Student strategies for learning programming from a computational environment

  • Margaret M. Recker
  • Peter Pirolli
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 608)


This paper discusses the design and evaluation of a hypertext-based environment that presents instructional material on programming in Lisp. The design of the environment was motivated by results from studies investigating students' strategies for knowledge acquisition. The effectiveness of the design was evaluated by conducting a study that contrasted how subjects used and learned from the instructional environment compared to subjects using more standard, structured, linear instruction. The results showed an interesting ability by environment interaction: the higher ability subjects using the hypertext environment improved and made significantly less errors when programming new concepts while the lower ability subjects did not improve and made more errors. Meanwhile, subjects using the control environment did not show this ability-based difference. These results have implications for the design of intelligent tutoring systems. They affect decisions involving the amount of learner control that is provided to students and the way student models are constructed.


Instructional Material Learner Control Intelligent Tutoring System Verbal Protocol Explanation Environment 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [1]
    J.R. Anderson and B.J. Reiser. The LISP Tutor. Byte, 10:159–175, 1985.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    S. Card, T. Moran, and A. Newell. The psychology of Human-computer interaction. Lawrence Erlbaurn, Associates, Hillsdale, NJ, 1983.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    M.T.H. Chi, M. Bassok, M.W. Lewis, P. Reiman, and R. Glaser. Self-explanations: How students study and use examples in learning to solve problems. Cognitive Science, 13:145–182, 1989.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    W. Doyle. Academic work. Review of Educational Research, 53(2):159–199, 1983.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    J. Laird, P. Rosenbloom, and A. Newell. Soar: An architecture for general intelligence. Artificial Intelligence, 33:1–64, 1987.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    T. Mayes, M. Kibby, and T. Anderson. Learning about learning from hypertext. In D. Jonassen and H. Mandl, editors, Designing Hypermedia for Learning, pages 227–250. Springer Verlag, Berlin, 1990.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    J. Nielsen. Hypertext & Hypermedia. Academic Press, San Diego, CA, 1990.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    S. Papert. Mindstorms: Children, Computers, and Powerful Ideas. Basic Books, New York, 1980.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    P. Pirolli. A cognitive model and computer tutor for programming recursion. Human-Computer Interaction, 2:319–355, 1986.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    P. Pirolli and J.R. Anderson. The role of learning from examples in the acquisition of recursive programming skills. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 39(2):240–272, 1985.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    P. Pirolli and M. Recker. Knowledge construction and transfer using an intelligent tutoring system: The role of examples, self-explanation, practice, and reflection. Technical Report CSM-1, University of California, Berkeley, 1991.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    M. Recker and P. Pirolli. Self-explanation verbal protocols: A protocol coding scheme and representative protocols. Technical Report CSM-5, University of California, Berkeley, 1991.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    L. Reder, D. Charney, and K. Morgan. The role of elaborations in learning a skill from instructional text. Memory and Cognition, 14:64–78, 1986.Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    B. Reiser, W. Copen, M. Ranney, A. Hamid, and D. Kimberg. Cognitive and motivational consequences of tutoring and discovery learning. Technical report, Cognitive Science Laboratory, Princeton University, 1991.Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    B.H. Ross. Remindings and their effects in learning a cognitive skill. Cognitive Psychology, 16:371–416, 1984.Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    R. E. Snow and D. F. Lohman. Toward a theory of cognitive aptitude for learning from instruction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76:347–376, 1984.Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    E. Steinberg. Cognition and learner control: A literature review, 1977–1988. Journal of Computer-Based Education, 16(4):117–121, 1989.Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    J. Sweller. Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12:257–285, 1988.Google Scholar
  19. [19]
    M. Twidale. Cognitive Agoraphobia and Dilettantism: Issues for Reactive Learning Environments. In L. Birbaum, editor, Proceedings of the International Conference of the Learning Sciences. Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education., Chariottesville, VA, 1991.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • Margaret M. Recker
    • 1
  • Peter Pirolli
    • 1
  1. 1.Graduate School of EducationUniversity of CaliforniaBerkeleyUSA

Personalised recommendations