In Proceedings of the Second International Workshop on Computing Education Research, ICER '06, pages 97--108, New York, NY, USA, 2006. ACM.

Digital Library

[18]

P. Kinnunen and L. Malmi. Cs minors in a cs1 course. In Proceedings of the Fourth International Workshop on Computing Education Research, ICER '08, pages 79--90, New York, NY, USA, 2008. ACM.

Digital Library

[19]

R. Lister. Computing education research: Geek genes and bimodal grades. ACM Inroads, 1(3):16--17, Sept. 2011.

Digital Library

[20]

R. Lister, E. S. Adams, S. Fitzgerald, W. Fone, J. Hamer, M. Lindholm, R. McCartney, J. E. Moström, K. Sanders, O. Seppälä, B. Simon, and L. Thomas. A multi-national study of reading and tracing skills in novice programmers. SIGCSE Bull., 36(4):119--150, June 2004.

Digital Library

[21]

R. Lister, B. Simon, E. Thompson, J. L. Whalley, and C. Prasad. Not seeing the forest for the trees: Novice programmers and the solo taxonomy. SIGCSE Bull., 38(3):118--122, June 2006.

Digital Library

[22]

M. McCracken, V. Almstrum, D. Diaz, M. Guzdial, D. Hagan, Y. B.-D. Kolikant, C. Laxer, L. Thomas, I. Utting, and T. Wilusz. A multi-national, multi-institutional study of assessment of programming skills of first-year cs students. SIGCSE Bull., 33(4):125--180, Dec. 2001.

Digital Library

[23]

S. Papert. Mindstorms: Children, Computers, and Powerful Ideas. Basic Books, Inc., New York, NY, USA, 1980.

Digital Library

[24]

A. Petersen, M. Craig, and D. Zingaro. Reviewing cs1 exam question content. In Proceedings of the 42nd ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, SIGCSE '11, pages 631--636, New York, NY, USA, 2011. ACM.

Digital Library

[25]

A. Robins. Learning edge momentum: a new account of outcomes in cs1. Computer Science Education, 20(1):37--71, 2010.

[26]

A. Robins, J. Rountree, and N. Rountree. Learning and teaching programming: A review and discussion. Computer Science Education, 13:137--172, 2003.

[27]

D. J. Scott. A closer look at completion in higher education in new zealand. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 31(2):101--108, 2009.

[28]

J. Sheard and M. Dick. Directions and dimensions in managing cheating and plagiarism of it students. In Proceedings of the Fourteenth Australasian Computing Education Conference - Volume 123, ACE '12, pages 177--186, Darlinghurst, Australia, Australia, 2012. Australian Computer Society, Inc.

Digital Library

[29]

J. Sinclair and S. Kalvala. Exploring societal factors affecting the experience and engagement of first year female computer science undergraduates. In Proceedings of the 15th Koli Calling Conference on Computing Education Research, Koli Calling '15, pages 107--116, New York, NY, USA, 2015. ACM.

Digital Library

[30]

E. Soloway, J. Bonar, and K. Ehrlich. Cognitive strategies and looping constructs: An empirical study. Commun. ACM, 26(11):853--860, Nov. 1983.

Digital Library

[31]

J. Sorva. Notional machines and introductory programming education. Trans. Comput. Educ., 13(2):8:1--8:31, July 2013.

Digital Library

[32]

D. Teague and R. Lister. Longitudinal think aloud study of a novice programmer. In Proceedings of the Sixteenth Australasian Computing Education Conference - Volume 148, ACE '14, pages 41--50, Darlinghurst, Australia, Australia, 2014. Australian Computer Society, Inc.

Digital Library

[33]

D. Teague and R. Lister. Programming: Reading, writing and reversing. In Proceedings of the 2014 Conference on Innovation & Technology in Computer Science Education, ITiCSE '14, pages 285--290, New York, NY, USA, 2014. ACM.

Digital Library

[34]

A. E. Tew, W. M. McCracken, and M. Guzdial. Impact of alternative introductory courses on programming concept understanding. In Proceedings of the First International Workshop on Computing Education Research, ICER '05, pages 25--35, New York, NY, USA, 2005. ACM.

Digital Library

[35]

C. Watson and F. W. Li. Failure rates in introductory programming revisited. In Proceedings of the 2014 Conference on Innovation & Technology in Computer Science Education, ITiCSE '14, pages 39--44, New York, NY, USA, 2014. ACM.

Digital Library

[36]

J. L. Whalley and R. Lister. The bracelet 2009.1 (wellington) specification. In Proceedings of the Eleventh Australasian Conference on Computing Education - Volume 95, ACE '09, pages 9--18, Darlinghurst, Australia, Australia, 2009. Australian Computer Society, Inc.

Digital Library

[37]

J. L. Whalley, R. Lister, E. Thompson, T. Clear, P. Robbins, P. K. A. Kumar, and C. Prasad. An australasian study of reading and comprehension skills in novice programmers, using the bloom and solo taxonomies. In Proceedings of the 8th Australasian Conference on Computing Education - Volume 52, ACE '06, pages 243--252, Darlinghurst, Australia, Australia, 2006. Australian Computer Society, Inc.

Digital Library

[38]

K. J. Whittington, D. P. Bills, and L. W. Hill. Implementation of alternative pacing in an introductory programming sequence. In Proceedings of the 4th Conference on Information Technology Curriculum, CITC4 '03, pages 47--53, New York, NY, USA, 2003. ACM.

Digital Library

[39]

B. C. Wilson and S. Shrock. Contributing to success in an introductory computer science course: A study of twelve factors. In Proceedings of the Thirty-second SIGCSE Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, SIGCSE '01, pages 184--188, New York, NY, USA, 2001. ACM.

Digital Library

[40]

J. Wolfe and B. A. Powell. Not all curves are the same: Left-of-center grading and student motivation. In 2015 ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, number 10.18260/p.24527, Seattle, Washington, June 2015. ASEE Conferences. https://peer.asee.org/24527.

Cited By

Geçitli EYurdakul B(2025)Teaching Programming Through MetaphorsEffective Computer Science Education in K-12 Classrooms10.4018/979-8-3693-4542-9.ch012(319-348)Online publication date: 24-Jan-2025
https://doi.org/10.4018/979-8-3693-4542-9.ch012
Fu WZhang JZhang DLi TLan MLiu N(2025)An Empirical Study of Adaptive Feedback to Enhance Cognitive Ability in Programming Learning among College Students: A Perspective Based on Multimodal Data AnalysisJournal of Educational Computing Research10.1177/07356331241313126Online publication date: 4-Jan-2025
https://doi.org/10.1177/07356331241313126
Veldthuis MHermans FHermans FBohrer R(2024)A Word about Programming: Applying a Natural Language Vocabulary Acquisition Model to Programming EducationProceedings of the 2024 ACM SIGPLAN International Symposium on SPLASH-E10.1145/3689493.3689985(56-65)Online publication date: 17-Oct-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3689493.3689985
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

Learning to Program is Easy
1. Social and professional topics
  1. Professional topics
    1. Computing education
      1. Computing education programs
        Computer science education
        CS1
      2. Student assessment

Recommendations

Performance of python CS1 students in mid-level non-python CS courses
SIGCSE '10: Proceedings of the 41st ACM technical symposium on Computer science education

If you change the CS1 language to Python, what is the impact on the rest of the curriculum? In earlier work we examined the impact of changing CS1 from C++ to Python while leaving CS2 in C++. We found that Python-prepared CS1 students fared no ...
First-year students' impressions of pair programming in CS1

Pair programming, as part of the Agile Development process, has noted benefits in professional software development scenarios. These successes have led to a rise in use of pair programming in educational settings, particularly in Computer Science 1 (CS1)...
CSTA national standards and their impact on the future of K-12 computer education
SIGITE '11: Proceedings of the 2011 conference on Information technology education

The Computer Science Teachers Association (CSTA), a membership organization that supports and promotes the teaching of computer science and other computing disciplines, recently revised the Model Curriculum for K-12 Computer Science with a focus on ...

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences

ITiCSE '16: Proceedings of the 2016 ACM Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education

July 2016

394 pages

ISBN:9781450342315

DOI:10.1145/2899415

General Chairs:
Alison Clear
Eastern Institute of Technology, New Zealand
,
Ernesto Cuadros-Vargas
San Pablo Catholic University, Peru
,
Program Chairs:
Janet Carter
University of Kent, UK
,
Yvan Tupac
San Pablo Catholic University, Peru

Copyright © 2016 ACM.

Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

Sponsors

Bilkent University: Bilkent University
SIGCSE: ACM Special Interest Group on Computer Science Education

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 11 July 2016

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article

Conference

ITiCSE '16

Sponsor:

Bilkent University
SIGCSE

ITiCSE '16: Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education Conference 2016

July 11 - 13, 2016

Arequipa, Peru

Acceptance Rates

ITiCSE '16 Paper Acceptance Rate 56 of 147 submissions, 38%;

Overall Acceptance Rate 552 of 1,613 submissions, 34%

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

86
Total Citations
View Citations
1,374
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)125
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)10

Reflects downloads up to 03 Jan 2025

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Geçitli EYurdakul B(2025)Teaching Programming Through MetaphorsEffective Computer Science Education in K-12 Classrooms10.4018/979-8-3693-4542-9.ch012(319-348)Online publication date: 24-Jan-2025
https://doi.org/10.4018/979-8-3693-4542-9.ch012
Fu WZhang JZhang DLi TLan MLiu N(2025)An Empirical Study of Adaptive Feedback to Enhance Cognitive Ability in Programming Learning among College Students: A Perspective Based on Multimodal Data AnalysisJournal of Educational Computing Research10.1177/07356331241313126Online publication date: 4-Jan-2025
https://doi.org/10.1177/07356331241313126
Veldthuis MHermans FHermans FBohrer R(2024)A Word about Programming: Applying a Natural Language Vocabulary Acquisition Model to Programming EducationProceedings of the 2024 ACM SIGPLAN International Symposium on SPLASH-E10.1145/3689493.3689985(56-65)Online publication date: 17-Oct-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3689493.3689985
Computer Science Teachers Association Institute for Advancing Computing Education Association for Computing Machinery Code.org College Board CSforALL Expanding Computing Education Pathways Alliance (2024)Reimagining CS Pathways: High School and Beyond10.1145/3678016Online publication date: 25-Sep-2024
https://doi.org/10.1145/3678016
Azaiz IKiesler NStrickroth SMonga MLonati VBarendsen ESheard JPaterson J(2024)Feedback-Generation for Programming Exercises With GPT-4Proceedings of the 2024 on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education V. 110.1145/3649217.3653594(31-37)Online publication date: 3-Jul-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3649217.3653594
Lohr DKiesler NKeuning HJeuring JMonga MLonati VBarendsen ESheard JPaterson J(2024)"Let Them Try to Figure It Out First" - Reasons Why Experts (Do Not) Provide Feedback to Novice ProgrammersProceedings of the 2024 on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education V. 110.1145/3649217.3653530(38-44)Online publication date: 3-Jul-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3649217.3653530
Mason RSimon Becker BCrick TDavenport JStephenson BStone JBattestilli LRebelsky SShoop L(2024)A Global Survey of Introductory Programming CoursesProceedings of the 55th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education V. 110.1145/3626252.3630761(799-805)Online publication date: 7-Mar-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3626252.3630761
Lauber ABlumenschein MPampel B(2024)Teaching Programming Skills in Large Digital Settings: Challenges and Experiences2024 IEEE 3rd German Education Conference (GECon)10.1109/GECon62014.2024.10734024(1-6)Online publication date: 5-Aug-2024
https://doi.org/10.1109/GECon62014.2024.10734024
Penney JPimentel JSteinmacher IGerosa M(2024)Anticipating User Needs: Insights from Design Fiction on Conversational Agents for Computational ThinkingChatbot Research and Design10.1007/978-3-031-54975-5_12(204-219)Online publication date: 13-Mar-2024
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-54975-5_12
Prather JDenny PLeinonen JBecker BAlbluwi ICraig MKeuning HKiesler NKohn TLuxton-Reilly AMacNeil SPetersen APettit RReeves BSavelka JLaakso MMonga MSimon Sheard J(2023)The Robots Are Here: Navigating the Generative AI Revolution in Computing EducationProceedings of the 2023 Working Group Reports on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education10.1145/3623762.3633499(108-159)Online publication date: 22-Dec-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3623762.3633499
Show More Cited By

View Options

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Table of Contents