ACM Home Page
Please provide us with feedback. Feedback
Pre-programming analysis tutors help students learn basic programming concepts
Full text PdfPdf (468 KB)
Source
Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education archive
Proceedings of the 39th SIGCSE technical symposium on Computer science education table of contents
Portland, OR, USA
SESSION: New perspectives on introductory computer science table of contents
Pages 276-280  
Year of Publication: 2008
ISBN:978-1-59593-799-5
Also published in ...
Author
Wei Jin  Shaw University, Raleigh, NC, USA
Sponsors
ACM: Association for Computing Machinery
SIGACCESS: ACM Special Interest Group on Accessible Computing
SIGCSE: ACM Special Interest Group on Computer Science Education
Publisher
ACM  New York, NY, USA
Bibliometrics
Downloads (6 Weeks): 13,   Downloads (12 Months): 88,   Citation Count: 1
Additional Information:

abstract   references   cited by   index terms   collaborative colleagues  

Tools and Actions: Request Permissions Request Permissions    Review this Article  
DOI Bookmark: Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1352135.1352231
What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

In this paper, we describe a scaffolding technique - pre-programming-analysis guided programming (PAGP) - developed to help students grasp basic programming concepts. Two different ways to implement the PAGP process in a classroom were developed and then compared: one for students to fill out an analysis form, and the other for students to interact with online cognitive tutors. Our results show that the PAGP process helps students learn better and faster, especially with the assistance of the online tutors.


REFERENCES

Note: OCR errors may be found in this Reference List extracted from the full text article. ACM has opted to expose the complete List rather than only correct and linked references.

 
1
Aleven V., McLaren B. M., Sewall J., and Koedinger, K. R.: The Cognitive Tutor Authoring Tools (CTAT): Preliminary Evaluation of Efficiency Gains. Intelligent Tutoring Systems 2006: 61--70
 
2
Anderson, J. R. 1993. Rules of the mind. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
 
3
Anderson, J. R., Conrad F. G., Corbett, A. T. Skill Acquisition and the LISP Tutor. Cognitive Science 13(4): pp. 467--505 (1989).
 
4
Anderson, J. R., Corbett, A. T., Koedinger, K. R., and Pelletier, R.: Cognitive Tutors: Lessons Learned. J. of the Learning Sciences, 4(2), pp. 167--207 (1995).
 
5
Astrachan, O. L., Duvall, R. C., Forbes, J., and Rodger, S. H. Active Learning in Small to Large Courses, Frontiers in Education 2002, Volume 1, pp. T2A-16--T2A-20.
6
7
 
8
Bloom, B. S. and Krathwohl, D. R. 1956. Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: The Classification of Educational Goals, by a committee of college and university examiners. Handbook I: Cognitive Domain. New York, Longmans, Green.
 
9
Bonwell, C., and Eison, J. 1991. Active learning: creating excitement in the classroom, ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report 1.
 
10
11
 
12
 
13
Fleury, A. Acting out algorithms: how and why it works. J. Comput. Small Coll. 13, 2 (Nov. 1997), pp. 83--90.
14
 
15
Koedinger K. R., Anderson, J. R.: Abstract Planning and Perceptual Chunks: Elements of Expertise in Geometry. Cognitive Science 14 (4): pp. 511--550 (1990)
16
17
18
19
20
21
22