Abstract
There are known misconceptions about variables which are mostly the same since the first studies since more than 30 years ago. Consciousness about the misconceptions in programming can be crucial for teaching and learning programming for novices because, if we are aware of them, maybe we can minimise or even prevent them. Researchers mostly conducted researches on an undergraduate or graduate level. There is a lack of studies about variable misconceptions at the K-12 level. Do K-12 students have the same misconceptions as undergraduates? Does the use of different programming languages affect misconceptions? We conducted the pilot study in the school setting among 127 elementary 5th and 6th-grade students. Students were learning to programme in text-based programming languages Logo, and Python with graphical (Logo) and procedural (Python) approaches. In this paper, we present the results of the research in which we aim to give answers to the questions posed above.
Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.References
Bayman, P., & Mayer, R. E. (1983). A diagnosis of beginning programmers misconceptions of BASIC programming statements. Communications of the ACM, 26(9), 677–679.
Bonar, J., & Soloway, E. (1983). Uncovering principles of novice programming, in Proceedings of the 10th ACM SIGACT-SIGPLAN symposium on Principles of programming languages – POPL, 83, 10–13.
Bruner, J. S. (1977). The process of education, 1960. Cambridge, MA: Harvard UP.
Chi, M. T. H., & Roscoe, R. D. (2002). The processes and challenges of conceptual change. In Reconsidering conceptual change: Issues in theory and practice (pp. 3–27). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2011). Research methods in education. Oxford: Routledge.
Du Boulay, B. (1986). Some difficulties of learning to program. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 2(1), 57–73.
S. Grover and S. Basu, (2017) Measuring student learning in introductory block-based programming, in Proceedings 2017 ACM SIGCSE Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education - SIGCSE 17, 267–272.
Hyslop-Margison, E. J., & Strobel, J. (2007). Constructivism and education: Misunderstandings and pedagogical implications. Teaching Education, 43(1), 72–86.
T. Kohn, (2017) Variable Evaluation, in Proceedings 2017 ACM SIGCSE Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education - SIGCSE 17, 345–350.
Kuechler, W. L., & Simkin, M. G. (2003). How well do multiple choice tests evaluate student understanding in computer programming classes? Journal of Information Systems Education, 14(4), 389.
Kwon, K. (2017). Student’s misconception of programming reflected on problem-solving plans. International Journal of Computer Science Education in Schools, 1, 14.
R. Lister, (2016) Toward a Developmental Epistemology of Computer Programming, in Proceedings of the 11th Workshop in Primary and Secondary Computing Education on ZZZ - WiPSCE 16, 5–16.
Ma, L., Ferguson, J., Roper, M., & Wood, M. (2011). Investigating and improving the models of programming concepts held by novice programmers. Computer Science Education, 21(1), 57–80.
Ministry of science education and Sports of the Republic of Croatia. (2005). The curriculum for primary school, Zagreb.
M. Mladenović, D. Krpan, and S. Mladenović, (2016a) Introducing programming to elementary students novices by using game development in Python and Scratch, in EDULEARN16 Proceedings 1622–1629.
Mladenović, M., Rosić, M., & Mladenović, S. (2016b). Comparing elementary students ’ programming success based on programming environment. International Journal of Modern Education and Computer Science, 8, 1–10.
Mladenović, M., Boljat, I., & Žanko, Ž. (2017). Comparing loops misconceptions in block-based and text-based programming languages at the K-12 level. Education and Information Technologies, 1–18.
Piaget J. (1952). The origins of intelligence in children. American Psychological Association ({APA}).
Plass, D. (2015). Identifying and addressing common programming misconceptions with variables ( part 1 ).
Putnam, R. T., Sleeman, D., Baxter, J. A., & Kuspa, L. K. (1986). A summary of misconceptions of high school basic programmers. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 2(4), 459–472.
Resnick, M., Silverman, B., Kafai, Y., Maloney, J., Monroy-Hernández, A., Rusk, N., Eastmond, E., Brennan, K., Millner, A., Rosenbaum, E., & Silver, J. (2009). Scratch: Programming for all. Communications of the ACM, 52(11), 60–67.
Shi, N., Cui, W., Zhang, P., & Sun, X. (2018). Evaluating the effectiveness roles of variables in the novice programmers learning. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 56(2), 181–201.
Simon. (2011). Assignment and sequence, in Proceedings of the 11th Koli Calling International Conference on Computing Education Research - Koli Calling, 11, 10.
Sirkiä, T. (2012). Recognizing programming misconceptions.
Sirkiä, T., & Sorva, J. (2012). Exploring programming misconceptions. Proceedings of the 12th Koli Calling International Conference on Computing Education Research - Koli Calling, 12, 19–28.
Sorva J. (2013). Visual program simulation in introductory program education, vol. 53, no. 9. Aalto Univ. School of Science.
Sorva, J. (2018).Misconceptions and the beginner programmer.
Swidan, A., Hermans, F., & Smit, M. (2018). Programming misconceptions for school students. Proceedings 2018 ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research - ICER, 18, 151–159.
White, G. (2001). Misconceptions in CIS education. Journal of Computing Sciences in Colleges, 16(3), 149–152.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Žanko, Ž., Mladenović, M. & Boljat, I. Misconceptions about variables at the K-12 level. Educ Inf Technol 24, 1251–1268 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-018-9824-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-018-9824-1