Abstract
Computer science courses, like many others, encompass subjects that are difficult to understand for students. Reflection on these subjects seems to be important for gaining a better understanding of complex and fundamental concepts in informatics. This paper presents a didactical setting that aims at fostering understanding of such hard subjects. In particular, the evolution of this didactical setting started out from combining ten-minute papers, peer review, and bonus scores. The combination of these didactical elements has been employed in an introductory computer science course that covers, among other things, several topics from theoretical computer science. The paper presents the detailed setup of the learning setting and its underlying goals as well as how it evolved over several years. Furthermore, the paper presents a qualitative and quantitative evaluation of the approach, both from the perspective of students and the perspective of instructors. Evaluation also yields data that expose differences between different versions of the approach. Furthermore, evaluation data also support a critical analysis of potential success and risk factors with respect to the efficacy of the approach, in particular the type of problem statement, the motivation for providing proper feedback, and the role of bonus scores. Overall, the learning setting yields encouraging results, yet offers various options for refinements in future work.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Mager, R.F.: Preparing Instructional Objectives, 2nd edn. Kogan Page, London (1992)
Sedelmaier, Y., Landes, D.: A competence-oriented approach to subject-matter didactics for software engineering. Int. J. Eng. Pedagogy (iJEP) 5(3), 34–44 (2015)
Klafki, W.: Didactic analysis as the core of preparation of instruction (Didaktische Analyse als Kern der Unterrichtsvorbereitung). J. Curric. Stud. 27(1), 13–30 (1995)
Siebert, H.: Pädagogischer Konstruktivismus: Lernzentrierte Pädagogik in Schule und Erwachsenenbildung, 3rd edn. Beltz, Weinheim (2005)
Terhart, E.: Constructivism and teaching: a new paradigm in general didactics? J. Curric. Stud. 35(1), 25–44 (2003)
Siebert, H.: Didaktisches Handeln in der Erwachsenenbildung: Didaktik aus konstruktivistischer Sicht, 2nd edn. Luchterhand, Neuwied (1997)
Sondergaard, H.: Learning from and with peers. In: Proceedings of the 14th Annual ACM SIGCSE Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education, pp. 31–35. ACM, New York (2009)
Cho, K., MacArthur, C.: Learning by reviewing. J. Educ. Psychol. 103(1), 73–84 (2011)
Cho, Y.H., Cho, K.: Peer reviewers learn from giving comments. Instr. Sci. 39(5), 629–643 (2011)
Turner, S., Pérez-Quiñones, M. A., Edwards, S., Chase, J.: Student attitudes and motivation for peer review in CS2. In: Proceedings of the 42nd ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, pp. 347–352 (2011)
Acknowledgements
This work is part of the EVELIN project and funded by the German Ministry of Education and Research (Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung) under grants 01PL12022A and 01PL17022A.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Sedelmaier, Y., Landes, D., Kuhn, M. (2019). Better Understanding Fundamental Computer Science Concepts Through Peer Review. In: Auer, M., Tsiatsos, T. (eds) The Challenges of the Digital Transformation in Education. ICL 2018. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, vol 917. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-11935-5_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-11935-5_7
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-11934-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-11935-5
eBook Packages: Intelligent Technologies and RoboticsIntelligent Technologies and Robotics (R0)