David Weintrop
Uri Wilensky
ABSTRACT
Blocks-based programming tools are becoming increasingly common in high-school introductory computer science classes. Such contexts are quite different than the younger audience and informal settings where these tools are more often used. This paper reports findings from a study looking at how high school students view blocks-based programming tools, what they identify as contributing to the perceived ease-of-use of such tools, and what they see as the most salient differences between blocks-based and text-based programming. Students report that numerous factors contribute to making blocks-based programming easy, including the natural language description of blocks, the drag-and-drop composition interaction, and the ease of browsing the language. Students also identify drawbacks to blocks-based programming compared to the conventional text-based approach, including a perceived lack of authenticity and being less powerful. These findings, along with the identified differences between blocks-based and text-based programming, contribute to our understanding of the suitability of using such tools in formal high school settings and can be used to inform the design of new, and revision of existing, introductory programming tools.
- Astrachan, O. and Briggs, A. 2012. The CS principles project. ACM Inroads. 3, 2 (2012), 38--42. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Begel, A. and Klopfer, E. 2007. Starlogo TNG: An introduction to game development. Journal of E-Learning.Google Scholar
- Bontá, P. et al. 2010. Turtle, Art, TurtleArt. Proc. of Constructionism 2010 Conference (Paris, Fr., 2010).Google Scholar
- Bruckman, A. and Edwards, E. 1999. Should we leverage natural-language knowledge? Proc. of the SIGCHI conference 1999, 207--214. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Cooper, S. et al. 2000. Alice: a 3-D tool for introductory programming concepts. Journal of Computing Sciences in Colleges. 15, 5, 107--116. Google ScholarDigital Library
- DiSalvo, B. 2014. Graphical Qualities of Educational Technology: Using Drag-and-Drop and Text-Based Programs for Introductory Computer Science. IEEE computer graphics and applications. 6, 12--15.Google Scholar
- Donzeau-Gouge, V. et al. 1984. Programming environments based on structured editors: The MENTOR experience. Interactive Programming Environments. McGraw Hill.Google Scholar
- Duncan, C. et al. 2014. Should Your 8-year-old Learn Coding? Proc. of WiPSCE 2014 (New York, USA), 60--69. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Esper, S. et al. 2013. CodeSpells: embodying the metaphor of wizardry for programming. Proc. of ITiCSE, 249--254. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Feurzeig, W. et al. 1970. Programming-languages as a conceptual framework for teaching mathematics. SIGCUE Outlook. 4, 2, 13--17. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Fields, D. A. et al. 2014. Programming in the wild: trends in youth computational participation in the online scratch community. Proc. of WiPSCE 2014, (New York, USA) 2--11. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Fraser, N. 2013. Blockly. Google.Google Scholar
- Goode, J. et al. 2012. Beyond curriculum: the exploring computer science program. ACM Inroads. 3, 2, 47--53. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Guzdial, M. 2004. Programming environments for novices. Computer Science Education Research. 2004, 127--154.Google Scholar
- Harel and Papert. 1991. Constructionism. Ablex Publishing.Google Scholar
- Harvey, B. and Mönig, J. 2010. Bringing "no ceiling" to Scratch: Can one language serve kids and computer scientists? Proc. of Constructionism 2010 (Paris, Fr.), 1--10.Google Scholar
- Hollan, J. et al. 2000. Distributed cognition: toward a new foundation for human-computer interaction research. ACM Trans. on Computer-Human Interaction. 7, 2, 174--196. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Horn, M. S. et al. 2014. Frog pond: a codefirst learning environment on evolution and natural selection. Proc. of the 2014 IDC conference, 357--360. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Horn, M. S. and Wilensky, U. 2012. NetTango: A mash-up of NetLogo and Tern. Paper presented at AERA 2012.Google Scholar
- Horstmann, C. S. 2012. Java Concepts: Early Objects. WileyGoogle Scholar
- Hutchins, E. 1995. How a cockpit remembers its speeds. Cognitive science. 19, 3, 265--288.Google Scholar
- Kelleher, C. and Pausch, R. 2005. Lowering the barriers to programming: A taxonomy of programming environments for novice programmers. ACM Computing Surveys. 37, 2. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Lego Systems Inc 2008. Lego Mindstorms NXT-G System.Google Scholar
- Lewis, C. M. 2010. How programming environment shapes perception, learning and goals: Logo vs. Scratch. Proc. of the 41st ACM Technical Symposium on CSE, 346--350. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Maloney, J. H. et al. 2008. Programming by choice: Urban youth learning programming with Scratch. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin. 40, 1, 367--371. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Maloney, J. H. et al. 2010. The scratch programming language and environment. ACM Transactions on Computing Education. 10, 4, 16. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Miller, P. et al. 1994. Evolution of novice programming environments: the structure editors of Carnegie Mellon University. Interactive Learning Envs. 4, 2, 140--158.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Papert, S. 1980. Mindstorms: Children, computers, and powerful ideas. Basic books. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Resnick, M. et al. 2009. Scratch: Programming for all. Comm. of the ACM. 52, 11, 60. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Roque, R. V. 2007. OpenBlocks: An extendable framework for graphical block programming systems. MIT.Google Scholar
- Da Silva Gillig, J. 2014. miniBloq.Google Scholar
- Slany, W. 2014. Tinkering with Pocket Code. Proc. of Constructionism 2014 (Vienna, Au.).Google Scholar
- Turkle, S. and Papert, S. 1990. Epistemological pluralism: Styles and voices within the computer culture. SIGNS: Journal of Women in Culture and Society. 16, 1, 128--157.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Weintrop, D. and Wilensky, U. 2012. RoboBuilder: A program-to-play constructionist video game. Proc. of Constructionism 2012 (Athens, Gr.).Google Scholar
- Weintrop, D. and Wilensky, U. 2013. Supporting computational expression: How novices use programming primitives in achieving a computational goal. Paper presented at AERA 2013.Google Scholar
- Wilkerson-Jerde, M. H. and Wilensky, U. 2010. Restructuring Change, Interpreting Changes: The DeltaTick Modeling and Analysis Toolkit. Proc. of Constructionism 2010 (Paris, Fr.).Google Scholar
Index Terms
- To block or not to block, that is the question: students' perceptions of blocks-based programming
Recommendations
Comparing Text-based, Blocks-based, and Hybrid Blocks/Text Programming Tools
ICER '15: Proceedings of the eleventh annual International Conference on International Computing Education ResearchThis dissertation investigates the comparative affordances and drawbacks of blocks-based, text-based, and hybrid blocks/text introductory programming tools. Blocks-based programming environments are growing in popularity and are increasingly being used ...
Block-based Comprehension: Exploring and Explaining Student Outcomes from a Read-only Block-based Exam
SIGCSE '19: Proceedings of the 50th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science EducationThe success of block-based programming environments like Scratch and Alice has resulted in a growing presence of the block-based modality in classrooms. For example, in the United States, a new, nationally-administered computer science exam is ...
Using Commutative Assessments to Compare Conceptual Understanding in Blocks-based and Text-based Programs
ICER '15: Proceedings of the eleventh annual International Conference on International Computing Education ResearchBlocks-based programming environments are becoming increasingly common in introductory programming courses, but to date, little comparative work has been done to understand if and how this approach affects students' emerging understanding of fundamental ...
Comments