Combining Abstract Tasks and Haptic Material to Foster Computational Thinking in Computer Science Students
Pages 102 - 109
Abstract
Students of Computer Science often struggle with the abstract nature of the content of their studies, especially in the student entry phase. This is partly due to the fact that on the one hand, many first year students possess only moderate abstract thinking skills, while on the other hand, Computer Science lecturers often take the existence of abstract thinking skills for granted, as they themselves are well versed in this area.
To bridge this gap and foster the students’ abstract thinking skills, we employ haptic material to make abstract tasks and the corresponding solution processes more tangible. This supports the development of abstract thinking skills, and at the same time helps to actively engage students in our classes on software development.
In this paper we describe our experiences with active classroom learning units based on haptic materials, as part of our inverted classroom teaching.
References
[1]
David J. Barnes and Michael Klling. 2011. Objects First with Java: A Practical Introduction Using BlueJ (5th ed.). Prentice Hall Press, USA.
[2]
Tim Bell and Jan Vahrenhold. 2018. CS Unplugged—How Is It Used, and Does It Work?Springer International Publishing, Cham, 497–521. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-98355-4_29
[3]
Reihane Boghrati, Abbas Heydarnoori, and Majeed Kazemitabaar. 2014. Activities Performed by Programmers While Using Framework Examples as a Guide. In Proceedings of the 29th Annual ACM Symposium on Applied Computing (Gyeongju, Republic of Korea) (SAC ’14). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1146–1151. https://doi.org/10.1145/2554850.2555016
[4]
Axel Böttcher, Veronika Thurner, Daniela Zehetmeier, and Tanja Häfner. 2022. Impact of Students’ Initial Abstract Thinking Competence on Successfully Studying Computer Science. In ICL2022 – 25th International Conference on Interactive Collaborative Learning. to be published.
[5]
Renee M. Clark and Samuel J. Dickerson. 2018. A Case Study of Post-Workshop Use of Simple Active Learning in an Introductory Computing Sequence. IEEE Transactions on Education 61, 3 (2018), 167–176. https://doi.org/10.1109/TE.2018.2808274
[6]
Barbara Ericson. 2023. Four Ways to Add Active Learning to Computing Courses. Commun. ACM 66, 2 (jan 2023), 26–29. https://doi.org/10.1145/3576930
[7]
Scott Freeman, Sarah L. Eddy, Miles McDonough, Michelle K. Smith, Nnadozie Okoroafor, Hannah Jordt, and Mary Pat Wenderoth. 2014. Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 111, 23 (2014), 8410–8415. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1319030111
[8]
Jens Gallenbacher. 2018. The Adventure of Computer Science. Springer International Publishing, Cham, 538–548. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-98355-4_31
[9]
Jens Gallenbacher. 2021. Abenteuer Informatik – IT zum Anfassen für alle von 9 bis 99 – vom Navi bis Social Media. (5 ed.). Spektrum.
[10]
Orit Hazzan and Jeff Kramer. 2007. Abstraction in Computer Science & Software Engineering: a Pedagogical Perspective. Frontier Journal 4, 1 (January 2007), 6–14.
[11]
Orit Hazzan and Jeff Kramer. 2016. Assessing Abstraction Skills. Commun. ACM 59, 12 (Dec. 2016), 43–45. https://doi.org/10.1145/2926712
[12]
Orit Hazzan, Noa Ragonis, and Tami Lapidot. 2011. Guide to Teaching Computer Science: An Activity-Based Approach. Springer, London, Dordrecht, Heidelberg, New York.
[13]
Takeshi Hongo, Takao Yakou, Kenji Yoshinaga, Toshiharu Kano, Michiko Miyazaki, and Takashi Hanakawa. 2022. Structural neuroplasticity in computer programming beginners. Cerebral Cortex (10 2022). https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhac425
[14]
Jeff Kramer. 2007. Is abstraction the key to computing. Commun. ACM 50, 4 (2007), 36–42.
[15]
Alexandra Martinez. 2018. Use of JiTT in a Graduate Software Testing Course: An Experience Report. In Proceedings of the 40th International Conference on Software Engineering: Software Engineering Education and Training (Gothenburg, Sweden) (ICSE-SEET ’18). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 108–115. https://doi.org/10.1145/3183377.3183397
[16]
P. Karen Murphy and S.L. Benton Stephen L.2010. The new frontier of educational neuropsychology: Unknown opportunities and unfulfilled hopes. Contemporary Educational Psychology 35, 2 (2010), 153 – 155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2010.04.006
[17]
I. Nassi and B. Shneiderman. 1973. Flowchart Techniques for Structured Programming. SIGPLAN Not. 8, 8 (aug 1973), 12–26. https://doi.org/10.1145/953349.953350
[18]
Seymour Papert and Idit Harel. 1991. Situating Constructionism. In Constructionism, Seymour Papert and Idit Harel (Eds.). Ablex Publishing Corporation, Norwood, NJ, Chapter 1.
[19]
Werner Schäfke. 2015. Dwarves, Trolls, Ogres, and Giants. De Gruyter, Berlin, München, Boston, 347–383. https://doi.org/
[20]
Ian Sommerville. 2015. Software Engineering (10 ed.). Addison-Wesley, Harlow, England.
[21]
David R. Stead. 2005. A review of the one-minute paper. Active Learning in Higher Education 6, 2 (2005), 118–131. https://doi.org/10.1177/1469787405054237
[22]
Veronika Thurner, Katrin Schlierkamp, Axel Böttcher, and Daniela Zehetmeier. 2016. Integrated development of technical and base competencies: Fostering reflection skills in software engineers to be. In IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference, EDUCON, Vol. 10-13-April-2016. 340–348. https://doi.org/10.1109/EDUCON.2016.7474576
[23]
Veronika Thurner, Katrin Schlierkamp, Daniela Zehetmeier, and Axel Böttcher. 2015. Software engineering project simulation in student entry phase of computer scientists-to-be. In IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference, EDUCON, Vol. 2015-April. 486–493. https://doi.org/10.1109/EDUCON.2015.7096014
[24]
David C.D. van Alten, Chris Phielix, Jeroen Janssen, and Liesbeth Kester. 2019. Effects of flipping the classroom on learning outcomes and satisfaction: A meta-analysis. Educational Research Review 28 (2019), 100281. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2019.05.003
[25]
Adrienne E. Williams and Diane K. O’Dowd. 2021. Seven practical strategies to add active learning to a science lecture. Neuroscience Letters 743 (2021), 135317. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neulet.2020.135317
Index Terms
- Combining Abstract Tasks and Haptic Material to Foster Computational Thinking in Computer Science Students
Recommendations
Field Experiences in Teaching Computer Science: Course Organization and Reflections
SIGCSE '15: Proceedings of the 46th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science EducationA major challenge for broadening participation in computing within K-12 settings is the lack of trained teachers. While professional development programs provide opportunities for the development of knowledge, skills, and pedagogy in teaching computing, ...
Reported Development of Computational Thinking, Through Computer Science and Programming, and its Benefits for Primary School Students: (Abstract Only)
SIGCSE '18: Proceedings of the 49th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science EducationAcross the world there has been a paradigm shift in school education, as many countries are incorporating Computer Science (CS), programming, and Computational Thinking (CT), into their K-12 curriculums for the first time. In 2018 these subjects will be ...
Thinking about Computational Thinking: Lessons from Education Research
SIGCSE '19: Proceedings of the 50th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science EducationComputational thinking (CT) is a means to help learners engage in authentic disciplinary and problem-solving practices of computer science (CS). For CS classrooms, CT is considered "thinking like a computer scientist". CT is believed to be an important ...
Comments
Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.Information & Contributors
Information
Published In
Copyright © 2023 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].
Publisher
Association for Computing Machinery
New York, NY, United States
Publication History
Published: 19 June 2023
Check for updates
Author Tags
Qualifiers
- Research-article
- Research
- Refereed limited
Funding Sources
- Stiftung Innovation in der Hochschullehre
Conference
ECSEE 2023
ECSEE 2023: European Conference on Software Engineering Education
June 19 - 21, 2023
Seeon/Bavaria, Germany
Acceptance Rates
Overall Acceptance Rate 11 of 16 submissions, 69%
Contributors
Other Metrics
Bibliometrics & Citations
Bibliometrics
Article Metrics
- 0Total Citations
- 42Total Downloads
- Downloads (Last 12 months)22
- Downloads (Last 6 weeks)2
Reflects downloads up to 05 Jan 2025
Other Metrics
Citations
View Options
Login options
Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.
Sign inFull Access
View options
View or Download as a PDF file.
PDFeReader
View online with eReader.
eReaderHTML Format
View this article in HTML Format.
HTML Format