Analyzing engagement taxonomy in collaborative algorithm visualization

ITiCSE 2007: 12th Annual Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education - Inclusive Education in Computer Science

Volumn , Issue , 2007, Pages 251-255

  Myller, Niko ^a   Laakso, Mikko ^b   Korhonen, Ari ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF EASTERN FINLAND   (Finland)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TURKU   (Finland)

^c AALTO UNIVERSITY   (Finland)

Author keywords

Algorithm simulation; Algorithm visualization; Collaborative learning; Engagement taxonomy

Indexed keywords

ALGORITHMS; COMPUTER SUPPORTED COOPERATIVE WORK; LEARNING SYSTEMS; TEACHING;

ALGORITHM SIMULATION; ALGORITHM VISUALIZATION; COLLABORATIVE LEARNING; ENGAGEMENT TAXONOMY;

TAXONOMIES;

EID: 34548065927     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1145/1268784.1268857     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (16)

1. R. Ben-Bassat Levy, M. Ben-Ari, and P. A. Uronen. The Jeliot 2000 program animation system. Computers & Education, 40(1): 15-21, 2003.
2. J. Cohen. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Academic Press, New York, 1977.
3. C. Evans and N. J. Gibbons. The Interactivity Effect in Multimedia Learning. Accepted to Computers & Education, 2006.
4. S. Grissom, M. McNally, and T. L. Naps. Algorithm visualization in CS education: comparing levels of student engagement. In Proceedings of the First ACM Symposium on Software Visualization, pages 87-94, June 2003.
5. T. Hübscher-Younger and N. H. Narayanan. Constructive and collaborative learning of algorithms. SIGCSE Bulletin, 35(1):6-10, 2003.
6. C. D. Hundhausen. Integrating Algorithm Visualization Technology into an Undergraduate Algorithms Course: Ethnographic Studies of a Social Constructivist Approach. Computers & Education, 39(3):237-260, 2002.
7. C. D. Hundhausen and J. L. Brown. Designing, Visualizing, and Discussing Algorithms within a CS 1 Studio Experience: An Empirical Study. Computers & Education, In press.
8. 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.
9. A. Korhonen, L. Malmi, P. Silvasti, V. Karavirta, J. Lnnberg, J. Nikander, K. Stålnacke, and P. Ihantola. Matrix -a framework for interactive software visualization. Research Report TKO-B 154/04, Laboratory of Information Processing Science, Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Helsinki University of Technology, 2004.
10. N. Nagappan, L. Williams, M. Ferzli, E. Wiebe, K. Yang, C. Miller, and S. Balik. Improving the CS1 experience with pair programming. In Proceedings of the 34th SIGCSE technical symposium on Computer science education, pages 359-362. ACM Press, 2003.
11. T. L. Naps and S. Grissom. The effective use of quicksort visualizations in the classroom. Journal of Computing Sciences in Colleges, 18(1):88-96, 2002.
12. T. L. Naps, G. Rößling, V. Almstrum, W. Dann, R. Fleischer, C. Hundhausen, A. Korhonen, L. Malmi, M. McNally, S. Rodger, and J. Á. Velázquez-Iturbide. Exploring the Role of Visualization and Engagement in Computer Science Education. In Working Group Reports from ITiCSE on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education, pages 131-152, New York, NY, USA, 2002. ACM Press.
13. J. Roschelle. Designing for cognitive communication: Epistemic fidelity or mediating collaborating inquiry. In D. L. Day and D. K. Kovacs, editors, Computers, Communication & Mental Models, pages 13-25. Taylor & Francis, London, 1996.
14. M. Scaife and Y. Rogers. External cognition: how do graphical representations work? International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 45(2):185-213, 1996.
15. D. D. Suthers and C. D. Hundhausen. An experimental study of the effects of representational guidance on collaborative learning processes. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(2):183-219, 2003.
16. L. Williams, R. R. Kessler, W. Cunningham, and R. Jeffries. Strengthening the case for pair programming. IEEE Software, 17(4):19-25, 2000.