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

article

Comparing loops misconceptions in block-based and text-based programming languages at the K-12 level

Authors:

Monika Mladenović,

?Ana ?AnkoAuthors Info & Claims

Education and Information Technologies, Volume 23, Issue 4

Pages 1483 - 1500

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-017-9673-3

Published: 01 July 2018 Publication History

Abstract

Novice programmers are facing many difficulties while learning to program. Most studies about misconceptions in programming are conducted at the undergraduate level, yet there is a lack of studies at the elementary school (K-12) level, reasonably because computer science neither programming are regularly still not the part of elementary school curricula's. Are the misconceptions about loops at elementary school level equal to those at the undergraduate level? Can we "prevent" the misconceptions by using the different pedagogical approach, visual programming language and shifting the programming context toward game programming? In this paper, we tried to answer these questions. We conducted the student misconceptions research on one of the fundamental programming concepts --- the loop. The research is conducted in the classroom settings among 207 elementary school students. Students were learning to program in three programming languages: Scratch, Logo and Python. In this paper, we present the results of this research.

References

[1]

Berland, M., Martin, T., Benton, T., Petrick Smith, C., & Davis, D. (2013). Using learning analytics to understand the learning pathways of novice programmers. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 22(4), 564-599.

[2]

Bonar, J., & Soloway, E. (1983). Uncovering principles of novice programming. In Proceedings of the 10th ACM SIGACT-SIGPLAN symposium on principles of programming languages (pp. 10-13).

[3]

Brown, J. S. (2000). GROWING UP DIGITAL. How the web changes work, education, and the ways people learn. The Magazine of Higher. Learning, 32(2), 11-20.

[4]

Brusilovsky, P., Calabrese, E., Hvorecky, J., Kouchnirenko, A., & Miller, P. (1997). Mini languages: Away to learn programming principles. Education and Information Technologies, 2(1), 65-83.

[5]

Clegg, T. L., & Kolodner, J. L. (2007). Bricoleurs and planners engaging in scientific reasoning: A tale of two groups in one learning community. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 2(3), 239-265.

[6]

Dann, W., & Cooper, S. (2009). Education: Alice 3: Concrete to abstract. Communications of the ACM, 52(8), 27-29.

Digital Library

[7]

Dehnadi, S. (2009). A cognitive study of learning to program in introductory programming courses. London: Middlesex University.

[8]

Fusco, E. (1981). Matching curriculum to students cognitive levels. Educational Leadership, 39(1), 47.

[9]

Garneli, V., Giannakos, M. N., & Chorianopoulos, K. (2015). Computing education in K-12 schools: A review of the literature. In Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON), 2015 IEEE (pp. 543-551). Tallinn, Estonia: IEEE.

[10]

Gomes, A., & Mendes, A. J. N. (2007). Learning to program-difficulties and solutions. International Conference on. Engineering Education, 1-5.

[11]

Grover, S., & Basu, S. (2017). Measuring student learning in introductory block-based programming. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM SIGCSE technical symposium on computer science education - SIGCSE '17 (pp. 267-272). New York, New York: ACM Press.

[12]

Grover, S., & Pea, R. (2013). Computational thinking in K-12 a review of the state of the field. Educational Researcher, 42(1), 38-43.

[13]

Grover, S., Cooper, S., & Pea, R. (2014). Assessing computational learning in K-12. In Proceedings of the 2014 conference on Innovation & technology in computer science education - ITiCSE'14 (pp. 57-62).

[14]

Grover, S., Pea, R., & Cooper, S. (2015). Designing for deeper learning in a blended computer science course for middle school students. Computer Science Education, 25(2), 199-237.

[15]

Guzdial, M. (2004). Programming environments for novicmes and Culturees. Computer Science Education Research, 2004, 127-154.

[16]

Kafai, Y. B. (2006). Playing and making games for learning. Games and Culture, 1(1), 36-40.

[17]

Kafai, Y. B., & Burke, Q. (2015). Constructionist gaming: Understanding the benefits of making games for learning. Educational Psychologist, 50(4), 313-334.

[18]

Ke, F., & Fengfeng. (2014). An implementation of design-based learning through creating educational computer games: A case study on mathematics learning during design and computing. Computers & Education, 73, 26-39.

Digital Library

[19]

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

Digital Library

[20]

Kölling, M., & McKay, F. (2016). Heuristic evaluation for novice programming systems. ACM Transactions on Computing Education (TOCE), 16(3), 12.

[21]

Kuechler, W. L., & Simkin, M. G. (2003). How well do multiple choice tests evaluate student understanding in computer programming classes? Journal of Information Systems Education, 14(4), 389.

[22]

Lahtinen, E., Ala-Mutka, K., & Järvinen, H.-M. (2005). A study of the difficulties of novice programmers. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 37(3), 14.

Digital Library

[23]

Linn, M. C., & Dalbey, J. (1985). Cognitive consequences of programming instruction: Instruction, access, and ability. Educational Psychologist, 20(4), 191-206.

[24]

Louis, C., Lawrence, M., & Keith, M. (2011). Research methods in education. Oxford, UK: Routledge.

[25]

Maloney, J. H., Peppler, K., Kafai, Y., Resnick, M., & Rusk, N. (2008). Programming by choice. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 40(1), 367.

[26]

Mayer, R. E. (1981). The psychology of how novices learn computer programming. ACM Computing Surveys, 13(1), 121-141.

Digital Library

[27]

McCracken, M., Almstrum, V., Diaz, D., Guzdial, M., Hagan, D., Kolikant, Y. B.-D., et al. (2001). A multinational, multi-institutional study of assessment of programming skills of first-year CS students. SIGCSE Bull, 33(4), 125-180.

Digital Library

[28]

McKenna, P. (2004). Gender and black boxes in the programming curriculum. Journal on Educational Resources in Computing, 4(1), 6-es.

Digital Library

[29]

Mladenovic, M., Krpan, D., & Mladenovic, S. (2016a). Introducing programming to elementary students novices by using game development in python and scratch. In EDULEARN16 Proceedings (pp. 1622- 1629). IATED. 10.21125/edulearn.2016.1323.

[30]

Mladenovic, S., Krpan, D., & Mladenovic, M. (2016b). Using games to help novices embrace programming: From elementary to higher education. International Journal of Engineering Education, 32(1), 521-531.

[31]

Mladenovic, M., Rosic, M., & Mladenovic, S. (2016c). Comparing elementary students' programming success based on programming environment. International Journal of Modern Education and Computer Science, 8(August), 1-10.

[32]

Myers, B. A. (1990). Taxonomies of visual programming and program visualization. Journal of Visual Languages and Computing, 1(1), 97-123.

Digital Library

[33]

Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms: Children, computers, and powerful ideas. New York: Basic Books, Inc.

[34]

Papert, S. (1993). The children's machine: Rethinking school in the age of the computer. BasicBooks Retrieved from http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=139395.

[35]

Papert, S. (2010). Does easy do it? Children, games, and learning. Game Developer.

[36]

Piaget, J. (1952). The origins of intelligence in children. American Psychological Association ({APA}).

[37]

Prensky, M. (2001). Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants Part 1. On the Horizon, 9, 1-6.

[38]

Robins, A., Rountree, J., & Rountree, N. (2003). Learning and teaching programming: A review and discussion. Computer Science Education, 13(2), 137-172.

[39]

Sekiya, T., & Yamaguchi, K. (2013). Tracing quiz set to identify novices' programming misconceptions. In Proceedings of the 13th Koli calling international conference on computing education research - Koli calling'13 (pp. 87-95). New York: ACM Press.

[40]

Turkle, S., & Papert, S. (1992). Epistemological pluralism and the revaluation of the concrete. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 11(1), 3-33.

[41]

Winslow, L. E. (1996). Programming pedagogy--a psychological overview. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 28(3), 17-22.

Digital Library

[42]

Zur-Bargury, I., Pârv, B., & Lanzberg, D. (2013). A nationwide exam as a tool for improving a new curriculum. In Proceedings of the 18th ACM conference on Innovation and technology in computer science education - ITiCSE'13 (p. 267). New York, New York: ACM Press.

Cited By

Hartmann MHielscher MMarinus E(2024)Prevalence of Programming Misconceptions in Primary School StudentsProceedings of the 24th Koli Calling International Conference on Computing Education Research10.1145/3699538.3699568(1-11)Online publication date: 12-Nov-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3699538.3699568
Choi WChoi I(2024)The Influence of CodeCombat on Computational Thinking in Python Programming Learning at Primary SchoolProceedings of the 2024 5th International Conference on Education Development and Studies10.1145/3669947.3669951(26-32)Online publication date: 24-Apr-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3669947.3669951
Kunz K(2023)Developing, Validating, and Implementing a Mental Model Test for Primary School Students (Doctoral Consortium)Proceedings of the 23rd Koli Calling International Conference on Computing Education Research10.1145/3631802.3631835(1-2)Online publication date: 13-Nov-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3631802.3631835
Show More Cited By

Comparing loops misconceptions in block-based and text-based programming languages at the K-12 level
1. Social and professional topics
  1. Professional topics
    1. Computing education
      1. Computing education programs

Recommendations

Identifying student misconceptions of programming
SIGCSE '10: Proceedings of the 41st ACM technical symposium on Computer science education

Computing educators are often baffled by the misconceptions that their CS1 students hold. We need to understand these misconceptions more clearly in order to help students form correct conceptions. This paper describes one stage in the development of a ...
Misconceptions about variables at the K-12 level
Abstract
There are known misconceptions about variables which are mostly the same since the first studies since more than 30 years ago. Consciousness about the misconceptions in programming can be crucial for teaching and learning programming for novices ...
Impact of used programming language for K-12 students' understanding of the loop concept

Block-based programming languages are becoming a favourite learning tool for programming novices while the traditional way of teaching programming mostly uses text-based programming languages. The purpose of this study was to compare the impact of used ...

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image Education and Information Technologies

Education and Information Technologies Volume 23, Issue 4

July 2018

337 pages

ISSN:1360-2357

Issue’s Table of Contents

Copyright © Copyright © 2018 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.

Publisher

Kluwer Academic Publishers

United States

Publication History

Published: 01 July 2018

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Article

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

17
Total Citations
View Citations
0
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)0
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0

Reflects downloads up to 13 Dec 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Hartmann MHielscher MMarinus E(2024)Prevalence of Programming Misconceptions in Primary School StudentsProceedings of the 24th Koli Calling International Conference on Computing Education Research10.1145/3699538.3699568(1-11)Online publication date: 12-Nov-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3699538.3699568
Choi WChoi I(2024)The Influence of CodeCombat on Computational Thinking in Python Programming Learning at Primary SchoolProceedings of the 2024 5th International Conference on Education Development and Studies10.1145/3669947.3669951(26-32)Online publication date: 24-Apr-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3669947.3669951
Kunz K(2023)Developing, Validating, and Implementing a Mental Model Test for Primary School Students (Doctoral Consortium)Proceedings of the 23rd Koli Calling International Conference on Computing Education Research10.1145/3631802.3631835(1-2)Online publication date: 13-Nov-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3631802.3631835
Bentz AStandl B(2023)Novice Programmers Conceptions of Loops in K-12 Education in Consideration of Interest and AbilityProceedings of the 18th WiPSCE Conference on Primary and Secondary Computing Education Research10.1145/3605468.3605506(1-9)Online publication date: 27-Sep-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3605468.3605506
Song YXing WBarron AOh HLi CMinces V(2023)M-flow: a Flow-based Music Creation Platform Improves Underrepresented Children’s Attitudes toward Computer ProgrammingProceedings of the 22nd Annual ACM Interaction Design and Children Conference10.1145/3585088.3589383(233-238)Online publication date: 19-Jun-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3585088.3589383
Li QJiang QLiang JXiong WLiang YZhao W(2023)Effects of interactive unplugged programming activities on computational thinking skills and student engagement in elementary educationEducation and Information Technologies10.1007/s10639-023-11634-728:9(12293-12318)Online publication date: 9-Mar-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/s10639-023-11634-7
Ma NQian JGong KLu Y(2023)Promoting programming education of novice programmers in elementary schools: A contrasting cases approach for learning programmingEducation and Information Technologies10.1007/s10639-022-11565-928:7(9211-9234)Online publication date: 11-Jan-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/s10639-022-11565-9
Basu SRutstein DTate CRachmatullah AYang HMerkle LDoyle MSheard JSoh LDorn B(2022)Standards-Aligned Instructional Supports to Promote Computer Science Teachers' Pedagogical Content KnowledgeProceedings of the 53rd ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education - Volume 110.1145/3478431.3499403(404-410)Online publication date: 22-Feb-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3478431.3499403
Allen ODowns XVaroy ELuxton-Reilly AGiacaman N(2022)Block-Based Object-Oriented ProgrammingIEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies10.1109/TLT.2022.319031815:4(439-453)Online publication date: 1-Aug-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1109/TLT.2022.3190318
Ozyurt OOzyurt H(2022)A large-scale study based on topic modeling to determine the research interests and trends on computational thinkingEducation and Information Technologies10.1007/s10639-022-11325-928:3(3557-3579)Online publication date: 27-Sep-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/s10639-022-11325-9
Show More Cited By

View Options

View options

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Issue’s Table of Contents