Jussi Kasurinen
ABSTRACT
In this paper we present a concept for three-phase measuring method, which can be used to obtain data on student learning. The focus of this method lies on the technical aspects of learning programming, answering questions like which programming constructs students applied and how large portion of the students understood the concepts of programming language.
The model is based on three consecutive measurements, which are used to observe the student errors, applied programming structures and an application of a Bayesian learning model to determine the programming knowledge. So far the model has produced results which confirm prior knowledge on student learning, indicating that the concept is feasible for further development. Despite of the early development phase of the method, it offers a straightforward way for teacher to assess the course contents and student performance.
- Anderson, J.R. and Schunn, C.D. 2000. Implications of the ACT-R Learning Theory: No Magic Bullets. Advances in instructional psychology, Vol. 5.Google Scholar
- Baker, RSJ, Corbett, A.T., Aleven, V. 2008, More Accurate Student Modeling through Contextual Estimation of Slip and Guess Probabilities in Bayesian Knowledge Tracing. Proc. of the 9th International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems, pages 406--415, Berlin, Germany. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Bertels, K.; Vanneste, P.; De Backer, C., 1993. A cognitive approach to program understanding. Proceedings of Working Conference on Reverse Engineering, 21--23 May, Baltimore, MD, USA, 1--7.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Bloom B. S., 1956. Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, Handbook I: The Cognitive Domain. New York: David McKay Co Inc.Google Scholar
- Carter, J., Ala-Mutka, K., Fuller, U., Dick, M., English, J., Fone, W. and Shread, J, 2003. How shall we assess this? ACM SIGCSE Bulletin Vol 35(4), 107--123. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Conati, C., Gertner, A. and Vanlehn, K., 2002. Using Bayesian Networks to Manage Uncertainty in Student Modelling. User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction 12(4), pages 371--417. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Corbett, A.T. and Anderson, J.R., 1995. Knowledge Tracing: Modeling the Acquisition of Procedural Knowledge. User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction 4(4), pages 253--278.Google Scholar
- Gunzelmann, G. and Gluck, K.A. 2004. Knowledge Tracing for Complex Training Applications: Beyond Bayesian Mastery Estimates. Proc. 13th Conference on Behavior Representation in Modeling and Simulation, Arlington, VA, USA, pages 383--384.Google Scholar
- Jastrzembski, T.S, Gluck, K.A. and Gunzelmann, G. Knowledge Tracing and Prediction of Future Trainee Performance. Proceedings of the Interservice/Industry Training, Simulation, and Education Conference, Orlando, Florida, USA, 2006.Google Scholar
- Kasurinen, J., Purmonen, M. and Nikula, U., 2008. A Study of Visualization in Introductory Programming. Proc. 20th annual Meeting of Psychology of Programming Interest Group, Lancaster, UK, 2008.Google Scholar
- Linn, MC, 1985. The cognitive consequences of programming instructions in classrooms. Educational Researcher, Vol 15(5), 14--16, 25--29.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Mayer, R. E., Dyck, J. L., Vilberg, W., 1986. Learning to program and learning to think: what's the connection? Communications of the ACM, Vol 29(7), 605--610. Google ScholarDigital Library
- McKetihen, K., Reitman, J.S., Rueter H.H. and Hirtle S.C.. 1981. Knowledge Organization and Skill Differences in Computer Programs. Cognitive Psychology 13, pages 307--325.Google Scholar
- Mierle, K., Laven, K., Roweis, S. and Wilson, G., 2005. Mining student CVS repositories for performance indicators. Proc. of the 2005 International workshop on Mining Software Repositories, pages 1--5. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Simon, B. Lister, R. and Fincher, S. 2006. Multi-Institutional Computer Science Education Research: A Review of Recent Studies of Novice Understanding. 36th Annual Conference on Frontiers in Education, San Diego, CA, USA, pages 12--17.Google Scholar
- Soloway, E., Ehrlich, K., Bonar, J. and Greenspan, J., 1982. What Do Novices Know about Programming? Directions in Human/Computer Interaction, 27--54.Google Scholar
- Spohrer J. C., Pope E., Lipman M., Sack W., Freiman S., Littman D., Johnson L., Soloway E., 1985. Bugs in Novice Programs and Misconceptions in Novice Programmers. Computers in Education, 543--552.Google Scholar
- Winslow L.E. 1996. Programming Pedagogy -- A Psychological Overview. SIGCSE Bulletin, 28, 17--28. Google ScholarDigital Library
Index Terms
- Estimating programming knowledge with Bayesian knowledge tracing
Recommendations
Estimating programming knowledge with Bayesian knowledge tracing
ITiCSE '09In this paper we present a concept for three-phase measuring method, which can be used to obtain data on student learning. The focus of this method lies on the technical aspects of learning programming, answering questions like which programming ...
Enhancing Programming Knowledge Tracing by Interacting Programming Skills and Student Code
LAK22: LAK22: 12th International Learning Analytics and Knowledge ConferenceProgramming education has received extensive attention in recent years due to the increasing demand for programming ability in almost all industries. Educational institutions have widely employed online judges for programming training, which can help ...
A role-based analysis model for the evaluation of novices' programming knowledge development
ICER '06: Proceedings of the second international workshop on Computing education researchThe development of high level programming knowledge is not well known and there are no direct techniques to evaluate and measure it. Measurement of programming skills is mostly based on the evaluation of programs written by students but the final ...
Comments