Abstract
Parsons puzzles are popular for programming education. Identifying the strategies used by students solving Parsons puzzles is of interest because they can be used to determine to what extent students use the strategies typically associated with programming expertise, and to provide feedback and monitor the progress of students in a tutor. We propose solution sequence as an approximation of the student’s strategy for solving Parsons puzzles. It is scalable in terms of both the size of the puzzle and the number of students solving the puzzle. We propose BNF grammar to represent desirable puzzle-solving strategies associated with expert programmers. This representation is extensible and agnostic to the puzzle-solving strategies themselves. Finally, we propose a best match parser that matches a student’s solution sequence against the BNF grammar of a desirable strategy and quantifies the degree to which the student’s solution conforms to the desirable strategy. As a proof of concept, we used the parser to analyze the data collected by a Parsons puzzle tutor on if-else statements over five semesters and found a significant difference between C++ and Java puzzle-solvers in terms of their conformance to one desirable puzzle-solving strategy. Being able to tease out the effects of individual components of a strategy is one benefit of our approach: we found that relaxing shell-first constraint in the strategy resulted in significant improvement in the conformance of both C++ and Java students.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Cañas, J.J., Bajo, M.T., Gonzalvo, P.: Mental models and computer programming. Int. J. Hum Comput Stud. 40(5), 795–811 (1994)
Denny, P., Luxton-Reilly, A., Simon, B.: Evaluating a new exam question: Parsons problems. In: Proceedings of the Fourth International Workshop on Computing Education Research (ICER 2008), New York, NY, USA, pp. 113–124. ACM (2008)
Ericson, B.J., Margulieux, L.E., Rick, J.: Solving Parsons problems versus fixing and writing code. In: Proceedings of the 17th Koli Calling International Conference on Computing Education Research (Koli Calling 2017), New York, NY, USA, pp. 20–29. ACM (2017)
Ericson, B.J., Guzdial, M.J., Morrison, B.B.: Analysis of interactive features designed to enhance learning in an Ebook. In: Proceedings of the 11th annual International Conference on International Computing Education Research (ICER 2015), New York, NY, USA, pp. 169–178. ACM (2015)
Fabic, G., Mitrovic, A., Neshatian, K.: Towards a mobile Python tutor: understanding differences in strategies used by novices and experts. In: Micarelli, A. (ed.) ITS 2016. LNCS, vol. 9684, pp. 447–448. Springer, Heidelberg (2016)
Fix, V., Wiedenbeck, S., Scholtz, J.: Mental representations of programs by novices and experts. In: Proceedings of the INTERACT 1993 and CHI 1993 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI 1993), New York, NY, USA, pp. 74–79. ACM (1993)
Helminen, J., Ihantola, P., Karavirta, V., Malmi, L.: How do students solve parsons programming problems? An analysis of interaction traces. In: Proceedings of the Ninth Annual International Conference on International Computing Education Research (ICER 2012), New York, NY, USA, pp. 119–126. ACM (2012)
Ihantola, P., Karavirta, V.: Two-dimensional Parson’s puzzles: the concept, tools, and first observations. J. Inf. Technol. Educ.: Innov. Pract. 10, 1–14 (2011)
Kumar, A.N.: Epplets: a tool for solving parsons puzzles. In: Proceedings of the 49th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (SIGCSE 2018), New York, NY, USA, pp. 527–532. ACM (2018)
Letovsky, S.: Cognitive processes in program comprehension. In: Soloway, E., Iyengar, S. (eds.) Empirical Studies of Programmers, pp. 58–79. Ablex, Norwood (1986)
Lopez, N., Whalley, J., Robbins, P., Lister, R.: Relationships between reading, tracing and writing skills in introductory programming. In: Proceedings of the 4th International Workshop on Computing Education Research (ICER 2008), New York, NY, USA, pp. 101–112. ACM (2008)
Nanja, M., Cook, C.R.: An analysis of the online debugging process. In: Olson, G.M., Sheppard, S., Soloway, E. (eds.) Empirical Studies of Programmers: Second Workshop, pp. 172–184. Ablex, Norwood (1987)
Parsons, D., Haden, P.: Parson’s programming puzzles: a fun and effective learning tool for first programming courses. In: Proceedings of the 8th Australasian Conference on Computing Education (ACE 2006), vol. 52, pp 157–163. Australian Computer Society, Inc. (2006)
Soloway, E., Ehrlich, K.: Empirical studies of programmer knowledge. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. SE-10(5), 595–609 (1984)
Winslow, L.E.: Programming pedagogy—a psychological overview. ACM SIGCSE Bull. 28(3), 17–22 (1996)
Acknowledgments
Partial support for this work was provided by the National Science Foundation under grants DUE-1432190 and DUE-1502564. The author thanks Anthony Bucci for suggesting the use of BNF grammars and Alessio Gaspar, Paul Wiegand and Jennifer Albert for associated discussions.
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
Kumar, A.N. (2019). Representing and Evaluating Strategies for Solving Parsons Puzzles. In: Coy, A., Hayashi, Y., Chang, M. (eds) Intelligent Tutoring Systems. ITS 2019. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 11528. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-22244-4_24
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-22244-4_24
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-22243-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-22244-4
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)