nach oben

Journal of Computing in Higher Education

Erschienen in:

21.01.2022

An exploratory study on fade-in versus fade-out scaffolding for novice programmers in online collaborative programming settings

verfasst von: Lanqin Zheng, Yuanyi Zhen, Jiayu Niu, Lu Zhong

Erschienen in: Journal of Computing in Higher Education | Ausgabe 2/2022

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

Programming skills have gained increasing attention in recent years because digital technologies have become an indispensable part of life. However, little is known about the roles of fade-in and fade-out scaffolding in online collaborative programming settings. To close this research gap, the present study aims to examine the roles of fade-in and fade-out scaffolding for novice programmers in online collaborative programming. A total of 90 undergraduate students participated in the exploratory study and were assigned to 15 fade-in groups and 15 fade-out groups. All of the participants completed the same programming task. The findings reveal that fade-in scaffolding can significantly improve collaborative knowledge building, programming skills, metacognitive behaviors, emotions, and collective efficacy. Goal setting, planning, monitoring and control, enacting strategies, and evaluation and reflection are identified as the crucial metacognitive behaviors. The main contribution of this exploratory study is to shed light on how to design and implement scaffolding for novice programmers.

Vorheriger Artikel A feedback model applied in a ubiquitous microlearning environment using SECA rules

Nächster Artikel An evaluation of a first-of-its-kind hybrid law degree program

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Bakeman, R., & Gottman, J. M. (1997). Observing interaction: An introduction to sequential analysis. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511527685CrossRef

Bakeman, R., & Quera, V. (2011). Sequential analysis and observational methods for the behavioral sciences. Cambridge University Press.CrossRef

Bagozzi, R. P., & Yi, Y. (1988). On the evaluation of structural equation models. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 16(1), 74–94. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02723327CrossRef

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. Freeman.

Beck, L., & Chizhik, A. (2013). Cooperative learning instructional methods for CS1: Design, implementation, and evaluation. ACM Transactions on Computing Education, 13(3), 10–21. https://doi.org/10.1145/2492686CrossRef

Bond, M., Buntins, K., Bedenlier, S., Zawacki-Richter, O., & Kerres, M. (2020). Mapping research in student engagement and educational technology in higher education: A systematic evidence map. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 17, 2. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-019-0176-8CrossRef

Bowman, N. A., Jarratt, L., Culver, K. C., & Segre, A. M. (2020). Pair programming in perspective: Effects on persistence, achievement, and equity in computer science. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 13(4), 731–758. https://doi.org/10.1080/19345747.2020.1799464CrossRef

Bulu, S. T., & Pedersen, S. (2010). Scaffolding middle school students’ content knowledge and ill-structured problem solving in a problem-based hypermedia learning environment. Educational Technology Research & Development, 58(5), 507–529. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-010-9150-9CrossRef

Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Lawrence Earlbaum Associates.

Denner, J., Werner, L., Campe, S., & Ortiz, E. (2014). Pair programming: Under what conditions is it advantageous for middle school students? Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 46(3), 277–296. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2014.888272CrossRef

Exter, M. E., & Ashby, I. (2019). Preparing today’s educational software developers: Voices from the field. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 31(3), 472–494. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-018-9198-9CrossRef

Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A. G., & Buchner, A. (2007). G* Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39(2), 175–191. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193146CrossRef

Fessakis, G., Gouli, E., & Mavroudi, E. (2013). Problem solving by 5–6 years old kindergarten children in a computer programming environment: A case study. Computers & Education, 63, 87–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.11.016CrossRef

Furberg, A. (2016). Teacher support in computer-supported lab work: Bridging the gap between lab experiments and students’ conceptual understanding. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 11(1), 89–113. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-016-9229-3CrossRef

Giacaman, N., & De Ruvo, G. (2018). Bridging theory and practice in programming lectures with active classroom programmer. IEEE Transactions on Education, 61(3), 177–186. https://doi.org/10.1109/TE.2018.2819969CrossRef

Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis. Prentice Hall.

Kaendler, C., Wiedmann, M., Rummel, N., & Spada, H. (2015). Teacher competencies for the implementation of collaborative learning in the classroom: A framework and research review. Educational Psychology Review, 27(3), 505–536. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-014-9288-9CrossRef

Kalyuga, S., & Renkl, A. (2010). Expertise reversal effect and its instructional implications: Introduction to the special issue. Instructional Science, 38(3), 209–215. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-009-9102-0CrossRef

Kapur, M. (2008). Productive failure. Cognition and Instruction, 26(3), 379–424. https://doi.org/10.1080/07370000802212669CrossRef

Kapur, M. (2016). Examining productive failure, productive success, unproductive failure, and unproductive success in learning. Educational Psychologist, 51(2), 289–299. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2016.1155457CrossRef

Kapur, M., & Bielaczyc, K. (2012). Designing for productive failure. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 21(1), 45–83. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2011.591717CrossRef

Koorsse, M., Cilliers, C., & Calitz, A. (2015). Programming assistance tools to support the learning of IT programming in South African secondary schools. Computers & Education, 82, 162–178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.11.020CrossRef

Kwon, K., Hong, R. Y., & Laffey, J. M. (2013). The educational impact of metacognitive group coordination in computer-supported collaborative learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(4), 1271–1281. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.01.003CrossRef

Kunkle, W. M., & Allen, R. B. (2016). The impact of different teaching approaches and languages on student learning of introductory programming concepts. ACM Transactions on Computing Education, 16(1), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1145/2785807CrossRef

Lajoie, S. P. (2005). Extending the scaffolding metaphor. Instructional Science, 33(5–6), 541–557. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-005-1279-2CrossRef

Lu, O. H., Huang, J. C., Huang, A. Y., & Yang, S. J. (2017). Applying learning analytics for improving students engagement and learning outcomes in an MOOCs enabled collaborative programming course. Interactive Learning Environments, 25(2), 220–234. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2016.1278391CrossRef

Janssen, N., Knoef, M., & Lazonder, A. W. (2019). Technological and pedagogical support for pre-service teachers’ lesson planning. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 28(1), 115–128. https://doi.org/10.1080/1475939X.2019.1569554CrossRef

Jennings, J., & Muldner, K. (2020). Assistance that fades in improves learning better than assistance that fades out. Instructional Science, 48(4), 371–394. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-020-09520-7CrossRef

Margulieux, L. E., & Catrambone, R. (2021). Scaffolding problem solving with learners’ own self explanations of subgoals. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 33, 499–523. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-021-09275-1CrossRef

Mathrani, A., Christian, S., & Ponder-Sutton, A. (2016). PlayIT: Game based learning approach for teaching programming concepts. Educational Technology & Society, 19(2), 5–17.

Menon, P., & Kovalchick, L. (2020). Using a concept map to represent the composition of knowledge in an introductory programming course. Information Systems Education Journal, 18(3), 4–17.

Mladenović, S., Krpan, D., & Mladenović, M. (2016). Using games to help novices embrace programming: From elementary to higher education. The International Journal of Engineering Education, 32(1), 521–531.

Mohd Rum, S. N., & Ismail, M. A. (2017). Metacognitive support accelerates computer assisted learning for novice programmers. Educational Technology & Society, 20(3), 170–181.

Molenaar, I., Sleegers, P., & van Boxtel, C. (2014). Metacognitive scaffolding during collaborative learning: A promising combination. Metacognition and Learning, 9(3), 309–332. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-014-9118-yCrossRef

Nosek, J. T. (1998). The case for collaborative programming. Communications of the ACM, 41(3), 105–108. https://doi.org/10.1145/272287.272333CrossRef

Phuong, D. T. D., & Shimakawa, H. (2008). Collaborative learning environment to improve novice programmer with convincing opinions. WSEAS Transactions on Advances in Engineering Education, 5(9), 635–644.

Puntambekar, S., & Hubscher, R. (2005). Tools for scaffolding students in a complex learning environment: What have we gained and what have we missed? Educational Psychologist, 40(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep4001_1CrossRef

Quera, V., Bakeman, R., & Gnisci, A. (2007). Observer agreement for event sequences: Methods and software for sequence alignment and reliability estimates. Behavior Research Methods, 39(1), 39–49. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03192842CrossRef

Sentance, S., & Csizmadia, A. (2016). Computing in the curriculum: Challenges and strategies from a teacher’s perspective. Education and Information Technologies, 22(2), 469–495. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-016-9482-0CrossRef

Shin, Y., Kim, D., & Song, D. (2020). Types and timing of scaffolding to promote meaningful peer interaction and increase learning performance in computer-supported collaborative learning environments. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 58(3), 640–661. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633119877134CrossRef

Sun, J. C. Y., & Hsu, K. Y. C. (2019). A smart eye-tracking feedback scaffolding approach to improving students’ learning self-efficacy and performance in a C programming course. Computers in Human Behavior, 95, 66–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.01.036CrossRef

Sung, H. Y., & Hwang, G. J. (2013). A collaborative game-based learning approach to improving students’ learning performance in science courses. Computers & Education, 63, 43–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.11.019CrossRef

Tan, H. Q. (2017). Programming in C (5th ed.). Tsinghua University Press.

Tansomboon, C., Gerard, L. F., Vitale, J. M., & Linn, M. C. (2017). Designing automated guidance to promote productive revision of science explanations. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 27(4), 729–757. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-017-0145-0CrossRef

Tawfik, A. A., Law, V., Ge, X., Xing, W., & Kim, K. (2018). The effect of sustained vs. faded scaffolding on students’ argumentation in ill-structured problem solving. Computers in Human Behavior, 87, 436–449. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.01.035CrossRef

Teague, D., & Roe, P. (2008). Collaborative learning-towards a solution for novice programmers. In Proceedings of the tenth Australasian computing education conference in conferences in research and practice in information technology-CRPIT volume 78 (pp. 147–153). Australian Computer Society. https://eprints.qut.edu.au/17818/1/c17818.pdf

Tsai, C. Y. (2019). Improving students’ understanding of basic programming concepts through visual programming language: The role of self-efficacy. Computers in Human Behavior, 95, 224–232. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.11.038CrossRef

Tullis, J., Goldstone, R., & Hanson, A. (2015). Scheduling scaffolding: The extent and arrangement of assistance during training impacts test performance. Journal of Motor Behavior, 47, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1080/00222895.2015.1008686CrossRef

van Leeuwen, A., & Janssen, J. (2019). A systematic review of teacher guidance during collaborative learning in primary and secondary education. Educational Research Review, 27, 71–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2019.02.001CrossRef

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.

Wang, X. C., Choi, Y., Benson, K., Eggleston, C., & Weber, D. (2021). Teacher’s role in fostering preschoolers’ computational thinking: An exploratory case study. Early Education and Development, 36(1), 26–48. https://doi.org/10.1080/10409289.2020.1759012CrossRef

Wang, X. M., & Hwang, G. J. (2017). A problem posing-based practicing strategy for facilitating students’ computer programming skills in the team-based learning mode. Educational Technology Research and Development, 65(6), 1655–1671. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-017-9551-0CrossRef

Wei, X., Lin, L., Meng, N., Tan, W., & Kong, S. C. (2021). The effectiveness of partial pair programming on elementary school students’ Computational Thinking skills and self-efficacy. Computers & Education, 160, 104023. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.104023CrossRef

Wood, D., Bruner, J. S., & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 17(2), 89–100. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.1976.tb00381.xCrossRef

Wu, B., Hu, Y., Ruis, A. R., & Wang, M. (2019). Analysing computational thinking in collaborative programming: A quantitative ethnography approach. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 35(3), 421–434. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12348CrossRef

Wu, L., Looi, C. K., Multisilta, J., How, M. L., Choi, H., Hsu, T. C., & Tuomi, P. (2020). Teacher’s perceptions and readiness to teach coding skills: A comparative study between Finland, Mainland China, Singapore, Taiwan, and South Korea. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 29(1), 21–34. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-019-00485-xCrossRef

Xu, B., Chen, N. S., & Chen, G. (2020). Effects of teacher role on student engagement in WeChat-Based online discussion learning. Computers & Education. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103956CrossRef

Yaghmazadeh, N., Wang, X., & Dillig, I. (2018). Automated migration of hierarchical data to relational tables using programming-by-example. Proceedings of the VLDB Endowment, 11(5), 580–593.CrossRef

Yeomans, L., Zschaler, S., & Coate, K. (2019). Transformative and troublesome? Students’ and professional programmers’ perspectives on difficult concepts in programming. ACM Transactions on Computing Education, 19(3), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1145/3283071CrossRef

Yilmaz, F. G. K., & Yilmaz, R. (2020). Student opinions about personalized recommendation and feedback based on learning analytics. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 25, 753–768. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-020-09460-8CrossRef

Yu, S., & Hu, G. (2017). Can higher-proficiency L2 learners benefit from working with lower-proficiency partners in peer feedback? Teaching in Higher Education, 22(2), 178–192. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2016.1221806CrossRef

Zhang, J. H., Meng, B., Zou, L. C., Zhu, Y., & Hwang, G. J. (2021). Progressive flowchart development scaffolding to improve university students’ computational thinking and programming self-efficacy. Interactive Learning Environments. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2021.1943687CrossRef

Zheng, L. (2017). Knowledge building and regulation in computer-supported collaborative learning. Springer.CrossRef

Zheng, L., & Huang, R. (2016). The effects of sentiments and co-regulation on group performance in computer-supported collaborative learning. The Internet and Higher Education, 28, 59–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2015.10.001CrossRef

Zheng, L., Huang, R., Hwang, G.-J., & Yang, K. (2015). Measuring knowledge elaboration based on a computer-assisted knowledge map analytical approach to collaborative learning. Educational Technology & Society, 18(1), 321–336.

Zheng, L., Li, X., Zhang, X., & Sun, W. (2019). The effects of group metacognitive scaffolding on group metacognitive behaviors, group performance, and cognitive load in computer-supported collaborative learning. The Internet and Higher Education, 42, 13–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2019.03.002CrossRef

Titel: An exploratory study on fade-in versus fade-out scaffolding for novice programmers in online collaborative programming settings
verfasst von: Lanqin Zheng
Yuanyi Zhen
Jiayu Niu
Lu Zhong
Publikationsdatum: 21.01.2022
Verlag: Springer US
Erschienen in: Journal of Computing in Higher Education / Ausgabe 2/2022
Print ISSN: 1042-1726
Elektronische ISSN: 1867-1233
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-021-09307-w

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 2/2022

A feedback model applied in a ubiquitous microlearning environment using SECA rules

A case study on the usage of lecture capture: perceptions of students, faculty members and administrators

A scoping review of computational thinking assessments in higher education

An evaluation of a first-of-its-kind hybrid law degree program

Online simulation for information technology skills training in higher education

The effect of learning analytics assisted recommendations and guidance feedback on students’ metacognitive awareness and academic achievements

Premium Partner