Advertisement

Evidence for Programming Strategies in University Coding Exercises

  • Kshitij SharmaEmail author
  • Katerina Mangaroska
  • Halvard Trætteberg
  • Serena Lee-Cultura
  • Michail Giannakos
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11082)

Abstract

Success in coding exercises is deeply related to the strategy employed by the students to solve coding tasks. In this contribution, we analyze the programming assignments of 600 students from an introductory university course in object-oriented programming. The students were provided unit tests for the assessment of their code, and their editing and testing actions were recorded using an Eclipse plug-in. The primary motivation for this study is to discover the programming strategies used by students for coding exercises with different difficulty levels, and find out if any relation exists between these strategies and the success in solving the coding tasks. More insights into this process will enable educators to provide future students timely, appropriate and constructive feedback on their coding process. Thus, to predict success in the coding exercises, we used indicators from students’ testing behaviour reflecting the time and effort differences between two successive unit test runs. The results show a clear difference in the strategies employed by students within different success levels. The results also highlight ways of providing actionable feedback to the students in a timely and appropriate manner.

Keywords

Programming strategies Personalized feedback Computer science education 

References

  1. 1.
    Alloway, T.P., Alloway, R.G.: Investigating the predictive roles of working memory and IQ in academic attainment. J. Exp. Child Psychol. 106(1), 20–29 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Barnes, D.J., Fincher, S., Thompson, S.: Introductory problem solving in computer science. In: 5th Annual Conference on the Teaching of Computing, pp. 36–39 (1997)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Barrick, M.R., Mount, M.K., Strauss, J.P.: Conscientiousness and performance of sales representatives: test of the mediating effects of goal setting. J. Appl. Psychol. 78(5), 715 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Blikstein, P., Worsley, M., Piech, C., Sahami, M., Cooper, S., Koller, D.: Programming pluralism: using learning analytics to detect patterns in the learning of computer programming. J. Learn. Sci. 23(4), 561–599 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bruce, C., Buckingham, L., Hynd, J., McMahon, C., Roggenkamp, M., Stoodley, I.: Ways of experiencing the act of learning to program: a phenomenographic study of introductory programming students at university. In: Transforming IT Education: Promoting a Culture of Excellence, pp. 301–325 (2006)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Busato, V.V., Prins, F.J., Elshout, J.J., Hamaker, C.: Intellectual ability, learning style, personality, achievement motivation and academic success of psychology students in higher education. Pers. Individ. Differ. 29(6), 1057–1068 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cano, F.: Epistemological beliefs and approaches to learning: their change through secondary school and their influence on academic performance. Br. J. Educ. Psychol. 75(2), 203–221 (2005)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chamorro-Premuzic, T., Furnham, A.: Personality traits and academic examination performance. Eur. J. Pers. 17(3), 237–250 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Chamorro-Premuzic, T., Furnham, A.: Personality, intelligence and approaches to learning as predictors of academic performance. Pers. Individ. Differ. 44(7), 1596–1603 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Cooper, S., Cassel, L., Moskal, B., Cunningham, S.: Outcomes-based computer science education. In: ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, vol. 37, pp. 260–261. ACM (2005)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Corno, L., Mandinach, E.B.: The role of cognitive engagement in classroom learning and motivation. Educ. Psychol. 18(2), 88–108 (1983)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Corno, L., Rohrkemper, M.: The intrinsic motivation to learn in classrooms. Res. Motiv. Educ. 2, 53–90 (1985)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Digman, J.M.: Five robust trait dimensions: development, stability, and utility. J. Pers. 57(2), 195–214 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Diseth, Å.: Self-efficacy, goal orientations and learning strategies as mediators between preceding and subsequent academic achievement. Learn. Individ. Differ. 21(2), 191–195 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Edwards, S.H., Perez-Quinones, M.A.: Web-CAT: automatically grading programming assignments. In: ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, vol. 40, pp. 328–328. ACM (2008)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Felder, R.M., Silverman, L.K., et al.: Learning and teaching styles in engineering education. Eng. Educ. 78(7), 674–681 (1988)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Fitzgerald, S., McCauley, R., Hanks, B., Murphy, L., Simon, B., Zander, C.: Debugging from the student perspective. IEEE Trans. Educ. 53(3), 390–396 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hattie, J., Timperley, H.: The power of feedback. Rev. Educ. Res. 77(1), 81–112 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Jadud, M.C.: Methods and tools for exploring novice compilation behaviour. In: Proceedings of the Second International Workshop on Computing Education Research, pp. 73–84. ACM (2006)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kiesmüller, U.: Diagnosing learners problem-solving strategies using learning environments with algorithmic problems in secondary education. ACM Trans. Comput. Educ. 9(3), 17 (2009)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lishinski, A., Yadav, A., Enbody, R., Good, J.: The influence of problem solving abilities on students’ performance on different assessment tasks in CS1. In: Proceedings of the 47th ACM Technical Symposium on Computing Science Education, pp. 329–334. ACM (2016)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Lister, R., et al.: A multi-national study of reading and tracing skills in novice programmers. In: ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, vol. 36, pp. 119–150. ACM (2004)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Maldonado-Mahauad, J., Pérez-Sanagustín, M., Kizilcec, R.F., Morales, N., Munoz-Gama, J.: Mining theory-based patterns from big data: identifying self-regulated learning strategies in massive open online courses. Comput. Hum. Behav. 80, 179–196 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Mitchell, C.M., Boyer, K.E., Lester, J.C.: When to intervene: toward a Markov decision process dialogue policy for computer science tutoring. In: The First Workshop on AI-supported Education for Computer Science, p. 40 (2013)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Perkins, D.N., Hancock, C., Hobbs, R., Martin, F., Simmons, R.: Conditions of learning in novice programmers. J. Educ. Comput. Res. 2(1), 37–55 (1986)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Piech, C., Sahami, M., Koller, D., Cooper, S., Blikstein, P.: Modeling how students learn to program. In: Proceedings of the 43rd ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, pp. 153–160. ACM (2012)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Pintrich, P.R.: A conceptual framework for assessing motivation and self-regulated learning in college students. Educ. Psychol. Rev. 16(4), 385–407 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Poropat, A.E.: A meta-analysis of the five-factor model of personality and academic performance. Psychol. Bull. 135(2), 322 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Rivers, K., Koedinger, K.R.: Automatic generation of programming feedback: a data-driven approach. In: The First Workshop on AI-Supported Education for Computer Science, vol. 50 (2013)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Rodriguez, C.M.: The impact of academic self-concept, expectations and the choice of learning strategy on academic achievement: the case of business students. High. Educ. Res. Dev. 28(5), 523–539 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Saeli, M., Perrenet, J., Jochems, W.M., Zwaneveld, B.: Teaching programming in secondary school: a pedagogical content knowledge perspective. Inform. Educ. 10(1), 73–88 (2011)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Simon, B., Chen, T.Y., Lewandowski, G., McCartney, R., Sanders, K.: Commonsense computing: what students know before we teach (episode 1: sorting). In: Proceedings of the Second International Workshop on Computing Education Research, pp. 29–40. ACM (2006)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Soloway, E., Bonar, J., Ehrlich, K.: Cognitive strategies and looping constructs: an empirical study. Commun. ACM 26(11), 853–860 (1983)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Soloway, E., Ehrlich, K.: Empirical studies of programming knowledge. In: Readings in Artificial Intelligence and Software Engineering, pp. 507–521. Elsevier (1986)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Stajkovic, A.D., Bandura, A., Locke, E.A., Lee, D., Sergent, K.: Test of three conceptual models of influence of the big five personality traits and self-efficacy on academic performance: a meta-analytic path-analysis. Pers. Individ. Differ. 120, 238–245 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Turkle, S., Papert, S.: Epistemological pluralism and the revaluation of the concrete. J. Math. Behav. 11(1), 3–33 (1992)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    VanDeGrift, T., Bouvier, D., Chen, T.Y., Lewandowski, G., McCartney, R., Simon, B.: Commonsense computing (episode 6): logic is harder than pie. In: Proceedings of the 10th Koli Calling International Conference on Computing Education Research, pp. 76–85. ACM (2010)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Vee, M., Meyer, B., Mannock, K.L.: Understanding novice errors and error paths in object-oriented programming through log analysis. In: Proceedings of Workshop on Educational Data Mining at the 8th International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems, pp. 13–20 (2006)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Vihavainen, A., Vikberg, T., Luukkainen, M., Pärtel, M.: Scaffolding students’ learning using test my code. In: Proceedings of the 18th ACM Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education, pp. 117–122. ACM (2013)Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Zimmerman, B.J., Schunk, D.H.: Reflections on theories of self-regulated learning and academic achievement. In: Self-Regulated Learning and Academic Achievement, pp. 282–301. Routledge (2013)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kshitij Sharma
    • 1
    Email author
  • Katerina Mangaroska
    • 1
  • Halvard Trætteberg
    • 1
  • Serena Lee-Cultura
    • 1
  • Michail Giannakos
    • 1
  1. 1.Norwegian University of Science and TechnologyTrondheimNorway

Personalised recommendations