Take a look at the new version of this page: [ beta version ]. Tell us what you think.

ABSTRACT

Reduction is a problem-solving strategy, relevant to various areas of computer science, and strongly connected to abstraction: a reductive solution necessitates establishing a connection among problems that may seem totally disconnected at first sight, and abstracts the solution to the reduced-to problem by encapsulating it as a black box. The study described in this article continues a previous, qualitative study that examined the ways undergraduate computer science students perceive, experience, and use reduction as a problem-solving strategy. The current study examines the same issue, but in the context of a larger population, using also quantitative analysis, and focusing on algorithmic problems. The findings indicate difficulties students have with the abstract characteristics of reduction and with acknowledging reduction as a general problem-solving strategy.

REFERENCES

• 1: Michal Armoni , Judith Gal-Ezer, Reduction -- an abstract thinking pattern: the case of the computational models course, Proceedings of the 37th SIGCSE technical symposium on Computer science education, March 03-05, 2006, Houston, Texas, USA [doi>10.1145/1121341.1121461]
• 2: Armoni, M., Gal-Ezer, J., and Hazzan, O. 2006. Reductive thinking in computer science. Comput. Sci. Educ. 16, 4, 281--301.
• 3: Armoni, M., Gal-Ezer, J., and Tirosh, D. 2005. Solving problems reductively. J. Educ. Comput. Res. 32, 2, 113--129.
• 4: Armoni, M. and Ginat, D. 2008. Reversing: A fundamental idea in computer science education. Comput. Sci. Educ. 18, 3, 213--230.
• 5: Bruner, J. S. 1960. The Process of Education. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
• 6: Bruno Buchberger, Should Students Learn Integration Rules?, ACM SIGSAM Bulletin, v.24 n.1, p.10-17, Jan. 1990 [doi>10.1145/382276.1095228]
• 7: Thomas T. Cormen , Charles E. Leiserson , Ronald L. Rivest, Introduction to algorithms, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1990
• 8: Thomas H. Cormen , Clifford Stein , Ronald L. Rivest , Charles E. Leiserson, Introduction to Algorithms, McGraw-Hill Higher Education, 2001
• 9: Cuoco, A., Goldenberg, E. P., and Mark, J. 1996. Habits of mind: An organizing principle for mathematics curricula. J. Math. Behav. 15, 4, 375--402.
• 10: Corder, C. 1990. Teaching Hard Teaching Soft: A Structured Approach to Planning and Running Effective Training Courses. Gower, Aldershot, UK.
• 11: Glaser, B. and Strauss, A. 1975. The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Aldine, Chicago, IL.
• 12: DiCheva, D. and Close, J. 1996. Mental models of recursion. J. Educ. Comput. Res. 14, 1, 1--23.
• 13: Bruria Haberman , Yifat Ben-David Kolikant, Activating “black boxes” instead of opening “zipper” - a method of teaching novices basic CS concepts, Proceedings of the 6th annual conference on Innovation and technology in computer science education, p.41-44, June 2001, Canterbury, United Kingdom [doi>10.1145/377435.377464]
• 14: Haberman, B., Shapiro, E., and Scherz, Z. 2002. Are black boxes transparent? High school students’ strategies of using abstract data types. J. Educ. Comput. Res. 27, 4, 411--436.
• 15: Hazzan, O. 2003. How students attempt to reduce abstraction in the learning of mathematics and in the learning of computer science. Comput. Sci. Educ. 13, 2, 95--122.
• 16: Orit Hazzan , Yael Dubinsky , Larisa Eidelman , Victoria Sakhnini , Mariana Teif, Qualitative research in computer science education, Proceedings of the 37th SIGCSE technical symposium on Computer science education, March 03-05, 2006, Houston, Texas, USA [doi>10.1145/1121341.1121469]
• 17: Hershkowitz, R., Schwarz, B. B., and Dreyfus, T. 2001. Abstraction in context: Epistemic actions. J. Res. Math. Educ. 32, 195--222.
• 18: Hank Kahney, What do novice programmers know about recursion, Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, p.235-239, December 12-15, 1983, Boston, Massachusetts, United States [doi>10.1145/800045.801618]
• 19: Jon Kleinberg , Eva Tardos, Algorithm Design, Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc., Boston, MA, 2005
• 20: Levi, D. 2001. Insights and conflicts in discussing recursion: A case study. Comput. Sci. Educ. 11, 4, 305--322.
• 21: Lin, F., Lee, Y., and Wu Yu, J. 2003. Students’ understanding of proof by contradiction. In Proceedings of the 27th Annual Meeting of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (PME’03), N. A. Pateman, B. J. Dougherty, and J. Zilliox, Eds. IV, 443--450.
• 22: Peter McKenna, Gender and black boxes in the programming curriculum, Journal on Educational Resources in Computing (JERIC), v.4 n.1, p.6-es, March 2004 [doi>10.1145/1060071.1060077]
• 23: Rachel Or-Bach , Ilana Lavy, Cognitive activities of abstraction in object orientation: an empirical study, ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, v.36 n.2, June 2004 [doi>10.1145/1024338.1024378]
• 24: Jacob Perrenet , Jan Friso Groote , Eric Kaasenbrood, Exploring students' understanding of the concept of algorithm: levels of abstraction, Proceedings of the 10th annual SIGCSE conference on Innovation and technology in computer science education, June 27-29, 2005, Caparica, Portugal [doi>10.1145/1067445.1067467]
• 25: Polya G. 1957. How to Solve it 2nd Ed. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
• 26: Kate Sanders , Lynda Thomas, Checklists for grading object-oriented CS1 programs: concepts and misconceptions, Proceedings of the 12th annual SIGCSE conference on Innovation and technology in computer science education, June 25-27, 2007, Dundee, Scotland [doi>10.1145/1268784.1268834]
• 27: Schoenfeld, A. H. 1985. Mathematical Problem Solving. Academic Press, Orlando, FL.
• 28: Schwill, A. 1994. Fundamental ideas of computer science. Bull. Euro. Assoc. Theoret. Comput. Sci. 53, 274--295.
• 29: Yuila Stolin , Orit Hazzan, Students' understanding of computer science soft ideas: the case of programming paradigm, ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, v.39 n.2, June 2007 [doi>10.1145/1272848.1272887]
• 30: Thompson, D. R. 1996. Learning and teaching indirect proof. Math. Teacher 89, 6, 474--482.
• 31: Turkle, S. and Pappert, S. 1990. Epistemological pluralism: Styles and voices within the computer culture. Signs: J. Women in Culture Soc. 16, 1, 128--157.
• 32: Scott A. Turner , Ricardo Quintana-Castillo , Manuel A. Pérez-Quiñones , Stephen H. Edwards, Misunderstandings about object-oriented design: experiences using code reviews, Proceedings of the 39th SIGCSE technical symposium on Computer science education, March 12-15, 2008, Portland, OR, USA [doi>10.1145/1352135.1352169]
• 33: Jeannette M. Wing, Computational thinking, Communications of the ACM, v.49 n.3, March 2006 [doi>10.1145/1118178.1118215]

INDEX TERMS

Primary Classification:
  K. Computing Milieux
  K.3 COMPUTERS AND EDUCATION
      K.3.2 Computer and Information Science Education
          Subjects: Computer science education

Additional Classification:
  D. Software
  D.1 PROGRAMMING TECHNIQUES

  F. Theory of Computation
  F.3 LOGICS AND MEANINGS OF PROGRAMS
      F.3.3 Studies of Program Constructs

Keywords:
Reduction, black box, reductive thinking