在一项重复研究中重新评估CS1中解释、描摹和写作技能之间的关系

IF 3 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Computer Science Education Pub Date : 2022-06-10 DOI:10.1080/08993408.2022.2079866
Max Fowler, David H. Smith IV, Mohammed Hassan, Seth Poulsen, Matthew West, C. Zilles
{"title":"在一项重复研究中重新评估CS1中解释、描摹和写作技能之间的关系","authors":"Max Fowler, David H. Smith IV, Mohammed Hassan, Seth Poulsen, Matthew West, C. Zilles","doi":"10.1080/08993408.2022.2079866","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Background and Context Lopez and Lister first presented evidence for a skill hierarchy of code reading, tracing, and writing for introductory programming students. Further support for this hierarchy could help computer science educators sequence course content to best build student programming skill. Objective This study aims to replicate a slightly simplified hierarchy of skills in CS1 using a larger body of students (600+ vs. 38) in a non-major introductory Python course with computer-based exams. We also explore the validity of other possible hierarchies. Method We collected student score data on 4 kinds of exam questions. Structural equation modeling was used to derive the hierarchy for each exam. Findings We find multiple best-fitting structural models. The original hierarchy does not appear among the “best” candidates, but similar models do. We also determined that our methods provide us with correlations between skills and do not answer a more fundamental question: what is the ideal teaching order for these skills? Implications This modeling work is valuable for understanding the possible correlations between fundamental code-related skills. However, analyzing student performance on these skills at a moment in time is not sufficient to determine teaching order. We present possible study designs for exploring this more actionable research question.","PeriodicalId":45844,"journal":{"name":"Computer Science Education","volume":"32 1","pages":"355 - 383"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"8","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reevaluating the relationship between explaining, tracing, and writing skills in CS1 in a replication study\",\"authors\":\"Max Fowler, David H. Smith IV, Mohammed Hassan, Seth Poulsen, Matthew West, C. Zilles\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/08993408.2022.2079866\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Background and Context Lopez and Lister first presented evidence for a skill hierarchy of code reading, tracing, and writing for introductory programming students. Further support for this hierarchy could help computer science educators sequence course content to best build student programming skill. Objective This study aims to replicate a slightly simplified hierarchy of skills in CS1 using a larger body of students (600+ vs. 38) in a non-major introductory Python course with computer-based exams. We also explore the validity of other possible hierarchies. Method We collected student score data on 4 kinds of exam questions. Structural equation modeling was used to derive the hierarchy for each exam. Findings We find multiple best-fitting structural models. The original hierarchy does not appear among the “best” candidates, but similar models do. We also determined that our methods provide us with correlations between skills and do not answer a more fundamental question: what is the ideal teaching order for these skills? Implications This modeling work is valuable for understanding the possible correlations between fundamental code-related skills. However, analyzing student performance on these skills at a moment in time is not sufficient to determine teaching order. We present possible study designs for exploring this more actionable research question.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45844,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Computer Science Education\",\"volume\":\"32 1\",\"pages\":\"355 - 383\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-06-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"8\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Computer Science Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/08993408.2022.2079866\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Computer Science Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/08993408.2022.2079866","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

摘要

Lopez和Lister首先为编程入门学生提供了代码阅读、跟踪和编写技能层次的证据。对这种层次结构的进一步支持可以帮助计算机科学教育者对课程内容进行排序,以最好地培养学生的编程技能。本研究旨在复制CS1中稍微简化的技能层次,使用更多的学生(600+ vs. 38)在非主要的Python入门课程中进行计算机考试。我们还探讨了其他可能的层次结构的有效性。方法收集4种考试题目的学生成绩资料。使用结构方程建模来推导每个考试的层次结构。我们发现了多个最适合的结构模型。最初的等级制度不会出现在“最佳”候选者中,但类似的模型会出现。我们还确定,我们的方法为我们提供了技能之间的相关性,但没有回答一个更基本的问题:这些技能的理想教学顺序是什么?这个建模工作对于理解与代码相关的基本技能之间可能的相关性是有价值的。然而,在某一时刻分析学生在这些技能上的表现并不足以决定教学顺序。我们提出可能的研究设计来探索这个更具可操作性的研究问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Reevaluating the relationship between explaining, tracing, and writing skills in CS1 in a replication study
ABSTRACT Background and Context Lopez and Lister first presented evidence for a skill hierarchy of code reading, tracing, and writing for introductory programming students. Further support for this hierarchy could help computer science educators sequence course content to best build student programming skill. Objective This study aims to replicate a slightly simplified hierarchy of skills in CS1 using a larger body of students (600+ vs. 38) in a non-major introductory Python course with computer-based exams. We also explore the validity of other possible hierarchies. Method We collected student score data on 4 kinds of exam questions. Structural equation modeling was used to derive the hierarchy for each exam. Findings We find multiple best-fitting structural models. The original hierarchy does not appear among the “best” candidates, but similar models do. We also determined that our methods provide us with correlations between skills and do not answer a more fundamental question: what is the ideal teaching order for these skills? Implications This modeling work is valuable for understanding the possible correlations between fundamental code-related skills. However, analyzing student performance on these skills at a moment in time is not sufficient to determine teaching order. We present possible study designs for exploring this more actionable research question.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Computer Science Education
Computer Science Education EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
6.90
自引率
3.70%
发文量
23
期刊介绍: Computer Science Education publishes high-quality papers with a specific focus on teaching and learning within the computing discipline. The journal seeks novel contributions that are accessible and of interest to researchers and practitioners alike. We invite work with learners of all ages and across both classroom and out-of-classroom learning contexts.
期刊最新文献
“These two worlds are antithetical”: epistemic tensions in integrating computational thinking in K12 humanities and arts Exploring young people’s perceptions and discourses of technology occupations through descriptive drawings and a questionnaire A review of arts integration in K-12 CS education: gathering STEAM for inclusive learning Investigating the psychometric features of a locally designed computational thinking assessment for elementary students Integrating coding across the curriculum: a scoping review
×
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