Improving Content Learning and Student Perceptions in CS1 with Scrumage

Duvall, Shannon; Spurlock, Scott; Hutchings, Dugald Ralph; Duvall, Robert C.

doi:10.1145/3408877.3432415

Cited by 5 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In a study of 79 novice programmers (defined as having had at most non-Python programming course and never learned or used Python), findings supported the claim that more agency and information can lead to higher student motivation, but not necessarily improved student learning [75]. Java: [17] Python: [37] (mSCS1), [58] MATLAB: [2, 3] (MCS1) German: [66,67] Finnish: [15] With the rise of block-based programming environments, questions have been raised about how block-based programming and block-based programming with text-based programming (dualmodality programming) compare to text-based programming. For a study comparing dual-modality programming environments and instruction with text-based approaches to instruction, participant learning was measured via the SCS1 assessment and course exams for 673 undergraduates in a semester-long CS1 course [5].…”

Section: To Learn Aboutmentioning

confidence: 87%

“…This, combined with the acknowledgment that it is a difficult assessment, can reduce the viability of the SCS1 assessment as a research tool. As such, there have been various efforts to shorten the SCS1 assessment [6,17,45]. Parker and Guzdial, the original creators of the SCS1 assessment, modified the SCS1 themselves, parsing it down to a 12 question test from the original 27 questions [45].…”

Section: Shortening the Scs1mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Despite the goal of creating an assessment that could be used by a multitude of students learning different languages, many research teams have chosen to replicate the SCS1 assessment into specific programming languages [2,3,17,37,58]. In one instance, the motivation for moving away from the pseudocode-based assessment was that the pseudocode was non-intuitive and concerns were raised about burdening students with interpreting a pseudolanguage, which was discussed as a concern with the results of the FCS1 validation studies [37].…”

Section: Translating the Scs1mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Other research teams have taken a similar approach of translating a subset of the SCS1 assessment into Python, though also adding 127 short, deliberate practice questions, for use in a pre-CS2 assessment [58]. Another case chose to translate some questions of the SCS1 questions into Java for use with 42 students in a CS1 course taught in Java [17]. Duvall et al cited that the pseudocode language was too similar to Python and their students had difficulty understanding the questions.…”

Section: Translating the Scs1mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Uses, Revisions, and the Future of Validated Assessments in Computing Education: A Case Study of the FCS1 and SCS1

Parker

Guzdial

Tew³

2021

Proceedings of the 17th ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Validated instruments of knowledge are important for creating an accepted and shared measurement for the most important part of education -student learning. The Force Concept of Inventory from Physics Education Research has had a significant impact across STEM education. The Foundational CS1 (FCS1) and Second CS1 (SCS1) assessments were created and validated to further computing education research. Now, ten years after the publication of the FCS1 assessment and five years after the release of the SCS1 assessment, we can trace the use and the impact that these validated instruments have had on the needs and knowledge of the computing education community. In this paper, we examine how the FCS1 and SCS1 assessments have been used and adapted. We use this discussion to guide a comparison between our field and physics education to give a sense of direction to future research. In looking back on the use of these validated instruments, we can better understand our needs in computing education research and about our future needs in assessment. CCS CONCEPTS• Social and professional topics → Student assessment.

show abstract

Section: To Learn Aboutmentioning

confidence: 87%

Section: Shortening the Scs1mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Translating the Scs1mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Translating the Scs1mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Uses, Revisions, and the Future of Validated Assessments in Computing Education: A Case Study of the FCS1 and SCS1

Parker

Guzdial

Tew³

2021

Proceedings of the 17th ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Scrum in the Classroom: An Implementation Guide

Reynolds,

Caldwell,

Procko

et al. 2023

2023 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Metacognition and Self-Regulation in Programming Education: Theories and Exemplars of Use

Loksa

Margulieux

Becker

et al. 2022

ACM Trans. Comput. Educ.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Metacognition and self-regulation are important skills for successful learning and have been discussed and researched extensively in the general education literature for several decades. More recently, there has been growing interest in understanding how metacognitive and self-regulatory skills contribute to student success in the context of computing education. This paper presents a thorough systematic review of metacognition and self-regulation work in the context of computer programming and an in-depth discussion of the theories that have been leveraged in some way. We also discuss several prominent metacognitive and self-regulation theories from the literature outside of computing education – for example, from psychology and education – that have yet to be applied in the context of programming education. In our investigation, we built a comprehensive corpus of papers on metacognition and self-regulation in programming education, and then employed backward snowballing to provide a deeper examination of foundational theories from outside computing education, some of which have been explored in programming education, and others that have yet to be but hold much promise. In addition, we make new observations about the way these theories are used by the computing education community, and present recommendations on how metacognition and self-regulation can help inform programming education in the future. In particular, we discuss exemplars of studies that have used existing theories to support their design and discussion of results as well as studies that have proposed their own metacognitive theories in the context of programming education. Readers will also find the article a useful resource for helping students in programming courses develop effective strategies for metacognition and self-regulation.

show abstract

Improving Content Learning and Student Perceptions in CS1 with Scrumage

Cited by 5 publications

References 8 publications

Uses, Revisions, and the Future of Validated Assessments in Computing Education: A Case Study of the FCS1 and SCS1

Uses, Revisions, and the Future of Validated Assessments in Computing Education: A Case Study of the FCS1 and SCS1

Scrum in the Classroom: An Implementation Guide

Metacognition and Self-Regulation in Programming Education: Theories and Exemplars of Use

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About