Predicting introductory programming performance: A multi-institutional multivariate study

Computer Science Education

Volumn 16, Issue 4, 2006, Pages 303-323

  Bergin, Susan ^a   Reilly, Ronan ^a  

^a NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF IRELAND   (Ireland)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 67349252780     PISSN: 08993408     EISSN: 17445175     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/08993400600997096     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Austin, H. S., 1987. Predictors of Pascal programming achievement for community college students. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 19 (1): 161–164.
2. Barker, R. J., and Unger, E. A., 1983. A predictor for success in an introductory programming class based upon abstract reasoning development. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 15 (1): 154–158.
3. Bergin, S., and Reilly, R., 2005a. Programming: factors that influence success. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 37 (1): 411–415.
4. Bergin, S., and Reilly, R., The influence of motivation and comfort-level on learning to program. Proceedings of the 17th Workshop on Psychology of Programming. pp. 293–304. PPIG '05
5. Bergin, S., and Reilly, R., Examining the role of self-regulated learning on introductory programming performance. Proceedings of the 2005 international Workshop on Computing Education Research. pp. 81–86. ICER 2005
6. Bergin, S., and Reilly, R., Statistical and machine learning models to predict programming performance, (2006). PhD thesis
7. Byrne, P., and Lyons, G., 2001. The effect of student attributes on success in programming. ACM SIGCSE Bulleting, 33 (3): 49–52.
8. Cantwell Wilson, B., and Shrock, S., 2001. Contributing to success in an introductory computer science course: a study of twelve factors. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 33 (1): 184–188.
9. Evans, G. E., and Simkin, M. G., 1989. What best predicts computer proficiency?. Communications of the ACM, 32 (11): 1322–1327.
10. Gibbs, D. C., 2000. The effect of a constructivist learning environment for field-dependent/independent students on achievement in introductory computer programming. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 32 (1): 207–211.
11. Goold, A., and Rimmer, R., 2000. Factors affecting performance in first-year computing. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 32 (2): 39–43.
12. Hagan, D., and Markham, S., 2000. Does it help to have some programming experience before beginning a computing degree program?. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 32 (3): 25–28.
13. Honour-Werth, L., 1986. Predicting student performance in a beginning computer science class. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 18 (1): 138–143.
14. Holden, E., and Weeden, E., The impact of prior experience in an information technology programming course sequence. Proceedings of the 4th Conference on Information Technology Curriculum. pp. 41–46. CITC4 '03
15. Hostetler, T. R., 1983. Predicting student success in an introductory programming course. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 15 (3): 40–43.
16. Konvalina, J., Wileman, S. A., and Stephens, L. G., 1983. Math proficiency: a key to success for computer science students. Communications of the ACM, 26 (5): 377–382.
17. Kurtz, B. L., 1980. Investigating the relationship between the development of abstract reasoning and performance in an introductory programming class. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 12 (1): 110–117.
18. Leeper, R. R., and Silver, J. L., 1982. Predicting the success in a first programming course. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 14 (1): 147–150.
19. Mayer, R. E., Dyck, J. L., and Vilberg, W., 1986. Learning to program and learning to think: what's the connection?. Communications of the ACM, 29 (7): 605–610.
20. Newsted, P. R., 1975. Grade and ability predictions in an introductory programming course. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 7 (2): 87–91.
21. Pajares, F., Brinter, S., and Valiante, G., 2000. Relation between achievement goals and self-beliefs of middle school students in writing and science. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25 (4): 406–422.
22. Pintrich, P., and DeGroot, E., 1990. Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82 (1): 33–40.
23. Pintrich, P., and Garcia, T., 1991a. Student goal orientation and self-regulation in the college classroom. Advances in Motivation and Achievement, 7: 371–403.
24. Pintrich, P., Smith, D., Garcia, T., and McKeachie, W., 1991b. “ A manual for the use of the motivated strategies for learning questionnaire ”. The Regents of the University of Michigan. Technical Report 91-B-004
25. Pintrich, P., 1999. The role of motivation in promoting and sustaining self-regulated learning. International Journal of Educational Research, 31: 459–470.
26. Pokay, P., and Blumenfeld, P., 1990. Predicting achievement early and late in the semester: the role of motivation and learning strategies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82 (1): 41–50.
27. Ramalingham, V., and Wiedenbeck, S., 1998. Development and validation of scores on a computer programming self-efficacy scale and group analyses of novice programmer self-efficacy. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 19 (4): 367–381.
28. Ramalingam, V., LaBelle, D., and Wiedenbeck, S., 2004. Self-efficacy and mental models in learning to program. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 36 (3): 171–175.
29. Rosenberg, M., 1965. Society and the adolescent self image, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
30. Rountree, N., Rountree, J., and Robins, A., 2002. Predictors of success and failure in a CS1 course. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 34 (4): 121–124.
31. Stein, M. V., 2002. Mathematical preparation as a basis for success in CS-II. Journal of Computing in Small Colleges, 17 (4): 28–38.
32. Ventura, P. R., 2005. Identifying predictors of success for an objects-first CS1. Computer Science Education, 15 (3): 223–243.
33. Wiedenbeck, S., Factors affecting the success of non-majors in learning to program. Proceedings of the 2005 International Workshop on Computing Education Research. pp. 13–24. ICER 2005
34. Zimmerman, B., 1986. Becoming a self-regulated learner: which are the key sub-processes?. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 11 (4): 307–313.
35. Zimmerman, B., and Martinez-Pons, M., 1990. Student differences in self-regulated learning: relating grade, sex and giftedness to self-efficacy and strategy use. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82 (1): 51–59.