Programming environments for young learners: a comparison of their characteristics and students' use

ABSTRACT

In this poster, I present findings from a descriptive case study investigating the use of two computer-based programming environments (CPEs), Microworlds™ Logo (MW) and Stagecast Creator™ (SC) as tools for collaborative fifth grade modeling in science. Findings include descriptions and comparisons of the ways that the students in this study used CPEs as scientific modeling tools and what particular characteristics of MW and SC were supportive or not for collaborative modeling.There is a longstanding interest in using models and modeling as learning tools in science (see Louca et al, 2003 for a review). The process of writing a computer program to simulate a natural system is similar to the process of developing a scientific model. This study was based on the idea that CPEs can be used by students who write programs as representations of natural phenomena.

REFERENCES

• 1: Louca, L., Druin, A., Hammer, D., & Dreher, D. (2003). Students' collaborative use of computer-based programming tools in science: A Descriptive Study. In B. Wasson, St. Ludvigsen, & Ul. Hoppe (Eds.). Designing for Change in Networked Learning Environments: Proceedings of the CSCL 2003 (pp. 109-118). The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
• 2: Kiper, S., D., Howard, E., & Ames, Ch. (1997). Criteria for evaluation of visual programming languages. Journal of Visual Languages & Computing, 8, 175-192.
• 3: David Canfield Smith , Allen Cypher, Making programming easier for children, The design of children's technology, Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc., San Francisco, CA, 1998
• 4: Allison Druin , Ben Bederson , Angela Boltman , Adrian Miura , Debby Knotts-Callahan , Mark Platt, Children as our technology design partners, The design of children's technology, Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc., San Francisco, CA, 1998
• 5: Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research. Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
• 6: Schoenfeld, A. H. (1989). Teaching mathematical thinking and problem solving. In L. B. Resnick & B. L. Klopfer (Eds.), Towards the thinking curriculum: Current cognitive research (pp. 83-103). Washington DC: ASCD.
• 7: Edwards, D. & Mercer, N. (1995). Common knowledge: The development of understanding in the classroom. NY: Routtedge