Comparison between Pseudocode Usage and Visual Programming with Scratch in Programming Teaching

Críscilla M. C. Rezende, Esdras L. Bispo
{"title":"Comparison between Pseudocode Usage and Visual Programming with Scratch in Programming Teaching","authors":"Críscilla M. C. Rezende, Esdras L. Bispo","doi":"10.1109/LACLO.2018.00087","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This work presents the results of a research that aimed to evaluate the use of the Scratch visual programming language in the development of computational thinking, in comparison with the use of pseudocode, during the teaching of logic and programming algorithms. The research was delineated with a methodology of action research, which made possible the evaluation of the Scratch language and the pseudocode at the end of the approach of each content. The steps of approaching each content were initiated with the application of the diagnostic evaluation, and finalized with the evaluation of performance. The results indicate that the use of the Scratch language presented better results during the initial stages; as the complexity of the content increased, the use of the pseudocode produced better results. Nevertheless, it is worth noting the good acceptance of the Scratch language for the teaching-learning process of the contents, as well as the contribution that it has had to the learning of logic and programming algorithms.","PeriodicalId":340408,"journal":{"name":"2018 XIII Latin American Conference on Learning Technologies (LACLO)","volume":"10 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2018 XIII Latin American Conference on Learning Technologies (LACLO)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/LACLO.2018.00087","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

This work presents the results of a research that aimed to evaluate the use of the Scratch visual programming language in the development of computational thinking, in comparison with the use of pseudocode, during the teaching of logic and programming algorithms. The research was delineated with a methodology of action research, which made possible the evaluation of the Scratch language and the pseudocode at the end of the approach of each content. The steps of approaching each content were initiated with the application of the diagnostic evaluation, and finalized with the evaluation of performance. The results indicate that the use of the Scratch language presented better results during the initial stages; as the complexity of the content increased, the use of the pseudocode produced better results. Nevertheless, it is worth noting the good acceptance of the Scratch language for the teaching-learning process of the contents, as well as the contribution that it has had to the learning of logic and programming algorithms.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
伪代码与Scratch可视化编程在程序设计教学中的比较
这项工作展示了一项研究的结果,该研究旨在评估在逻辑和编程算法教学过程中,与使用伪代码相比,Scratch可视化编程语言在计算思维发展中的使用。该研究采用行动研究的方法进行描述,这使得在每个内容的方法结束时对Scratch语言和伪代码进行评估成为可能。接近每个内容的步骤以诊断评估的应用开始,并以绩效评估结束。结果表明,使用Scratch语言在初始阶段具有较好的效果;随着内容复杂性的增加,使用伪代码会产生更好的结果。尽管如此,值得注意的是Scratch语言在内容的教学过程中的良好接受程度,以及它对学习逻辑和编程算法的贡献。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
School Inclusion Using Computational Monitoring Of Reading For Students With Dyslexia Learning Objects to Strengthen Learning. Experience in Regular Basic Education in Perú Using Augmented Reality in the Development of Literacy for Students with Special Educational Needs Sentiments in Social Context of Student Modelling Openness and its Discontents: Some Challenges in the Adoption of Open Education Architectures in Brazil
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1