Affective effects of program visualization

ICER 2006 - Proceedings of the 2nd International Computing Education Research Workshop

Volumn 2006, Issue , 2006, Pages 1-5

  Ebel, Gil ^a   Ben Ari, Mordechai ^a  

^a WEIZMANN INSTITUTE OF SCIENCE   (Israel)

Author keywords

Affect; Attention; Jeliot; Program visualization

Indexed keywords

CORRELATION METHODS; LEARNING SYSTEMS; PATTERN RECOGNITION; SOFTWARE TESTING; VISUALIZATION;

AFFECTIVE EFFECTS; PROGRAM VISUALIZATION (PV); TEACHING ACTIVITIES;

COMPUTER PROGRAMMING;

EID: 34247398770     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1145/1151588.1151590     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (19)

1. D. P. Ausubel. The use of advance organizer in the learning and retention of meaningful verbal material. Journal of Educational Psychology, 51:267-272, 1960.
2. M. Ben-Ari, N. Myller, E. Sutinen, and J. Tarhio. Perspectives on program animation with Jeliot. In Software. Visualization: International Seminar, Lecture Notes in Computer Science 2269, pages 31-45, Dagstuhl Castle, Germany, 2002.
3. R. Ben-Bassat Levy, M. Ben-Ari, and P. A. Uronen. The Jeliot 2000 program animation system. Computers & Education, 40(1):1-15, 2003.
4. M. Birenbaum. Alternatives in Assessments. Ramot, Tel-Aviv, 1997.
5. M. Byrne, R. Catrambone, and J. Stasko. Do algorithm animations aid learning? Technical Report GIT-GVU-96-19, Georgia, Institute of Technology, 1996.
6. A. Collins, J. S. Brown, and S. E. Newman. Cognitive apprenticeship: Teaching the crafts of reading, writing, and mathematics. In L. B. Resnick, editor, Knowing, Learning, and Instruction: Essays in Honor of Robert Glaser, pages 453-494. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ, 1989.
7. C. K. Conners, G. Sitarenios, D. A. J. Parker, and N. J. Epstein. Revision and restandardization of the Conners Teacher Rating Scale (CTRS-R.): Factor structure, reliability, and criterion validity. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 26(4):279-291, 1998.
8. B. L. Fredrickson. The role of positive emotions in positive psychology, the broaden-and-build theory of positive emotions. American Psychologist, 56(3):218-226, 2001.
9. M. R. Gagné. The Conditions of Learning. Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York, 1977.
10. J. Gal-Ezer, C. Beeri, D. Harel, and A. Yehudai. A high school program in computer science. IEEE Computer, 28(10):73-80, 1995.
11. C. D. Hundhausen and S. A. Douglas. Low-fidelity algorithm visualization. Journal of Visual Languages and Computing, 13(5):449-470, 2002.
12. C. D. Hundhausen, S. A. Douglas, and J. T. Stasko. A meta-study of algorithm visualization effectiveness. Journal of Visual Languages and Computing, 13(3):259-290, 2002.
13. M. Imai, C. R. Anderson, I. Wilkinson, and H. Yi. Properties of attention during reading lessons. Technical Report 568, Center for the study of reading, Urbana, IL, 1993. ERIC Document Reproduction services No. ED353558.
14. C. Kehoe, J. Stasko, and A. Taylor. Rethinking the evaluation of algorithm animations as learning aids: An observational study. Technical Report GIT-GVU-99-10, Georgia Institute of Technology, 1999.
15. J. D. Kindlon. The measurement of attention. Child Psychology & Psychiatry Review, 3(2):72-78, 1998.
16. R. E. Mayer. Multimedia Learning. Cambridge University Press, New York, 2001.
17. P. Saraiya, C. A. Shaffer, D. S. McCrickard, and C. North. Effective features of algorithm visualizations. SIGCSE Bulletin, 36(1):382-386, 2004.
18. M. Tapia and E. G. Marsh. An instrument to measure mathematics attitudes. Academic Exchange Quarterly, 8(2):16-21, 2004.
19. H. Wang, J. Fan, and R. T. Johnson. A symbolic model of human attentional networks. Cognitive Systems Research, 5:119-134, 2004.