Naturally occurring data as research instrument: Analyzing examination responses to study the novice programmer

SIGCSE Bulletin Inroads

Volumn 41, Issue 4, 2009, Pages

  Clear, Tony ^a   Bouvier, Dennis J ^b   Jacková, Jana ^c   Robbins, Phil ^a   Lister, Raymond ^d   Carter, Paul ^d   Lopez, Mike ^e   Seppälä, Otto ^f   Simon, ^g   Eckerdal, Anna ^h   McCartney, Robert ⁱ   Thompson, Errol ^j  

^a AUCKLAND UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (New Zealand)

^b SOUTHERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITY EDWARDSVILLE   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF ILINA   (Slovakia)

^d UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA   (Canada)

^e MANUKAU INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (New Zealand)

^f AALTO UNIVERSITY   (Finland)

^g UNIVERSITY OF NEWCASTLE   (Australia)

^h UPPSALA UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

ⁱ UNIVERSITY OF CONNECTICUT   (United States)

^j NONE   (United Kingdom)

more..

Author keywords

Comprehension; CS1; Novice programmers; Solo taxonomy; Tracing

Indexed keywords

CODES (SYMBOLS); COMPUTER PROGRAMMING; EDUCATION; TAXONOMIES;

COMPREHENSION; CS1; INTRODUCTORY PROGRAMMING COURSE; NATURALLY OCCURRING; NOVICE PROGRAMMER; PROGRAMMING SKILLS; RESEARCH INSTRUMENTS; TRACING;

STUDENTS;

EID: 84922867245     PISSN: 10963936     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. Baroody, A., Feil, Y., and Johnson, A. (2007). An alternative reconceptualization of procedural and conceptual knowledge. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 38:2, 115-131.
2. Biggs, J. B. (1999). Teaching for quality learning at university. Buckingham: Open University Press.
3. Biggs, J. B. and Collis, K. F. (1982). Evaluating the quality of learning: the SOLO taxonomy (Structure of the Observed Learning Outcome). New York: Academic Press.
4. Byckling, P. and Sajaniemi, J. (2006). Roles of variables and programming skills improvement. SIGCSE Bulletin 38:1, 413-417.
5. Clear, T., Edwards, J., Lister, R., Simon, B., Thompson, E. and Whalley, J. (2008). The teaching of novice computer programmers: bringing the scholarly-research approach to Australia. Tenth Australasian Computing Education Conference (ACE 2008), Wollongong, Australia, 63-68.
6. Clear, T., Whalley, J., Lister, R., Carbone, A., Hu, M., Sheard, J., Simon, B. and Thompson, E. (2008). Reliably classifying novice programmer exam results using the SOLO taxonomy. 21st Annual NACCQ Conference, NACCQ, Auckland, New Zealand, 23-30.
7. Colburn, T. and Shute, G. (2007). Abstraction in computer science. Minds & Machines 17, 169-184.
8. Cottrill, J., Dubinsky, E., Nichols, D., Schwingendorf, K., Thomas, K., and Vidakovic, D. (1996). Understanding the limit concept: beginning with a coordinated process scheme. Journal of Mathematical Behavior 15:2, 167-192.
9. Denny, P., Luxton-Reilly, A. and Simon, B. (2008). Evaluating a new exam question: Parsons problems. Fourth International Workshop on Computing Education Research (ICER '08), Sydney, Australia, 113-124.
10. Fincher, S., Lister, R., Clear, T., Robins, A., Tenenberg, J. and Petre, M. (2005). Multi-institutional, multi-national studies in CSEd research: some design considerations and trade-offs. in Anderson, R., Fincher, S. and Guzdial, M. eds. First International Workshop on Computing Education Research, Seattle, WA, USA, 111-121.
11. Gray, E., Pinto, M., Pitta, D., and Tall, D. (1999). Knowledge construction and diverging thinking in elementary and advanced mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics 38, 111-133.
12. Gray, E. and Tall, D. (2007). Abstraction as a natural process of mental compression. Mathematics Education Research Journal 19:2, 23-40.
13. Hattie, J. and Purdie, N. (1998). The SOLO model: addressing fundamental measurement issues. In Dart, B. & Boulton-Lewis, G. M. (Eds.), Teaching and learning in higher education, 145-176. Camberwell, Vic: Australian Council of Educational Research.
14. Hiebert, J. and Lefevre, P. (1986). Conceptual and procedural knowledge in mathematics: an introductory analysis. In Hiebert, J., ed., Conceptual and procedural knowledge: the case of mathematics, 1-27. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.
15. Lister R., Adams, E. S., Fitzgerald, S., Fone, W., Hamer, J., Lindholm, M., McCartney, R., Moström, E., Sanders, K., Seppälä, O., Simon, B., and Thomas, L. (2004). A multinational study of reading and tracing skills in novice programmers. SIGCSE Bulletin 36:4, 119-150.
16. Lister, R., Fidge, C., and Teague, D. (2009). Further evidence of a relationship between explaining, tracing and writing skills in introductory programming. 14th Annual SIGCSE Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education (ITiCSE'09), July 3-8, 2009, Paris, France.
17. Lister, R., Simon, B., Thompson, E., Whalley, J. L., and Prasad, C. (2006). Not seeing the forest for the trees: novice programmers and the SOLO taxonomy. SIGCSE Bulletin 38:3, 118-122.
18. Lopez, M., Whalley, J., Robbins, P., and Lister, R. (2008). Relationships between reading, tracing and writing skills in introductory programming. Fourth International Workshop on Computing Education Research (ICER '08), Sydney, Australia, 101-112.
19. McCartney, R., Mostrom, J.E., Sanders, K., and Seppälä, O. (2004). Questions, annotations, and institutions: observations from a study of novice programmers. Fourth Finnish / Baltic Sea Conference on Computer Science Education (Koli Calling 2004), 11-19.
20. McCormick, R. (1997). Conceptual and procedural knowledge. International Journal of Technology and Design Education 7:1-2, 141-159.
21. Parsons, D. and Haden, P. (2006). Parson's programming puzzles: a fun and effective learning tool for first programming courses. Eighth Australasian Computing Education Conference (ACE2006), Hobart, Australia, 157- 163.
22. Pegg, J. (2002). Assessment in mathematics: A developmental approach. In J. M. Royer (Ed.), Mathematical Cognition 227-259. Information Age Publishing: Greenwich, CT, USA.
23. Pegg, J. and Tall, D. (2005). The fundamental cycle of concept construction underlying various theoretical frameworks. ZDM 37:6, 468-474.
24. Perkins, D. and Martin, F. (1989). Fragile knowledge and neglected strategies in novice programmers. In Soloway, E. and Spohrer, J, Eds., Studying the Novice Programmer. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ, USA, 213-229.
25. Philpott, A., Robbins, P., and Whalley, J. (2007). Accessing the steps on the road to relational thinking. 20th Annual Conference of the National Advisory Committee on Computing Qualifications, Nelson, New Zealand, 286.
26. Rasch, G. (1960/1980). Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment tests (Copenhagen, Danish Institute for Educational Research), expanded edition (1980) with foreword and afterword by B.D. Wright. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
27. Robins, A., Rountree, J., and Rountree, N. (2003). Learning and teaching programming: a review and discussion. Computer Science Education 13:2, 137-172.
28. Sfard, A. (1988). Operational vs. structural method of teaching mathematics - case study. Twelfth Conference for the Psychology of Mathematics Education 2, 560-567. Vesprèm, Hungary: Ferenc Genzwein, OOK.
29. Sfard, A. (1991). On the dual nature of mathematical conceptions: reflections on processes and objects as different sides of the same coin. Educational Studies in Mathematics 22, 1-36.
30. Sheard, J., Carbone, A., Lister, R., Simon, B., Thompson, E., and Whalley, J. L. (2008). Going SOLO to assess novice programmers. SIGCSE Bulletin 40:3, 209-213.
31. Simon (2009). Code-explaining exam questions: a cautionary note. Ninth International Conference on Computing Education Research (Koli Calling 2009).
32. Soloway, E. (1986). Learning to program = learning to construct mechanisms and explanations. Communications of the ACM 29:9, 850-858.
33. Star, J. R. (2005). Reconceptualizing procedural knowledge. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 36, 401-411.
34. Tall, D., (2008). The transition to formal thinking in mathematics. Mathematics Education Research Journal 20:2, 5-24.
35. Thompson, E. (2004). Does the sum of the parts equal the whole? 21st Annual NACCQ Conference, NACCQ, Auckland, New Zealand, 2008, 440-445.
36. Thompson, E. (2007). Holistic assessment criteria - Applying SOLO to programming projects. Ninth Australasian Computing Education Conference (ACE2007), Ballarat, Australia, 155-162.
37. Thompson, E. (2009). How do they understand? Practitioner perceptions of an object-oriented program. Dissertation, Massey University, Palmerston North.
38. Venables, A., Tan, G., and Lister, R. (2009) A closer look at tracing, explaining and code writing skills in the novice programmer. Fifth International Workshop on Computing Education Research (ICER '09), Berkeley, California, USA.
39. Wiedenbeck, S. (1985). Novice/expert differences in programming skills. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies 23:4, 383-390.
40. Whalley, J. L., Lister, R., Thompson, E., Clear, T., Robbins, P., Kumar, P. K. A., and Prasad, C. (2006). An Australasian study of reading and comprehension skills in novice programmers, using the Bloom and SOLO taxonomies. Eighth Australasian Computing Education Conference (ACE2006), Hobart, Australia, 243-252.
41. Whalley, J. and Lister, R. (2009). The BRACElet 2009.1 (Wellington) Specification. Eleventh Australasian Computing Education Conference (ACE2009), Wellington, New Zealand, 9-18.
42. Whalley, J. and Robbins, P. (2007). Report on the Fourth BRACElet Workshop. Bulletin of Applied Computing and IT. Retrieved June 7, 2007 from http://www.naccq.co.nz/bacit/0501/2007Whalley-BRACELET-Workshop.htm.
43. Wright, B.D, and Linacre, J.M. (1994) Reasonable mean-square fit values. Rasch Measurement Transactions 8:3, 370.