skip to main content
10.1145/2538862.2538888acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagessigcseConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Defining and evaluating conflictive animations for programming education: the case of jeliot ConAn

Published: 05 March 2014 Publication History

Abstract

A review of the practical uses of errors in education reveals three contexts where errors have been shown to help: teaching conceptual knowledge, changing students' attitudes and promoting learning skills. Conflictive animations form a novel approach to teaching programming that follows a long tradition on research and development on program animation tools. Conflictive animations link the benefits of errors with program animation tools and programming education. This approach involves presenting to the students conflictive animations that do not animate faithfully the programs or concepts taught. Conflictive animations are versatile enough to cover the fundamental building blocks of programs such as operators, expressions and statements. With conflictive animations a novel set of learning activities can be introduced to computer science classes. This conflictive dimension of activities augments an engagement taxonomy for animation tools at all levels. They are an example of activities that promote critical thinking. A particular implementation of conflictive animations has been empirically evaluated aiming for ecological validity rather than statistical significance. Results indicate that students using conflictive animations improve their metacognitive skills, and, when compared to a control group, their conceptual knowledge improves at a better rate.

References

[1]
M. Ben-Ari. Constructivism in computer science education. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 20(1):45{73, 2001.
[2]
M. Ben-Ari, R. Bednarik, R. Ben-Bassat Levy, G. Ebel, A. Moreno, N. Myller, and E. Sutinen. A decade of research and development on program animation: The jeliot experience. Journal of Visual Languages & Computing, 22(5):375--384, 2011.
[3]
R. Ben-Bassat Levy, M. Ben-Ari, and P. A. Uronen. The Jeliot 2000 program animation system. Computers & Education, 40(1):1--15, 2003.
[4]
J. Bennedsen and M. E. Caspersen. Exposing the programming process. In J. Bennedsen, M. E. Caspersen, and M. Kölling, editors, Reection on the Teaching of Programming. Springer, 2008.
[5]
R. Borasi. Capitalizing on errors as "springboards for inquiry": A teaching experiment. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 25(2):166--208, 1994.
[6]
C. S. Große and A. Renkl. Finding and fixing errors in worked examples: Can this foster learning outcomes? Learning and Instruction, 17(6):612--634, 2007.
[7]
C. D. Hundhausen, S. A. Douglas, and J. T. Stasko. A meta-study of algorithm visualization effectiveness. Journal of Visual Languages and Computing, 13(3):259--290, 2002.
[8]
J. Jackson, M. Cobb, and C. Carver. Identifying top java errors for novice programmers. In Proceedings of the 35th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, 2005.
[9]
V. Karavirta, A. Korhonen, L. Malmi, and K. Stalnacke. Matrixpro - a tool for demonstrating data structures and algorithms ex tempore. In Proceedings of ICALT 2004, pages 892--893, 2004.
[10]
M. Limón. On the cognitive conict as an instructional strategy for conceptual change: a critical appraisal. Learning and Instruction, 11(4{5):357--380, 2001.
[11]
L. Ma, J. D. Ferguson, M. Roper, I. Ross, and M. Wood. Using cognitive conict and visualisation to improve mental models held by novice programmers. In SIGCSE '08: Proceedings of the 39th SIGCSE technical symposium on Computer science education, pages 342--346, New York, NY, USA, 2008. ACM.
[12]
R. E. Mayer. Multimedia Learning. Cambridge University Press, 2001.
[13]
A. Moreno, M. Joy, N. Myller, and E. Sutinen. Layered architecture for automatic generation of conictive animations in programming education. Learning Technologies, IEEE Transactions on, 3(2):139--151, 2010.
[14]
A. Moreno, E. Sutinen, R. Bednarik, and N. Myller. Conictive animations as engaging learning tools. In R. Lister and Simon, editors, Seventh Baltic Sea Conference on Computing Education Research (Koli Calling 2007), volume 88 of CRPIT, pages 203--206, Koli National Park, Finland, 2007. ACS.
[15]
T. L. Naps, G. Rößling, V. Almstrum, W. Dann, R. Fleischer, C. Hundhausen, A. Korhonen, L. Malmi, M. McNally, S. Rodger, and J. Á. Velázquez-Iturbide. Exploring the role of visualization and engagement in computer science education. In ITiCSE-WGR '02: Working group reports from ITiCSE on Innovation and technology in computer science education, pages 131--152, New York, NY, USA, 2002. ACM Press.
[16]
D. N. Perkins, C. Hancock, R. Hobbs, F. Martin, and R. Simmons. Conditions of learning in novice programmers. In J. C. Spohrer and E. I. Soloway, editors, Studying the Novice Programmer, pages 261--279. Ablex Publishing Company, 1989.
[17]
M. Petre. Why looking isn't always seeing: readership skills and graphical programming. Communications of the ACM, 38(6):33--44, 1995.
[18]
N. Postman. The End of Education, chapter The Fallen Angel. Vintage, 1996.
[19]
J. P. Smith, III, A. A. diSessa, and J. Roschelle. Misconceptions reconceived: A constructivist analysis of knowledge in transition. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 3(2):115--163, 1993-1994.
[20]
J. Urquiza-Fuentes and J. Velázquez-Iturbide. Toward the effective use of educational program animations: The roles of student's engagement and topic complexity. Computers & Education, 67(0):178--192, 2013.
[21]
V. Vainio and J. Sajaniemi. Factors in novice programmers' poor tracing skills. SIGCSE Bulletin (Association for Computing Machinery, Special Interest Group on Computer Science Education), 39(3):236--240, 2007.

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Computer-Animated Videos in Education: A Comprehensive Review and Teacher Experiences from Animation CreationDigital10.3390/digital40300314:3(613-647)Online publication date: 12-Jul-2024
  • (2024)Algorithmization and Programming in the Light of Students' Perspectives2024 International Conference on Emerging eLearning Technologies and Applications (ICETA)10.1109/ICETA63795.2024.10850734(243-248)Online publication date: 24-Oct-2024
  • (2022)A Review of Worked Examples in Programming ActivitiesACM Transactions on Computing Education10.1145/356026623:1(1-35)Online publication date: 29-Dec-2022
  • Show More Cited By

Index Terms

  1. Defining and evaluating conflictive animations for programming education: the case of jeliot ConAn

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Information & Contributors

    Information

    Published In

    cover image ACM Conferences
    SIGCSE '14: Proceedings of the 45th ACM technical symposium on Computer science education
    March 2014
    800 pages
    ISBN:9781450326056
    DOI:10.1145/2538862
    Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

    Sponsors

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    Published: 05 March 2014

    Permissions

    Request permissions for this article.

    Check for updates

    Author Tags

    1. animation
    2. conflictive animation
    3. constructivism
    4. cs1
    5. programming

    Qualifiers

    • Research-article

    Conference

    SIGCSE '14
    Sponsor:

    Acceptance Rates

    SIGCSE '14 Paper Acceptance Rate 108 of 274 submissions, 39%;
    Overall Acceptance Rate 1,787 of 5,146 submissions, 35%

    Upcoming Conference

    SIGCSE TS 2025
    The 56th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education
    February 26 - March 1, 2025
    Pittsburgh , PA , USA

    Contributors

    Other Metrics

    Bibliometrics & Citations

    Bibliometrics

    Article Metrics

    • Downloads (Last 12 months)11
    • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)3
    Reflects downloads up to 18 Feb 2025

    Other Metrics

    Citations

    Cited By

    View all
    • (2024)Computer-Animated Videos in Education: A Comprehensive Review and Teacher Experiences from Animation CreationDigital10.3390/digital40300314:3(613-647)Online publication date: 12-Jul-2024
    • (2024)Algorithmization and Programming in the Light of Students' Perspectives2024 International Conference on Emerging eLearning Technologies and Applications (ICETA)10.1109/ICETA63795.2024.10850734(243-248)Online publication date: 24-Oct-2024
    • (2022)A Review of Worked Examples in Programming ActivitiesACM Transactions on Computing Education10.1145/356026623:1(1-35)Online publication date: 29-Dec-2022
    • (2022)Nested-Decider: An Animation Program for Aiding Teaching and Learning of Decisions/Nested DecisionsICT Education10.1007/978-3-031-21076-1_8(129-148)Online publication date: 8-Dec-2022
    • (2019)An AR/TUI-supported Debugging Teaching EnvironmentProceedings of the 31st Australian Conference on Human-Computer-Interaction10.1145/3369457.3369538(590-594)Online publication date: 2-Dec-2019
    • (2019)Designing Intentional Bugs for LearningProceedings of the 2019 Conference on United Kingdom & Ireland Computing Education Research10.1145/3351287.3351289(1-7)Online publication date: 5-Sep-2019
    • (2019)Students' Misconceptions of Optimization AlgorithmsProceedings of the 2019 ACM Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education10.1145/3304221.3319749(464-470)Online publication date: 2-Jul-2019
    • (2019)Perfect MatchProceedings of the 50th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education10.1145/3287324.3287344(1102-1108)Online publication date: 22-Feb-2019
    • (2019)A systematic literature review of student engagement in software visualization: a theoretical perspectiveComputer Science Education10.1080/08993408.2018.156461129:2-3(283-309)Online publication date: 11-Jan-2019
    • (2018)Understanding International Benchmarks on Student EngagementProceedings of the 2017 ITiCSE Conference on Working Group Reports10.1145/3174781.3174782(1-24)Online publication date: 30-Jan-2018
    • Show More Cited By

    View Options

    Login options

    View options

    PDF

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    Figures

    Tables

    Media

    Share

    Share

    Share this Publication link

    Share on social media