skip to main content
10.1145/3328778.3366865acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagessigcseConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Dual-Modality Instruction and Learning: A Case Study in CS1

Published: 26 February 2020 Publication History

Abstract

In college-level introductory computer science courses, students traditionally learn to program using text-based languages which are common in industry and research. This approach means that learners must concurrently master both syntax and semantics. Blocks-based programming environments have become commonplace in introductory computing courses in K-12 schools and some colleges in part to simplify syntax challenges. However, there is evidence that students may face difficulty moving to text-based programming environments when starting with blocks-based environments. Bi-directional dual-modality programming environments provide multiple representations of programming language constructs (in both blocks and text) and allow students to transition between them freely. Prior work has shown that some students who use dual-modality environments to transition from blocks to text have more positive views of text programming compared to students who move directly from blocks to text languages, but it is not yet known if there is any impact on learning. To investigate the impact on learning, we conducted a study at a large public university across two semesters in a CS1 course (N=673). We found that students performed better on typical course exams when they were taught using dual-modality representations in lecture and were provided dual-modality tools. The results of our work support the conclusion that dual-modality instruction can help students learn computational concepts in early college computer science coursework.

References

[1]
Bau, D. 2015. Droplet, a blocks-based editor for text code. Journal of Computing Sciences in Colleges. 30, 6 (2015), 138--144.
[2]
Bau, D.A. 2015. Integrating Droplet into Applab -Improving the usability of a blocks-based text editor. 2015 IEEE Blocks and Beyond Workshop (2015), 55--57.
[3]
Bau, D.A. and Bau, D.A. 2014. A Preview of Pencil Code. Proceedings of the 2nd Workshop on Programming for Mobile & Touch - PROMOTO '14 (2014), 21--24.
[4]
Bau, D.A., Bau, D.A., Pickens, C.S. and Dawson, M. 2015. Pencil Code: Block Code for a Text World. Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children (2015), 445--448.
[5]
Bau, D. and Bau, D.A. 2014. A Preview of Pencil Code. Proceedings of the 2nd Workshop on Programming for Mobile & Touch - PROMOTO '14. (2014), 21--24.
[6]
Blanchard, J., Gardner-McCune, C. and Anthony, L. 2019. Effects of Code Representation on Student Perceptions and Attitudes Toward Programming. 2019 IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages and Human-Centric Computing (2019), 127--131.
[7]
Blanchard, J., Gardner-McCune, C. and Anthony, L. 2019. Amphibian: Dual-Modality Representation in Integrated Development Environments. Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE Blocks and Beyond Workshop (Blocks and Beyond) (2019).
[8]
Brainerd, C.J. 1978. Piaget's Theory of Intelligence. Prentice Hall.
[9]
Brown, N.C.C., Mönig, J., Bau, A. and Weintrop, D. 2016. Panel: Future Directions of Block-based Programming. Proceedings of the 47th ACM Technical Symposium on Computing Science Education (2016), 315--316.
[10]
Cooper, S., Dann, W. and Pausch, R. 2000. Alice: a 3-D tool for introductory programming concepts. Journal of Computing Sciences in Colleges. 15, 5 (2000), 107--116.
[11]
Cooper, S., Dann, W. and Pausch, R. 2003. Teaching objects-first in introductory computer science. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin. 35, 1 (2003), 191--195.
[12]
Corney, M., Teague, D., Ahadi, A. and Lister, R. 2012. Some Empirical Results for Neo-Piagetian Reasoning in Novice Programmers and the Relationship to Code Explanation Questions. 14th Australasian Computing Education Conference (2012), 77--86.
[13]
Gobet, F., Lane, P.C.R., Croker, S., Cheng, P.C.-H., Jones, G., Oliver, I. and Pine, J.M. 2001. Chunking mechanisms in human learning. TRENDS in Cognitive Sciences. 5, 6 (2001), 236--243.
[14]
Goode, J. and Margolis, J. 2011. Exploring Computer Science: A Case Study of School Reform. ACM Transactions on Computing Education. 11, 2 (2011), 1--16.
[15]
Henriksen, P. and Kolling, M. 2004. Greenfoot: Combining Object Visualization with Interaction. Companion to the 19th annual ACM SIGPLAN conference on Object-oriented programming systems, languages, and applications - OOPSLA '04. (2004), 73--82.
[16]
Hsu, K.C. 1996. Developing Programming Environments for Programmable Bricks. Ph.D. Dissertation. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA.
[17]
Kaleliolu, F. 2015. A new way of teaching programming skills to K-12 students: Code.org. Computers in Human Behavior. 52, (2015), 200--210.
[18]
Kelleher, C. and Pausch, R. 2005. Lowering the Barriers to Programming?: a survey of programming environments and languages for novice programmers. ACM Computing Surveys. 37, 2 (2005), 83--137.
[19]
Kölling, M. 2008. Using BlueJ to Introduce Programming. Reflections on the Teaching of Programming. Springer-Verlag. 98--115.
[20]
Lister, R. 2011. Concrete and Other Neo-Piagetian Forms of Reasoning in the Novice Programmer. Proceedings of the Thirteenth Australasian Computing Education Conference (2011), 9--18.
[21]
Lister, R. 2011. COMPUTING EDUCATION RESEARCH: Programming, syntax and cognitive load. ACM Inroads.
[22]
Malan, D.J. and Leitner, H.H. 2007. Scratch for budding computer scientists. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin. 39, 1 (2007), 223--227.
[23]
Maloney, J., Rusk, N., Burd, L., Silverman, B., Kafai, Y., Resnick, M., Rusk, N., Silverman, B. and Resnick, M. 2004. Scratch: A sneak preview. Proceedings - Second International Conference on Creating, Connecting and Collaborating Through Computing. (2004), 104--109.
[24]
Meerbaum-Salant, O. 2010. Learning computer science concepts with scratch. ICER '10: Proceedings of the Sixth international workshop on Computing education research. (2010), 69--76.
[25]
Miller, G.A. 1956. The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. The Psychological Review. 63, 2 (1956), 81--97.
[26]
Nachar, N. 2008. The Mann-Whitney U: A Test for Assessing Whether Two Independent Samples Come from the Same Distribution. Tutorials in Quantitative Methods for Psychology. 4, 1 (2008), 13--20.
[27]
Parker, M.C. and Guzdial, M. 2016. Replication, Validation, and Use of a Language Independent CS1 Knowledge Assessment. Proceedings of the 2016 ACM Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education (2016), 93--101.
[28]
Teague, D. 2015. Neo-Piagetian Theory and the Novice Programmer. Ph.D. Dissertation. Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia.
[29]
Teague, D., Comey, M., Ahadi, A., Lister, R., Corney, M., Ahadi, A. and Lister, R. 2013. A Qualitative Think Aloud Study of the Early Neo-Piagetian Stages of Reasoning in Novice Programmers. Proceedings of the Fifteenth Australasian Computing Education Conference (2013), 87--95.
[30]
Teague, D. and Lister, R. 2014. Programming: reading, writing and reversing. Proceedings of the 2014 conference on Innovation & technology in computer science education - ITiCSE '14. (2014), 285--290.
[31]
Tharp, A.L. 1982. Selecting the "right" programming language. Proceedings of the thirteenth SIGCSE technical symposium on Computer science education (1982), 151--155.
[32]
The Joint Task Force on Computing Curricula - ACM/IEEE-Computer Society 2013. Computer Science Curricula 2013: Curriculum Guidelines for Undergraduate Degree Programs in Computer Science.
[33]
Weintrop, D. 2016. Modality Matters: Understanding the Effects of Programming Language Representation in High School Computer Science Classrooms. Ph.D. Dissertation. Northwestern University, Evanston, IL.
[34]
Weintrop, D. and Holbert, N. 2017. From Blocks to Text and Back: Programming Patterns in a Dual-modality Environment. Proceedings of the 48th ACM SIGCSE Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (SIGCSE '17). (2017).
[35]
Weintrop, D. and Wilensky, U. 2015. To block or not to block" That is the question. Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children. (2015), 199--208.
[36]
Weintrop, D. and Wilensky, U. 2016. Bringing blocks-based programming into high school computer science classrooms. Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association (2016).
[37]
Wing, J.M., Jeannette, V. and Wing, J.M. 2006. Computational thinking. Communications of the ACM. 49, 3 (2006), 33--35.
[38]
IntelliJ IDEA: https://www.jetbrains.com/idea/.

Cited By

View all
  • (2023)Psychometric Evaluation of the Cybersecurity Curriculum AssessmentProceedings of the 54th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education V. 110.1145/3545945.3569762(228-234)Online publication date: 2-Mar-2023
  • (2023)Beyond Blocks: Lilypad, a Text-Based Visual Code Editor2023 IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages and Human-Centric Computing (VL/HCC)10.1109/VL-HCC57772.2023.00037(226-228)Online publication date: 3-Oct-2023
  • (2023)Computing Education Research in SchoolsPast, Present and Future of Computing Education Research10.1007/978-3-031-25336-2_20(481-520)Online publication date: 18-Apr-2023
  • Show More Cited By

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences
SIGCSE '20: Proceedings of the 51st ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education
February 2020
1502 pages
ISBN:9781450367936
DOI:10.1145/3328778
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 the author(s) 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].

Sponsors

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 26 February 2020

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Badges

  • Best Paper

Author Tags

  1. computer science education
  2. cs1, blocks-based programming environments
  3. dual-modality programming environments
  4. novice programmers
  5. programming languages

Qualifiers

  • Research-article

Conference

SIGCSE '20
Sponsor:

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 1,595 of 4,542 submissions, 35%

Upcoming Conference

SIGCSE TS 2025
The 56th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education
February 26 - March 1, 2025
Pittsburgh , PA , USA

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)57
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)12
Reflects downloads up to 15 Feb 2025

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2023)Psychometric Evaluation of the Cybersecurity Curriculum AssessmentProceedings of the 54th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education V. 110.1145/3545945.3569762(228-234)Online publication date: 2-Mar-2023
  • (2023)Beyond Blocks: Lilypad, a Text-Based Visual Code Editor2023 IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages and Human-Centric Computing (VL/HCC)10.1109/VL-HCC57772.2023.00037(226-228)Online publication date: 3-Oct-2023
  • (2023)Computing Education Research in SchoolsPast, Present and Future of Computing Education Research10.1007/978-3-031-25336-2_20(481-520)Online publication date: 18-Apr-2023
  • (2022)Transitioning from Blocks to TextProceedings of the 53rd ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education V. 210.1145/3478432.3499033(1045-1046)Online publication date: 3-Mar-2022
  • (2022)Effects of a Block-Based Scaffolded Tool on Students’ Introduction to Hierarchical Data StructuresIEEE Transactions on Education10.1109/TE.2021.310960465:2(191-199)Online publication date: May-2022
  • (2021)Hybrid and Non-Hybrid Block-Based Programming Languages in an Introductory College Computer-Science CourseJournal of Educational Computing Research10.1177/073563312098510859:5(817-843)Online publication date: 11-Jan-2021
  • (2021)Psychometric Evaluation of the Cybersecurity Concept InventoryACM Transactions on Computing Education10.1145/345134622:1(1-18)Online publication date: 18-Oct-2021
  • (2021)Uses, Revisions, and the Future of Validated Assessments in Computing Education: A Case Study of the FCS1 and SCS1Proceedings of the 17th ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research10.1145/3446871.3469744(60-68)Online publication date: 16-Aug-2021
  • (2021)Dual Modality Instruction & Programming EnvironmentsProceedings of the 52nd ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education10.1145/3408877.3432434(481-487)Online publication date: 3-Mar-2021
  • (2021)From Droplet to Lilypad: Present and Future of Dual-Modality Environments2021 IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages and Human-Centric Computing (VL/HCC)10.1109/VL/HCC51201.2021.9576355(1-2)Online publication date: 10-Oct-2021

View Options

Login options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Figures

Tables

Media

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media