Trial to Increase Motivation on Programming by Using Hardware Control Functions in the AT Visual Programming Environment

Kunimune, Hisayoshi; Kamijima, Shun; Yamamoto, Toshiharu; Niimura, Masaaki

doi:10.1145/3375900.3375917

Cited by 1 publication

(2 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…23.3% (7) of the tools are intended to be used in an educational setting. Some of these tools such as [38] and [39] are utilized for teaching basic programming principles such as loops and conditionals, whereas the tool in [44] aims at teaching data science concepts to non-programmers, and the tool in [45] is intended for teaching computing and engineering concepts and for programming robots.…”

Section: Rq1-d4: Domainmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is natural for tools that are aimed at computer science education such as [38], [39], [44], [45] to be evaluated with students. However, for tools aimed at other purposes such as [32], [33], [41], [43], [51], [52], [57], [61], it would have be ideal to evaluate the usability and learnability of the tools with The article that used the highest number of test participants (180) for evaluation can be found in [35].…”

Section: B Rq2-d2: Type Of Test Participantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Characterizing Visual Programming Approaches for End-User Developers: A Systematic Review

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recently many researches have explored the potential of visual programming in robotics, the Internet of Things (IoT), and education. However, there is a lack of studies that analyze the recent evidence-based visual programming approaches that are applied in several domains. This study presents a systematic review to understand, compare, and reflect on recent visual programming approaches using twelve dimensions: visual programming classification, interaction style, target users, domain, platform, empirical evaluation type, test participants' type, number of test participants, test participants' programming skills, evaluation methods, evaluation measures, and accessibility of visual programming tools. The results show that most of the selected articles discussed tools that target IoT and education, while other fields such as data science, robotics are emerging. Further, most tools use abstractions to hide implementation details and use similar interaction styles. The predominant platforms for the tools are web and mobile, while desktop-based tools are on the decline. Only a few tools were evaluated with a formal experiment, whilst the remaining ones were evaluated with evaluation studies or informal feedback. Most tools were evaluated with students with little to no programming skills. There is a lack of emphasis on usability principles in the design stage of the tools. Additionally, only one of the tools was evaluated for expressiveness. Other areas for exploration include supporting end users throughout the life cycle of applications created with the tools, studying the impact of tutorials on improving learnability, and exploring the potential of machine learning to improve debugging solutions developed with visual programming.INDEX TERMS Visual programming, end-user development, human-computer interaction, systematic literature review.

show abstract