skip to main content
10.1145/2462476.2462503acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesiticseConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Concept specification maps: displaying content structures

Authors Info & Claims
Published:01 July 2013Publication History

ABSTRACT

In introductory courses there are topics with a huge amount of concepts and interdependencies between them. Especially in the course materials the relevant definitions or specifications are widely spread. This paper presents a semi-automatic way of text analysis to display the structure of concepts in literature such as textbooks. Therefore we searched for text paragraphs that contain a definition or specification of a given concept. From the results we built a graphical representation, containing "definition-nodes" that show the logical structure of those concepts. We call it a Concept Specification Map. Furthermore we show an application of the method on five textbooks of introductory courses into object-oriented programming. We present the results of the analysis and draw some conclusions on their influence regarding introductory courses.

References

  1. H. Abelson, G. J. Sussman, and J. Sussman. Structure and interpretation of computer programs. MIT Press and McGraw-Hill, Cambridge and Mass and New York, 2 edition, 1996. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. D. J. Armstrong. The quarks of object-oriented development. Commun. ACM, 49(2):123--128, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. M. Berges and P. Hubwieser. Towards an overview map of object-oriented programming and design. Koli Calling, page to be published, 2012.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. M. Berges, A. Mühling, and P. Hubwieser. The gap between knowledge and ability. Koli Calling, page to be published, 2012. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. J. Börstler, M. S. Hall, M. Nordström, J. H. Paterson, K. Sanders, C. Schulte, and L. Thomas. An evaluation of object oriented example programs in introductory programming textbooks. SIGCSE Bull, 41(4):126--143, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. P. J. Deitel and H. M. Deitel. Java: How to program. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River and N.J, 9 edition, 2012.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. B. Eckel. Thinking in Java. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River and NJ, 4 edition, 2006.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. D. Flanagan. Java in a nutshell. O'Reilly, Beijing and and Sebastopol and CA and, 5 edition, 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. P. Hubwieser and M. Berges. Minimally invasive programming courses: learning oop with(out) instruction. In Proceedings of the 42nd ACM technical symposium on Computer science education, pages 87--92. ACM, Dallas and TX and USA, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. P. Hubwieser and A. Mühling. Investigating cognitive structures of object oriented programming. In Proceedings of the 16th annual joint conference on Innovation and technology in computer science education, ITiCSE '11, pages 377--377, New York and NY and USA, 2011. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. P. Hubwieser and A. Mühling. Knowpats: Patterns of declarative knowledge - searching frequent knowledge patterns about object-orientation. In J. Filipe and Ana L. N. Fred, editors, KDIR 2011 - Proceedings of the International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Information Retrieval, Paris, France, 26--29 October, 2011, pages 358--364. SciTePress, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. P. Hubwieser and A. Mühling. What students (should) know about object oriented programming. In Proceedings of the seventh international workshop on Computing education research, ICER '11, pages 77--84, New York and NY and USA, 2011. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. H. W. Means. A content analysis of ten introduction to programming textbooks. SIGCSE Bull, 20(1):283--287, 1988. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. B. Meyer. Testable, reusable units of cognition. Computer, 39(4):20--24, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. M. Pedroni. Concepts and Tools for Teaching Programming. PhD thesis, ETH Zurich, Zurich and Switzerland, 2009.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. M. d. Raadt, R. Watson, and M. Toleman. Textbooks: under inspection, 2005.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. R. Sedgewick and K. D. Wayne. Introduction to programming in Java: An interdisciplinary approach. Pearson Addison-Wesley, Boston, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. M. Steinert. Lernzielstrukturen im Informatikunterricht. PhD thesis, TU München, München, 2010.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Concept specification maps: displaying content structures

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      ITiCSE '13: Proceedings of the 18th ACM conference on Innovation and technology in computer science education
      July 2013
      384 pages
      ISBN:9781450320788
      DOI:10.1145/2462476

      Copyright © 2013 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 1 July 2013

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      ITiCSE '13 Paper Acceptance Rate51of161submissions,32%Overall Acceptance Rate552of1,613submissions,34%

      Upcoming Conference

      ITiCSE 2024

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader