skip to main content
research-article

The introductory computer programming course is first and foremost a language course

Published:27 April 2018Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

An fMRI (functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging) study published in 2014 established that comprehension of computer programs occurs in the same regions of the brain that process natural languages---not logic, not math. The unexpectedness of this result was primed in part by the widespread belief that the language aspects of learning how to program are trivial when compared to learning to use programming languages for engineering tasks. In fact, though, the fMRI data is compelling cognitive evidence for the argument that the reason students have been failing introductory programming courses in large numbers---for decades---is because CS educators have underestimated the importance of teaching programming languages as languages per se. Despite the availability of this non-invasive technology for well over two decades, educators have neither researched the cognitive complexities of how programming languages might be acquired, nor tried to seriously understand this process in any degree of depth. Consequently, they have failed to consider what this evidence now implies: (a) that programming languages, despite being artificial languages, are alive in the brains of programmers in much the same way as any natural language that those programmers speak; and (b) that this new information about the cognitive aspects of programming languages has profound pedagogic implications.

References

  1. Amirtha, T. This Is Your Brain On Code, According To Functional MRI Imaging. Fast Company, April 21, 2014; http://www.fastcompany.com/3029364/this-is-your-brain-on-code-according-to-functional-mri-imaging. Accessed 2017 November 22.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Bailey, N., Madden, C. & Krashen, S.D. Is there a `natural `sequence' in adult second language learning? Language Learning, 24, 2 (1974), 235--243.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. Bennedsen, J. & Caspersen, M. E. Failure Rates in Introductory Programming. Inroads - The SIGCSE Bulletin, 39, 2 (June 2007), 32--36. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Bransford, J., Sherwood, R., Vye, N. & Rieser, J. Teaching Thinking and Problem Solving: Research Foundations. American Psychologist, 41, 10 (1986), 1078--1089.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. California CTC (Commission on Teacher Credentialing). Supplementary Authorization Guideline Book (CTC, July 2016); https://www.ctc.ca.gov/docs/default-source/credentials/manuals-handbooks/supplement-auth.pdf. Accessed 2018 March 8.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Chomsky, C. The Acquisition of Syntax in Children from 5 to 10. (Cambridge, MA MIT Press, 1969).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. College Board. AP Data: Program Summary Report 2017. (College Board, 2017). https://secure-media.collegeboard.org/digitalServices/pdf/research/2017/Program-Summary-Report-2017.pdf. Accessed 2017 November 22.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Corina, D. P., Lawyer, L. A., Hauser, P. & Hirshorn, E.. Lexical Processing in Deaf Readers: An fMRI Investigation of Reading Proficiency. PLOS ONE, 8, 1 (2013), 1--10.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Corder, S. P. The Significance of Learner's Errors. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 5, 4 (1967), 161--170.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. CSTA Standards Task Force. CSTA, K-12 Computer Science Standards. (New York: CSTA/ACM, 2011); http://c.ymcdn.com/sites/www.csteachers.org/resource/resmgr/Docs/Standards/CSTA_K-12_CSS.pdf. Accessed 2017 November 22.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Dulay, H. C. & Burt, M. K. Should We Teach Children Syntax? Language Learning, 23, 2 (1973), 245--258.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Eklund, A., Nichols, T. & Knutsson, H. Cluster failure: Why fMRI inferences for spatial extent have inflated false-positive rates. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 113, 28 (2016), 7900--7905.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. Floyd, B., Santander, T. & Weimer, W. Decoding the representation of code in the brain: An fMRI study of code review and expertise. In ICSE '17 Proceedings of the 39th International Conference on Software Engineering, (2017), 175--86. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Hamrick, Phillip. Ph.D. Dissertation, Georgetown University, Washington D.C. Development of Conscious Knowledge During Early Incidental Learning Of L2 Syntax. (ProQuest, LLC, 2013), 3642262.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Hesling, I., Dilharreguy, B., Bordessoules, M. & Allard, M. The Neural Processing of Second Language Comprehension Modulated by the Degree of Proficiency: A Listening Connected Speech fMRI Study. The Open Neuroimaging Journal, 6 (2012), 44--54.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. Kidwai, A. Knowledge of Language: Noam Chomsky's Innateness Thesis. Contemporary Education Dialogue, 5,2 (2008), 245--265.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Kummerfeld, S. K. & Kay, J. The neglected battle fields of Syntax Errors. In Proceedings of the Fifth Australasian Conference on Computing Education, 20, 105--111. (Adelaide, Australia: Australian Computer Society, Inc., 2003). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Lahtinen, E., AlaMutka, K. & Järvinen, H.M. A Study of the Difficulties of Novice Programmers. In Proceedings of the 10th Annual SIGCSE Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education (June 27--29, 2005), 14--18. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Lewis-Kraus, G. The Great AI Awakening. New York Times (Magazine). December 14, 2016; http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/14/magazine/the-great-ai-awakening. html?_r=0. Accessed 2017 November 22.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Lo, Mun & Marton, Ference. Towards a science of the art of teaching: Using variation theory as a guiding principle of pedagogical design. International Journal for Lesson and Learning Studies, 1 (2011), 7--22.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. Mattern, K., Shaw, E. & Ewing, M. Advance Placement Exam Participation: Is AP Exam Participation and Performance Related to Choice of College Major? (New York, NY: College Board, 2011).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. McGettrick, A., Boyle, R., Ibbett, R., Lloyd, J., Lovegrove, G. & Mander, K. Grand Challenges in Computing: Education---A Summary. The Computer Journal, 48,1 (2005), 42--48. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Monti, M. M., Parsons, L. M. & Osherson, D. N. Thought Beyond Language: Neural Dissociation of Algebra and Natural Language. Association for Psychological Science, 23, 8 (2012), 914--922.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Morgan, R. & Klaric, J. AP Students in College: An Analysis of Five-Year Academic Careers. (New York, NY: College Board, 2007).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Moro, Andrea. The Boundaries of Babel: The Brain and the Enigma of Impossible Languages. (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2008).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. Pappano, L. Learning to Think Like a Computer. New York Times, April 4, 2017. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/04/education/edlife/teaching-students-computer-code.html?_r=0. Accessed 2017 November 22.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Parnin, C. Scientists Begin Looking at Programmers' Brains: The Neuroscience of Programming. Huffington Post, April 23, 2014; https://www.huffingtonpost.com/chris-parnin/scientists-begin-looking-_b_4829981.html. Accessed 2017 November 22.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Portnoff, S. M.S. Thesis. California State University, Los Angeles. (1) The case for using foreign language pedagogies in introductory computer programming instruction; (2) A contextualized pre-AP computer programming curriculum: Models and simulations for exploring real-world cross-curricular topics. (ProQuest, LLC, 2016), 262; 10132126. http://pqdtopen.proquest.com/pubnum/10132126.html?FMT=AI. Accessed 2017 November 22.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Reges, S. & Stepp, M. Building Java Programs. 3rd ed. (Boston: Pearson, 2014). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. Siegmund, J., Kästner, C., Apel, S., Parnin, C., Bethmann, A., Leich, T., Saake, G & Brechmann, A. Understanding Understanding Source Code with Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging. In Proceedings of the 36th International Conference on Software Engineering (2014), 378--389. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. Siegmund, J., Kästner, C., Apel, S., Parnin, C., Bethmann, A. & Brechmann, A. Understanding Programmers' Brains with fMRI. In Frontiers in Neuroinformatics Conference Abstract: Neuroinformatics (2014).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Tagarelli, K.M. Ph.D. Dissertation, Georgetown University, Washington D.C. The Neurocognition of Adult Second Language Learning: An fMRI Study. (ProQuest, LLC, 2014); 3642262.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Watson, C., & Li, F. W. Failure Rates in Introductory Programming Revisited. In Proceedings of the 2014 Conference On Innovation & Technology In Computer Science Education. (Uppsala, Sweden: Association for Computing Machinery, June 2014), 39--44. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. Woolfolk, A. Educational Psychology. 9th ed. (Boston: Pearson, Allyn and Bacon, 2004).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. Yokoyama, S., Kim, J., Uchida, S., Okamoto, H., Bai, C., Yusa, N. et al. A longitudinal fMRI study of neural plasticity in the second language lexical processing. Neuroscience Research Abstracts 58S (2007), S174.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. The introductory computer programming course is first and foremost a language course
    Index terms have been assigned to the content through auto-classification.

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in

    Full Access

    • Published in

      cover image ACM Inroads
      ACM Inroads  Volume 9, Issue 2
      June 2018
      75 pages
      ISSN:2153-2184
      EISSN:2153-2192
      DOI:10.1145/3211407
      Issue’s Table of Contents

      Copyright © 2018 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 27 April 2018

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article
      • Popular
      • Refereed

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    HTML Format

    View this article in HTML Format .

    View HTML Format