research-article

Public Access

Mind the Gap: The Illusion of Skill Acquisition in Computational Thinking

Authors:

Hadi HosseiniAuthors Info & Claims

SIGCSE 2023: Proceedings of the 54th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education V. 1

Pages 778 - 784

https://doi.org/10.1145/3545945.3569749

Published: 03 March 2023 Publication History

Abstract

With the advent of online educational platforms and the advances in pedagogical technologies, self-directed learning has emerged as one of the most popular modes of learning. Distance education---elevated by the COVID-19 pandemic---involves methods of instruction through a variety of remote activities which often rely on educational videos for mastery. In the absence of direct student engagement, the asynchronous nature of remote activities may deteriorate the quality of education for learners. Students often have an illusion of skill acquisition after watching videos, which results in overestimation of abilities and skills. We focus on the efficacy of skill acquisition through interactive technologies and assess their impact on computational thinking in comparison with delivery through other traditional media (e.g. videos and texts). In particular, we investigate the relationship between actual learning, perception of learning, and learners' confidence in adult learners. Our results reveal intriguing observations about the role of interactivity and visualization and their implications on the pedagogical design for self-directed learning modules.

References

[1]

Anders Berglund, Anna Eckerdal, Arnold Pears, Philip East, Päivi Kinnunen, Lauri Malmi, Robert McCartney, Jan-Erik Moström, Laurie Murphy, Mark Ratcliffe, et al. 2009. Learning computer science: Perceptions, actions and roles. European Journal of Engineering Education 34, 4 (2009), 327--338.

[2]

Benjamin Samuel Bloom, Committee of College, and University Examiners. 1964. Taxonomy of educational objectives. Vol. 2. Longmans, Green New York.

[3]

John Brooke. 2013. SUS: A Retrospective. Journal of Usability Studies 8, 2 (2013), 29--40.

Digital Library

[4]

Shana K. Carpenter, Miko M. Wilford, Nate Kornell, and Kellie M. Mullaney. 2013. Appearances can be deceiving: instructor fluency increases perceptions of learning without increasing actual learning. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 20, 6 (2013), 1350--1356. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-013-0442-z

[5]

Edward Deci and Richard M Ryan. 1985. Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. Springer Science & Business Media.

[6]

Louis Deslauriers, Logan S McCarty, Kelly Miller, Kristina Callaghan, and Greg Kestin. 2019. Measuring actual learning versus feeling of learning in response to being actively engaged in the classroom. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 116, 39 (2019), 19251--19257.

[7]

Mohammed F. Farghally, Kyu Han Koh, Hossameldin Shahin, and Clifford A. Shaffer. 2017. Evaluating the Effectiveness of Algorithm Analysis Visualizations. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM SIGCSE Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (Seattle, Washington, USA) (SIGCSE '17). Association for Computing Ma- chinery, New York, NY, USA, 201--206. https://doi.org/10.1145/3017680.3017698

Digital Library

[8]

James Ferris and Hadi Hosseini. 2020. MatchU: An Interactive Matching Platform. In Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 34. 13606--13607.

[9]

D. Gale and L. S. Shapley. 1962. College Admissions and the Stability of Marriage. The American Mathematical Monthly 69, 1 (1962), 9--15. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 00029890.1962.11989827 arXiv:https://doi.org/10.1080/00029890.1962.11989827

[10]

Maxwell Hartt, Hadi Hosseini, and Mehrnaz Mostafapour. 2020. Game On: Exploring the Effectiveness of Game-based Learning. Planning Practice & Research 35, 5 (2020), 589--604.

[11]

Hadi Hosseini, Maxwell Hartt, and Mehrnaz Mostafapour. 2019. Learning IS Child's Play: Game-Based Learning in Computer Science Education. Journal of Planning Education and Research, ACM Transactions on Computing Education (TOCE) forthcoming (2019).

[12]

Hadi Hosseini and Laurel Perweiler. 2019. Are You Game?. In Proceedings of the 50th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (Minneapolis, MN, USA) (SIGCSE '19). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 866--872. https://doi.org/10.1145/3287324.3287411

Digital Library

[13]

Essi Isohanni and Hannu-Matti Järvinen. 2014. Are Visualization Tools Used in Programming Education? By Whom, How, Why, and Why Not?. In Proceedings of the 14th Koli Calling International Conference on Computing Education Research. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 35--40.

[14]

Michael Kardas and Ed O'Brien. 2018. Easier seen than done: Merely watching others perform can foster an illusion of skill acquisition. Psychological science (2018).

[15]

Michael Kardas and Ed O'Brien. 2018. Easier Seen Than Done: Merely Watching Others Perform Can Foster an Illusion of Skill Acquisition. Psychol Sci 29, 4 (Apr 2018), 521--536. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797617740646

[16]

Zoltan Katai. 2014. Selective Hiding for Improved Algorithmic Visualization. In Proceedings of the 2014 Conference on Innovation & Technology in Computer Science Education (Uppsala, Sweden) (ITiCSE '14). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 33--38. https://doi.org/10.1145/2591708.2591734

Digital Library

[17]

Kerri-Ann Kuhn and Sharyn Rundle-Thiele. 2009. Curriculum alignment: Student perception of learning achievement measures. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education 21, 3 (2009), 351--361.

[18]

Anders Larrabee Sønderlund, Emily Hughes, and Joanne Smith. 2019. The efficacy of learning analytics interventions in higher education: A systematic review. British Journal of Educational Technology 50, 5 (2019), 2594--2618.

[19]

Meng-Yun Liao, Ching-Ying Sung, Hao-Chuan Wang, Wen-Chieh Lin, and Fu-Yin Cherng. 2019. Embodying Historical Learners' Messages as Learning Companions in a VR Classroom. In Extended Abstracts of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Glasgow, Scotland Uk) (CHI EA '19). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1--6. https://doi.org/10.1145/ 3290607.3312861

Digital Library

[20]

Junhua Liu, Lionell Loh, Ernest Ng, Yijia Chen, Kristin L. Wood, and Kwan Hui Lim. 2020. Self-Evolving Adaptive Learning for Personalized Education. In Conference Companion Publication of the 2020 on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing (Virtual Event, USA) (CSCW '20 Compan- ion). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 317--321. https://doi.org/10.1145/3406865.3418326

Digital Library

[21]

Marc Najork. 2001. Web-Based Algorithm Animation. In Proceedings of the 38th Annual Design Automation Conference (Las Vegas, Nevada, USA) (DAC '01). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 506--511.

Digital Library

[22]

Thomas L. Naps, James R. Eagan, and Laura L. Norton. 2000. JHAVÉ-an Environment to Actively Engage Students in Web-Based Algorithm Visualizations. In Proceedings of the Thirty-First SIGCSE Technical Symposium on Computer Sci- ence Education (Austin, Texas, USA) (SIGCSE '00). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 109--113. https://doi.org/10.1145/330908.331829

Digital Library

[23]

Thomas L. Naps, Guido Rößling, Vicki Almstrum, Wanda Dann, Rudolf Fleischer, Chris Hundhausen, Ari Korhonen, Lauri Malmi, Myles McNally, Susan Rodger, and J. Ángel Velázquez-Iturbide. 2002. Exploring the Role of Visualization and Engagement in Computer Science Education. In Working Group Reports from ITiCSE on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education (Aarhus, Denmark) (ITiCSE-WGR '02). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 131--152. https://doi.org/10.1145/960568.782998

Digital Library

[24]

Jakob Nielsen. 1994. Usability inspection methods. In Conference companion on Human factors in computing systems. 413--414.

Digital Library

[25]

Jakob Nielsen and Rolf Molich. 1990. Heuristic evaluation of user interfaces. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems. 249--256.

Digital Library

[26]

Ed O'Brien. 2019. Enjoy it again: Repeat experiences are less repetitive than people think. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 116, 4 (2019), 519.

[27]

Jungkook Park, Yeong Hoon Park, Suin Kim, and Alice Oh. 2017. Eliph: Effective Visualization of Code History for Peer Assessment in Programming Education. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing (Portland, Oregon, USA) (CSCW '17). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 458--467.

Digital Library

[28]

Samir Passi and Steven Jackson. 2017. Data Vision: Learning to See Through Algorithmic Abstraction. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing (Portland, Oregon, USA) (CSCW '17). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 2436--2447. https://doi.org/10.1145/2998181.2998331

Digital Library

[29]

Paul R Pintrich, Robert W Roeser, and Elisabeth AM De Groot. 1994. Classroom and individual differences in early adolescents' motivation and self-regulated learning. The Journal of Early Adolescence 14, 2 (1994), 139--161.

[30]

Jan L Plass, Bruce D Homer, and Charles K Kinzer. 2015. Foundations of game-based learning. Educational Psychologist 50, 4 (2015), 258--283.

[31]

Phil Sands, Aman Yadav, and Jon Good. 2018. Computational thinking in K-12: In-service teacher perceptions of computational thinking. In Computational thinking in the STEM disciplines. Springer, 151--164.

[32]

Purvi Saraiya, Clifford A. Shaffer, D. Scott McCrickard, and Chris North. 2004. Effective Features of Algorithm Visualizations. SIGCSE Bull. 36, 1 (March 2004), 382--386. https://doi.org/10.1145/1028174.971432

Digital Library

[33]

Clifford A. Shaffer, Matthew L. Cooper, Alexander Joel D. Alon, Monika Akbar, Michael Stewart, Sean Ponce, and Stephen H. Edwards. 2010. Algorithm Visualization: The State of the Field. ACM Trans. Comput. Educ. 10, 3, Article 9 (2010), 22 pages.

Digital Library

[34]

Lloyd Shapley and Herbert Scarf. 1974. On cores and indivisibility. Journal of Mathematical Economics 1, 1 (1974), 23--37. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-4068(74)90033-0

[35]

Elizabeth Simpson. 1971. Educational objectives in the psychomotor domain. Be- havioral Objectives in Curriculum Development: Selected Readings and Bibliography 60, 2 (1971).

[36]

David Scot Taylor, Andrei F. Lurie, Cay S. Horstmenn, Menko B. Johnson, Sean K. Sharma, and Edward C. Yin. 2009. Predictive vs. Passive Animation Learning Tools. In Proceedings of the 40th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (Chattanooga, TN, USA) (SIGCSE '09). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 494--498. https://doi.org/10.1145/1508865.1509038

Digital Library

[37]

Jaime Urquiza-Fuentes and J. Ángel Velázquez-Iturbide. 2009. A Survey of Successful Evaluations of Program Visualization and Algorithm Animation Systems. ACM Trans. Comput. Educ. 9, 2, Article 9 (June 2009), 21 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/1538234.1538236

Digital Library

[38]

Lisa Vangsness and Michael E Young. 2020. More isn't always better: when metacognitive prompts are misleading. Metacognition and Learning (2020), 1--22.

[39]

Peng Wang, Roman Bednarik, and Andrés Moreno. 2012. During Automatic Program Animation, Explanations after Animations Have Greater Impact than before Animations. In Proceedings of the 12th Koli Calling International Conference on Computing Education Research (Koli, Finland) (Koli Calling '12). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 100--109. https://doi.org/10. 1145/2401796.2401808

Digital Library

[40]

Qiaosi Wang, Shan Jing, Ida Camacho, David Joyner, and Ashok Goel. 2020. Jill Watson SA: Design and Evaluation of a Virtual Agent to Build Communities Among Online Learners. In Extended Abstracts of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA '20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1--8. https://doi.org/10.1145/3334480.3382878

Digital Library

[41]

Jeannette M Wing. 2006. Computational thinking. Commun. ACM 49, 3 (2006), 33--35.

Digital Library

[42]

Soojeong Yoo, Sunkyung Kim, and Youngho Lee. 2020. Learning by Doing: Evaluation of an Educational VR Application for the Care of Schizophrenic Patients. In Extended Abstracts of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Honolulu, HI, USA) (CHI EA '20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1--6. https://doi.org/10.1145/3334480.338285151

Digital Library

Cited By

Prather JDenny PLeinonen JBecker BAlbluwi ICraig MKeuning HKiesler NKohn TLuxton-Reilly AMacNeil SPetersen APettit RReeves BSavelka JLaakso MMonga MSimon Sheard J(2023)The Robots Are Here: Navigating the Generative AI Revolution in Computing EducationProceedings of the 2023 Working Group Reports on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education10.1145/3623762.3633499(108-159)Online publication date: 22-Dec-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3623762.3633499

Index Terms

Mind the Gap: The Illusion of Skill Acquisition in Computational Thinking
1. Applied computing
  1. Education
    1. Interactive learning environments
2. Social and professional topics
  1. Professional topics
    1. Computing education
      1. Computational thinking
      2. Computing education programs
        Computational science and engineering education

Recommendations

Mind the gap: Enabling online faculty and instructional designers in mapping new models for quality online courses

Distance education has provided the foundation for new generations of learning, including courses delivered through various web-based educational technologies, also referred to as online learning. Many post-secondary institutions face the challenge of ...
Improving Learning Outcomes for Higher Education Through Smart Technology

The ever-decreasing time between the doubling of knowledge creates a problem for education concerning how to handle information overload. To address this issue, educators must learn to make learning more effective and more efficient. Currently, there is ...
Motivational active learning for computer science education (abstract only)
SIGCSE '14: Proceedings of the 45th ACM technical symposium on Computer science education

Motivational Active Learning (MAL) is an innovative pedagogical approach based on MIT's teaching format TEAL (Technology-Enabled Active Learning) combined with advanced motivational strategies based on gamification design aspects. The main idea of MAL ...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences

SIGCSE 2023: Proceedings of the 54th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education V. 1

March 2023

1481 pages

ISBN:9781450394314

DOI:10.1145/3545945

General Chairs:
Maureen Doyle
Northern Kentucky University, USA
,
Ben Stephenson
University of Calgary, Canada
,
Program Chairs:
Brian Dorn
University of Nebraska at Omaha, USA
,
Leen-Kiat Soh
University of Nebraska-Lincoln, USA
,
Lina Battestilli
North Carolina State University, USA

Copyright © 2023 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]

Sponsors

SIGCSE: ACM Special Interest Group on Computer Science Education

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 03 March 2023

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article

Funding Sources

NSF (National Science Foundation)

Conference

SIGCSE 2023

Sponsor:

SIGCSE

SIGCSE 2023: The 54th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education

March 15 - 18, 2023

Toronto ON, Canada

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 1,787 of 5,146 submissions, 35%

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

1
Total Citations
View Citations
373
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)219
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)26

Reflects downloads up to 05 Mar 2025

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Prather JDenny PLeinonen JBecker BAlbluwi ICraig MKeuning HKiesler NKohn TLuxton-Reilly AMacNeil SPetersen APettit RReeves BSavelka JLaakso MMonga MSimon Sheard J(2023)The Robots Are Here: Navigating the Generative AI Revolution in Computing EducationProceedings of the 2023 Working Group Reports on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education10.1145/3623762.3633499(108-159)Online publication date: 22-Dec-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3623762.3633499

View Options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Login options

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

Full Access

Get this Publication

Figures

Tables

Media

View Table of Conten