Effective features of algorithm visualizations

ABSTRACT

Many algorithm visualizations have been created, but little is known about which features are most important to their success. We believe that pedagogically useful visualizations exhibit certain features that hold across a wide range of visualization styles and content. We began our efforts to identify these features with a review that attempted to identify an initial set of candidates. We then ran two experiments that attempted to identify the effectiveness for a subset of features from the list. We identified a small number of features for algorithm visualizations that seem to have a significant impact on their pedagogical effectiveness, and found that several others appear to have little impact. The single most important feature studied is the ability to directly control the pace of the visualization. An algorithm visualization having a minimum of distracting features, and which focuses on the logical steps of an algorithm, appears to be best for procedural understanding of the algorithm. Providing a good example for the visualization to operate on proved significantly more effective than letting students construct their own data sets. Finally, a pseudocode display, a series of questions to guide exploration of the algorithm, or the ability to back up within the visualization did not show a significant effect on learning.

REFERENCES

• 1: V. Colaso, A. Kamal, P. Saraiya, C. North, S. McCrickard, and C. Shaffer. Learning and retention in data structures: A comparison of visualization, text, and combined methods. In Proceedings of the World Conference on Educational Multimedia/Hypermedia and Educational Telecommunications (ED-MEDIA 2002) June 2002.
• 2: Martha E. Crosby , Jan Stelovsky, From multimedia instruction to multimedia evaluation, Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, v.4 n.2-3, p.147-162, 1995
• 3: S. Hansen, N. Narayanan, and Schrimpsher. Helping learners visualize and comprehend algorithms. Interactive Multimedia Electronic Journal of Computer-Enhanced Learning 1, 2000.
• 4: C. Hundhausen, S. Douglas, and J. Stasko. A meta-study of algorithm isualization effectiveness. Journal of Visual Languages and Computing 2002.
• 5: Charles Kann , Robert W. Lindeman , Rachelle Heller, Integrating algorithm animation into a learning environment, Computers & Education, v.28 n.4, p.223-228, May 1997 [doi>10.1016/S0360-1315(97)00015-8 ]
• 6: Andrea Williams Lawrence, Empirical studies of the value of algorithm animation in algorithm understanding, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, 1993
• 7: B. Price, R. Baecker, and I. Small. A principled taxonomy of software visualization. Journal of Visual Languages and Computing 4:211--266, 1993.
• 8: P. Saraiya. Effective features of algorithm visualizations. Master's thesis, Department of Computer Science,Virginia Tech, July 2002.
• 9: Clifford A. Shaffer, A practical introduction to data structures and algorithm analysis, Prentice-Hall, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ, 1997
• 10: J. Stasko and D. McCrickard. Real clock time animation support for developing software visualizations. Australian Computer Journal 27(3):118--128, No. 1995.
• 11: P. Wright, A. Lickorish, A. Hull, and N. Umellen. Graphics in written directions: Appreciated by readers not by writers. Applied Cognitive Psychology 9:41--59, 1995.

INDEX TERMS

Primary Classification:
  F. Theory of Computation
  F.2 ANALYSIS OF ALGORITHMS AND PROBLEM COMPLEXITY
      F.2.2 Nonnumerical Algorithms and Problems
          Subjects: Sorting and searching

Additional Classification:
  H. Information Systems
  H.5 INFORMATION INTERFACES AND PRESENTATION (I.7)
      H.5.1 Multimedia Information Systems
          Subjects: Evaluation/methodology; Animations

General Terms:
Algorithms, Experimentation

Keywords:
algorithm visualization, courseware, heapsort