short-paper

Analysis of students’ preconceptions of concurrency

Authors:

EASEAI 2019: Proceedings of the 1st ACM SIGSOFT International Workshop on Education through Advanced Software Engineering and Artificial Intelligence

Pages 9 - 12

https://doi.org/10.1145/3340435.3342721

Published: 26 August 2019 Publication History

Get Access

Abstract

In previous literature, several authors have recommended teaching concurrent programming, as the current evolution of IT involves concurrency. However, in order to teach concurrent programming properly, in a constructivist educational learning framework, we need to know the preconceptions students have regarding it. In this paper, we report on the results found from data collected through a questionnaire submitted in secondary schools to 101 students aged from 12 to 15. We detail the preconceptions of concurrent programming we extracted from the questionnaire answers and formulate recommendations toward creating a course teaching concurrent programming.

References

[1]

ACM/IEEE-CS Joint Task Force on Computing Curricula. 2013. Computer Science Curricula 2013. Technical Report. ACM Press and IEEE Computer Society Press.

Google Scholar

[2]

Claus Brabrand. 2008. Constructive Alignment for Teaching Model-Based Design for Concurrency. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 1–18.

Google Scholar

[3]

Manuel Carro, Ángel Herranz, and Julio Mariño. 2013. A Model-driven Approach to Teaching Concurrency. Trans. Comput. Educ. 13, 1, Article 5 (2013), 19 pages.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[4]

Michael B. Feldman and Bruce D. Bachus. 1997. Concurrent Programming CAN Be Introduced into the Lower-level Undergraduate Curriculum. SIGCSE Bull. 29, 3 (1997), 77–79.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[5]

Alena Juvova, Stefan Chudy, Pavel Neumeister, Jitka Plischke, and Jana Kvintova. 2015. Reflection of constructivist theories in current educational practice. Universal Journal of Educational Research 3, 5 (2015), 345–349.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[6]

Yifat Ben-David Kolikant. 2001. Gardeners and Cinema Tickets: High School Students’ Preconceptions of Concurrency. Computer Science Education 11, 3 (2001), 221–245.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[7]

Gary Lewandowski, Dennis J Bouvier, Robert McCartney, Kate Sanders, and Beth Simon. 2007. Commonsense computing (episode 3): concurrency and concert tickets. In Proceedings of the third international workshop on Computing education research. ACM, 133–144.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[8]

Adrienne Naumescu and Pierre Pirson. 1993. Utiliser les Préconceptions des Élèves pour construire l’Apprentissage en Sciences. European Journal of Teacher Education 16, 3 (1993), 205–214.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[9]

Lynn Andrea Stein. 1999. Challenging the Computational Metaphor: Implications for How We Think., 35 pages.

Google Scholar

[10]

Herb Sutter. 2005. The Free Lunch Is Over: A Fundamental Turn Toward Concurrency in Software. Dr. Dobb’s Journal 30, 3 (2005).

Google Scholar

[11]

Peter Van Roy, Joe Armstrong, Matthew Flatt, and Boris Magnusson. 2003. The Role of Language Paradigms in Teaching Programming. SIGCSE Bull. 35, 1 (2003), 269–270.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[12]

Heather Verkade, Jason M Lodge, Kristine Elliott, TD Mulhern, AA Espinosa, SJ Cropper, and BIP Rubinstein. 2017. Exploring misconceptions as a trigger for enhancing student learning. (2017).

Google Scholar

Cited By

View all

Vanderose BFrenay BHenry JDevroey X(2020)Report from the 1st Int. Workshop on Education through Advanced Software Engineering and Artificial Intelligence (EASEAI '19)ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes10.1145/3375572.337557945:1(25-27)Online publication date: 22-Jan-2020
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3375572.3375579
de Jesus Oliveira Duraes TSergio Lopes de Souza PMartins GJose Conte DGarcia Bachiega NMazzini Bruschi S(2020)Research on Parallel Computing Teaching: state of the art and future directions2020 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE)10.1109/FIE44824.2020.9273914(1-9)Online publication date: 21-Oct-2020
https://doi.org/10.1109/FIE44824.2020.9273914

Index Terms

Analysis of students’ preconceptions of concurrency
1. Applied computing
  1. Education
2. Computing methodologies
  1. Concurrent computing methodologies
    1. Concurrent algorithms

Recommendations

A model-driven approach to teaching concurrency

We present an undergraduate course on concurrent programming where formal models are used in different stages of the learning process. The main practical difference with other approaches lies in the fact that the ability to develop correct concurrent ...
Effects of Learning Analytics on Students' Self-Regulated Learning in Flipped Classroom

The present article is aimed at analyzing the effects of learning analytics on students' self-regulated learning in a flipped classroom. An experiment was conducted with 96 engineering students, enrolled in a subject offered in the Flipped Classroom ...
WFR-TM

Transactional Memory (TM) is a promising concurrent programming paradigm which employs transactions to achieve synchronization in accessing common data known as transactional variables. A transaction may either commit, making its updates to ...

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

EASEAI 2019: Proceedings of the 1st ACM SIGSOFT International Workshop on Education through Advanced Software Engineering and Artificial Intelligence

August 2019

45 pages

ISBN:9781450368520

DOI:10.1145/3340435

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].

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 26 August 2019

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Short-paper

Conference

ESEC/FSE '19

Sponsor:

SIGSOFT

ESEC/FSE '19: 27th ACM Joint European Software Engineering Conference and Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering

August 26, 2019

Tallinn, Estonia

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

2
Total Citations
View Citations
90
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)3
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)1

Reflects downloads up to 13 Dec 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all

Vanderose BFrenay BHenry JDevroey X(2020)Report from the 1st Int. Workshop on Education through Advanced Software Engineering and Artificial Intelligence (EASEAI '19)ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes10.1145/3375572.337557945:1(25-27)Online publication date: 22-Jan-2020
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3375572.3375579
de Jesus Oliveira Duraes TSergio Lopes de Souza PMartins GJose Conte DGarcia Bachiega NMazzini Bruschi S(2020)Research on Parallel Computing Teaching: state of the art and future directions2020 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE)10.1109/FIE44824.2020.9273914(1-9)Online publication date: 21-Oct-2020
https://doi.org/10.1109/FIE44824.2020.9273914

View Options

Login options

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

Cited By

Index Terms

Recommendations

A model-driven approach to teaching concurrency

Effects of Learning Analytics on Students' Self-Regulated Learning in Flipped Classroom

WFR-TM