Commonsense computing: using student sorting abilities to improve instruction

ABSTRACT

We examine students' commonsense understanding of computer science concepts before they receive any formal instruction in the field. For this study, we asked students on the first day of a CS1 class to describe in English how they would arrange a set of numbers in ascending, sorted order; we then repeated the experiment asking students to sort a list of dates (in mm/dd/yyyy format).We found that a majority of students described a coherent algorithm; some described versions of insertion or selection sort, but many gave unexpected algorithms. We also found significant differences between responses given for sorting numbers versus dates. Based on our analysis of the data we suggest that beginning-programming instructors more explicitly discuss data types, begin loop instruction with post-test loops, assist students in recognizing implicit conditional and iteration use in natural language solutions to probls, and recognize that novices and experts focus on different aspects of the probl in even basic probl solving tasks.

REFERENCES

• 1: Constructivism in computer science education, Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, v.20 n.1, p.45-73, January 2001
• 2: Y. Ben-David Kolikant. Gardeners and cina tickets: High schools' preconceptions of concurrency. Computer Science Education, 11(3):221--245, 2001.
• 3: Yifat Ben-David Kolikant, Students' alternative standards for correctness, Proceedings of the 2005 international workshop on Computing education research, p.37-43, October 01-02, 2005, Seattle, WA, USA [doi>10.1145/1089786.1089790]
• 4: J. Bonar and E. Soloway. Preprogramming knowledge: A major source of misconceptions in novice programmers. In E. Soloway and J. Spohrer, editors, Studying the Novice Programmer. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ, 1989.
• 5: J. D. Bransford, A. L. Brown, and R. R. Cocking, editors. How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School. National Acady Press, Washington, DC, expanded edition, 2000.
• 6: J. Bruner. The process of education. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, 1960.
• 7: M. Clancy. Misconceptions and attitudes that interfere with learning to program. In S. Fincher and M. Petre, editors, Computer Science Education Research. Taylor and Francis Group, London, 2004.
• 8: Committee on Undergraduate Science Education. Science Teaching Reconsidered: A Handbook. National Acady Press, Washington, DC, 1997.
• 9: J. Paul Gibson , Jackie O'Kelly, Software engineering as a model of understanding for learning and problem solving, Proceedings of the 2005 international workshop on Computing education research, p.87-97, October 01-02, 2005, Seattle, WA, USA [doi>10.1145/1089786.1089795]
• 10: B. Glaser and A. Strauss. The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Aldine, Chicago, 1967.
• 11: G. Lakoff. Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL 60637, 1987.
• 12: Raymond Lister , Elizabeth S. Adams , Sue Fitzgerald , William Fone , John Hamer , Morten Lindholm , Robert McCartney , Jan Erik Moström , Kate Sanders , Otto Seppälä , Beth Simon , Lynda Thomas, A multi-national study of reading and tracing skills in novice programmers, ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, v.36 n.4, December 2004
• 13: Michael McCracken , Vicki Almstrum , Danny Diaz , Mark Guzdial , Dianne Hagan , Yifat Ben-David Kolikant , Cary Laxer , Lynda Thomas , Ian Utting , Tadeusz Wilusz, A multi-national, multi-institutional study of assessment of programming skills of first-year CS students, ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, v.33 n.4, December 2001 [doi>10.1145/572139.572181]
• 14: L. Miller. Natural language programming: Styles, strategies, and contrasts. IBM Systs J., 20(2):184--215, 1981.
• 15: Lisa A. Onorato , Roger W. Schvaneveldt, Programmer/nonprogrammer differences in specifying procedures to people and computers, Papers presented at the first workshop on empirical studies of programmers on Empirical studies of programmers, p.128-137, June 1986, Washington, D.C., United States
• 16: John F. Pane , Brad A. Myers , Chotirat Ann Ratanamahatana, Studying the language and structure in non-programmers' solutions to programming problems, International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, v.54 n.2, p.237-264, Feb. 2001 [doi>10.1006/ijhc.2000.0410 ]
• 17: A. Schwill. Fundamental ideas of computer science. Bull. European Association for Theoretical Computer Science, 53:274--295, 1994.
• 18: Beth Simon , Tzu-Yi Chen , Gary Lewandowski , Robert McCartney , Kate Sanders, Commonsense computing: what students know before we teach (episode 1: sorting), Proceedings of the 2006 international workshop on Computing education research, September 09-10, 2006, Canterbury, United Kingdom [doi>10.1145/1151588.1151594]
• 19: J. Smith, A. diSessa, and J. Roschelle. Misconceptions reconceived: A constructivist analysis of knowledge in transition. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 3(2):115--163, 1993.
• 20: Denise Tolhurst , Bob Baker , John Hamer , Ilona Box , Raymond Lister , Quintin Cutts , Marian Petre , Michael de Raadt , Anthony Robins , Sally Fincher , Simon Simon , Patricia Haden , Ken Sutton , Margaret Hamilton , Jodi Tutty, Do map drawing styles of novice programmers predict success in programming?: a multi-national, multi-institutional study, Proceedings of the 8th Austalian conference on Computing education, p.213-222, January 16-19, 2006, Hobart, Australia

INDEX TERMS

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

General Terms:
Algorithms, Human Factors

Keywords:
CS1, beginner, constructivism, naïve, preconceptions, resources, sorting