Proceedings of the 40th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education 2009
DOI: 10.1145/1508865.1508973
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Another look at the behaviors of novice programmers

Abstract: This paper reports on the progress of an NSF funded research project investigating the development practices of students in introductory programming courses. In previous work, we describe our extension of the BlueJ IDE to capture events associated with program development [5]. Here we report on data collected during the Fall 2007 and Spring 2008 semesters on CS 1 students. In particular, we show that our data analysis independently confirms the results obtained in separate studies by Jadud [3,2]. In addition w… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
12
1

Year Published

2010
2010
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
5
3

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 28 publications
(15 citation statements)
references
References 8 publications
2
12
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Jadud's results indicate that syntactical errors, such as missing semicolons or misspellings of variable names, are the most common type of beginners' Java errors. This study was repeated by Fenwick et al (2009), who obtained similar results. Fenwick et al also presented higher-level patterns of student behavior, confirming, for example, the benefits of starting projects early and working incrementally.…”
Section: Related Worksupporting
confidence: 66%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Jadud's results indicate that syntactical errors, such as missing semicolons or misspellings of variable names, are the most common type of beginners' Java errors. This study was repeated by Fenwick et al (2009), who obtained similar results. Fenwick et al also presented higher-level patterns of student behavior, confirming, for example, the benefits of starting projects early and working incrementally.…”
Section: Related Worksupporting
confidence: 66%
“…The closest reference to the present study is the one by Chambers et al (2012), where student errors were collected using an observational method. Our study complements Chambers' study as we apply a computer-based analysis as the first step, similar to the studies by Jadud (2005), Fenwick et al (2009), and Denny et al (2012). Moreover, our method complements the work of Jadud, Fenwick, and Denny by incorporating a manual analysis step.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 85%
“…Examples of these patterns that can be extracted are programming behavioral patterns such as debugging (Ahmadzadeh et al 2005), compilation, and coding (Vee et al 2006a;Spacco et al 2006); patterns depicting practices common to successful students but not to struggling students (Norris et al 2008); problem-solving strategies (Kiesmueller et al 2010;Hosseini et al 2014) and anomalies (Helminen et al 2012); submission patterns (Falkner and Falkner 2012;Allevato et al 2008); and code evolutions (Piech et al 2012;Blikstein 2011). The possibility of cheating and the effect of starting late on projects can also be traced from these patterns (Fenwick et al 2009) as well as distinguishing experienced students from poorly performing students (Annamaa et al 2015;Leinonen et al 2016). The data collected can also be explored to predict student performance identifying at-risk students in programming (Tabanao et al 2008;Falkner and Falkner 2012;Watson et al 2013;Koprinska et al 2015) with the aim of providing them tailored remedial instructions.…”
Section: A Process-oriented Approach In Programmingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…While these type of systems offer the flexibility to submit assignments at any time or location, there are downsides for using such systems. The lack of human guidance may lead to undesired study practices such as trial and error problem solving [46,90] or returning assignments at the last minute [48,52,55,117].…”
Section: Detailed Research Questionsmentioning
confidence: 99%