Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]

skip to main content
10.1145/3623762.3633498acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesiticseConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Multi-Institutional Multi-National Studies of Parsons Problems

Published: 28 December 2023 Publication History

Abstract

Students are often asked to learn programming by writing code from scratch. However, many novices struggle to write code and get frustrated when their code does not work. Parsons problems can reduce the difficulty of a coding problem by providing mixed-up blocks the learner rearranges into the correct order. These mixed-up blocks can include distractor blocks that are not needed in a correct solution. Distractor blocks can include common errors, which may help students learn to recognize and fix such errors. Evidence suggests students find Parsons problems engaging, useful for learning to program, and typically easier and faster to solve than writing code from scratch, but with equivalent learning gains. Most research on Parsons problems prior to this work has been conducted at a single institution. This work addresses the need for replication across multiple contexts.
A 2022 ITiCSE Parsons Problems Working Group conducted an extensive literature review of Parsons problems, designed several experimental studies for Parsons problems in Python, and created 'study-in-a-box' materials to help instructors run the experimental studies, but the 2022 working group had only sufficient time to pilot two of these studies.
Our 2023 ITiCSE Parsons Problems Working Group reviewed these studies, revised some of the studies, expanded both the programming and natural languages used in some of the studies, created new studies, conducted think-aloud observations on some of the studies, and ran both revised as well as new experimental studies. The think-aloud observations and experimental studies provide evidence for using Parsons problems to help students learn common algorithms such as swap, and the usefulness of distractors in helping students learn to recognize, fix, and avoid common errors. In addition, our 2023 ITiCSE Parsons Problems Working Group reviewed Parsons problem papers published after the 2022 literature review and provided a literature review of multi-national (MIMN) studies conducted in computer science education to better understand the motivations and challenges in performing such MIMN studies.
In summary, this article contributes an analysis of recent Parsons problem research papers, an itemization of considerations for MIMN studies, the results from our MIMN studies of Parsons problems, and a discussion of recent and future directions for MIMN studies of Parsons problems and more generally.

References

[1]
Robert K Atkinson, Sharon J Derry, Alexander Renkl, and Donald Wortham. 2000. Learning from examples: Instructional principles from the worked examples research. Review of educational research 70, 2 (2000), 181--214.
[2]
Albert Bandura. 1997. Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. Worth Publishers, New York, NY.
[3]
Brett A. Becker, Paul Denny, Raymond Pettit, Durell Bouchard, Dennis J. Bouvier, Brian Harrington, Amir Kamil, Amey Karkare, Chris McDonald, Peter-Michael Osera, Janice L. Pearce, and James Prather. 2019. Compiler Error Messages Considered Unhelpful: The Landscape of Text-Based Programming Error Message Research. In Proceedings of the Working Group Reports on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education (Aberdeen, Scotland Uk) (ITiCSE-WGR '19). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 177--210. https://doi.org/10.1145/3344429.3372508
[4]
Sarah Beecham, John Noll, and Tony Clear. 2017. Do We Teach the Right Thing? A Comparison of GSE Education and Practice. In 2017 IEEE 12th International Conference on Global Software Engineering (ICGSE). IEEE, Buenos Aires, Argentina, 11--20. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICGSE.2017.8
[5]
Klara Benda, Amy Bruckman, and Mark Guzdial. 2012. When life and learning do not fit: Challenges of workload and communication in introductory computer science online. ACM Transactions on Computing Education (TOCE) 12, 4 (2012), 1--38.
[6]
Jeff Bender, Bingpu Zhao, Alex Dziena, and Gail Kaiser. 2022. Learning Computational Thinking Efficiently How Parsons Programming Puzzles within Scratch Might Help. In Proceedings of the Twenty-Fourth Australasian Computing Education Conference. ACM, Online, 66--75.
[7]
Sylvia Beyer, Kristina Rynes, Julie Perrault, Kelly Hay, and Susan Haller. 2003. Gender differences in computer science students. In Proceedings of the 34th SIGCSE technical symposium on Computer science education. ACM, Reno, NV, USA, 49--53.
[8]
Elizabeth Ligon Bjork, Jeri L Little, and Benjamin C Storm. 2014. Multiple-choice testing as a desirable difficulty in the classroom. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition 3, 3 (2014), 165--170.
[9]
Robert A Bjork. 2017. Creating desirable difficulties to enhance learning. In Best of the Best: Progress (Best of the Best series). Crown House Publishing, Carmarthen, UK.
[10]
A. Booth, A. Sutton, and D. Papaioannou. 2016. Systematic Approaches to a Successful Literature Review. Sage, London. https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/105755/ © 2016 Andrew Booth, Anthea Sutton and Diana Papaioannou.
[11]
Dennis Bouvier, Ellie Lovellette, John Matta, Bedour Alshaigy, Brett A. Becker, Michelle Craig, Jana Jackova, Robert McCartney, Kate Sanders, and Mark Zarb. 2016. Novice Programmers and the Problem Description Effect. In Proceedings of the 2016 ITiCSE Working Group Reports (Arequipa, Peru) (ITiCSE '16). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 103--118. https://doi.org/10.1145/3024906.3024912
[12]
John D Bransford, Ann L Brown, and Rodney R Cocking. 2000. How people learn. Vol. 11. National academy press, Washington DC, USA.
[13]
Pearl Brereton, Barbara A. Kitchenham, David Budgen, Mark Turner, and Mohamed Khalil. 2007. Lessons from applying the systematic literature review process within the software engineering domain. Journal of Systems and Software 80, 4 (2007), 571--583. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2006.07.009 Software Performance.
[14]
Stephen D Brookfield. 2017. Becoming a critically reflective teacher 2 ed.). Jossey-Bass, London, England.
[15]
Peter Brusilovsky, Barbara J Ericson, Cay S Horstmann, Christian Servin, Frank Vahid, and Craig Zilles. 2023. The Future of Computing Education Materials. Technical Report. ACM.
[16]
Aparna Chirumamilla and Guttorm Sindre. 2019. E-Assessment in Programming Courses: Towards a Digital Ecosystem Supporting Diverse Needs?. In Digital Transformation for a Sustainable Society in the 21st Century: 18th IFIP WG 6.11 Conference on e-Business, e-Services, and e-Society, I3E 2019, Trondheim, Norway, September 18--20, 2019, Proceedings 18. Springer, Trondheim, Norway, 585--596.
[17]
Holger Danielsiek, Laura Toma, and Jan Vahrenhold. 2017. An Instrument to Assess Self-Efficacy in Introductory Algorithms Courses. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research (Tacoma, Washington, USA) (ICER '17). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 217--225. https://doi.org/10.1145/3105726.3106171
[18]
Paul Denny, Andrew Luxton-Reilly, and Beth Simon. 2008. Evaluating a New Exam Question: Parsons Problems. In Proceedings of the Fourth International Workshop on Computing Education Research (Sydney, Australia) (ICER '08). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 113--124. https://doi.org/10.1145/1404520.1404532
[19]
Paul Denny, James Prather, Brett A Becker, Zachary Albrecht, Dastyni Loksa, and Raymond Pettit. 2019. A Closer Look at Metacognitive Scaffolding: Solving Test Cases Before Programming. In Proceedings of the 19th Koli Calling International Conference on Computing Education Research. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1--10.
[20]
Yuemeng Du, Andrew Luxton-Reilly, and Paul Denny. 2020. A Review of Research on Parsons Problems. In Proceedings of the Twenty-Second Australasian Computing Education Conference (Melbourne, VIC, Australia) (ACE'20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 195--202. https://doi.org/10.1145/3373165.3373187
[21]
Rodrigo Duran, Jan-Mikael Rybicki, Juha Sorva, and Arto Hellas. 2019. Exploring the Value of Student Self-Evaluation in Introductory Programming. In Proceedings of the 2019 ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research (Toronto ON, Canada) (ICER '19). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 121--130. https://doi.org/10.1145/3291279.3339407
[22]
Rodrigo Duran, Albina Zavgorodniaia, and Juha Sorva. 2022. Cognitive load theory in computing education research: A review. ACM Transactions on Computing Education (TOCE) 22, 4 (2022), 1--27.
[23]
Carol S Dweck. 1986. Motivational processes affecting learning. American psychologist 41, 10 (1986), 1040.
[24]
Jacquelynne Eccles. 2009. Who am I and what am I going to do with my life? Personal and collective identities as motivators of action. Educational psychologist 44, 2 (2009), 78--89.
[25]
Elsa Eiriksdottir and Richard Catrambone. 2011. Procedural instructions, principles, and examples: How to structure instructions for procedural tasks to enhance performance, learning, and transfer. Human factors 53, 6 (2011), 749--770.
[26]
Barbara Ericson and Carl Haynes-Magyar. 2022. Adaptive Parsons Problems as Active Learning Activities During Lecture. In Proceedings of the 27th ACM Conference on on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education Vol. 1 (Dublin, Ireland) (ITiCSE '22). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 290--296. https://doi.org/10.1145/3502718.3524808
[27]
Barbara Ericson, Austin McCall, and Kathryn Cunningham. 2019. Investigating the affect and effect of adaptive parsons problems. In Proceedings of the 19th Koli Calling International Conference on Computing Education Research. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1--10.
[28]
Barbara J. Ericson, Paul Denny, James Prather, Rodrigo Duran, Arto Hellas, Juho Leinonen, Craig S. Miller, Briana B. Morrison, Janice L. Pearce, and Susan H. Rodger. 2022. Parsons Problems and Beyond: Systematic Literature Review and Empirical Study Designs. In Proceedings of the 2022 Working Group Reports on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education (Dublin, Ireland) (ITiCSE-WGR '22). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 191--234. https://doi.org/10.1145/3571785.3574127
[29]
Barbara J Ericson, James D Foley, and Jochen Rick. 2018. Evaluating the efficiency and effectiveness of adaptive parsons problems. In Proceedings of the 2018 ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 60--68.
[30]
Barbara J. Ericson, Mark J. Guzdial, and Briana B. Morrison. 2015. Analysis of Interactive Features Designed to Enhance Learning in an Ebook. In Proceedings of the Eleventh Annual International Conference on International Computing Education Research (Omaha, Nebraska, USA) (ICER '15). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 169--178. https://doi.org/10.1145/2787622.2787731
[31]
Barbara J Ericson, Lauren E Margulieux, and Jochen Rick. 2017. Solving parsons problems versus fixing and writing code. In Koli Calling '17: Proceedings of the 17th Koli Calling International Conference on Computing Education Research. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1--10.
[32]
Barbara J Ericson and Bradley N Miller. 2020. Runestone: A Platform for Free, On-line, and Interactive Ebooks. In Proceedings of the 51st ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1012--1018.
[33]
K Anders Ericsson, Ralf T Krampe, and Clemens Tesch-Römer. 1993. The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance. Psychological review 100, 3 (1993), 363.
[34]
José Figueiredo and Francisco José García-Peñalvo. 2022. Strategies to increase success in learning programming. In 2022 International Symposium on Computers in Education (SIIE). IEEE, New York, NY, 1--6.
[35]
Sally Fincher, Raymond Lister, Tony Clear, Anthony Robins, Josh Tenenberg, and Marian Petre. 2005. Multi-Institutional, Multi-National Studies in CSEd Research: Some Design Considerations and Trade-Offs. In Proceedings of the First International Workshop on Computing Education Research (Seattle, WA, USA) (ICER '05). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 111--121. https://doi.org/10.1145/1089786.1089797
[36]
Flynn Fromont, Hiruna Jayamanne, and Paul Denny. 2023. Exploring the Difficulty of Faded Parsons Problems for Programming Education. In Proceedings of the 25th Australasian Computing Education Conference. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 113--122.
[37]
Rita Garcia. 2021. Evaluating Parsons Problems as a Design-Based Intervention. In 2021 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE). IEEE, IEEE, New York, NY, 1--9.
[38]
Rita Garcia, Katrina Falkner, and Rebecca Vivian. 2018. Scaffolding the Design Process Using Parsons Problems. In Proceedings of the 18th Koli Calling International Conference on Computing Education Research (Koli, Finland) (Koli Calling '18). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 26, 2 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3279720.3279746
[39]
Fernand Gobet and Herbert A Simon. 1996. Recall of random and distorted chess positions: Implications for the theory of expertise. Memory & cognition 24, 4 (1996), 493--503.
[40]
Scott Grissom, Renée Mccauley, and Laurie Murphy. 2017. How Student Centered is the Computer Science Classroom? A Survey of College Faculty. ACM Trans. Comput. Educ. 18, 1, Article 5 (nov 2017), 27 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3143200
[41]
Shuchi Grover, Brian Broll, and Derek Babb. 2023. Cybersecurity Education in the Age of AI: Integrating AI Learning into Cybersecurity High School Curricula. In Proceedings of the fifty-fourth ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education V. 1 (SIGCSE 2023), ACM, New York, NY, 980--986.
[42]
Kyle James Harms, Jason Chen, and Caitlin L. Kelleher. 2016. Distractors in Parsons Problems Decrease Learning Efficiency for Young Novice Programmers. In Proceedings of the 2016 ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research (Melbourne, VIC, Australia) (ICER '16). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 241--250. https://doi.org/10.1145/2960310.2960314
[43]
Devamardeep Hayatpur, Tehilla Helfenbaum, Haijun Xia, Wolfgang Stuerzlinger, and Paul Gries. 2023. Structuring Collaboration in Programming Through Personal-Spaces. In Extended Abstracts of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Hamburg, Germany) (CHI EA '23). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 263, 7 pages.
[44]
Carl Haynes-Magyar and Barbara Ericson. 2022. The Impact of Solving Adaptive Parsons Problems with Common and Uncommon Solutions. In Proceedings of the 22nd Koli Calling International Conference on Computing Education Research (Koli, Finland) (Koli Calling '22). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 23, 14 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3564721.3564736
[45]
Juha Helminen, Petri Ihantola, Ville Karavirta, and Lauri Malmi. 2012. How do students solve parsons programming problems? an analysis of interaction traces. In Proceedings of the ninth annual international conference on International computing education research. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 119--126.
[46]
Roya Hosseini, Kamil Akhuseyinoglu, Peter Brusilovsky, Lauri Malmi, Kerttu Pollari-Malmi, Christian Schunn, and Teemu Sirkia. 2020. Improving Engagement in Program Construction Examples for Learning Python Programming. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education 30 (2020), 299--336.
[47]
Roya Hosseini, Kamil Akhuseyinoglu, Andrew Petersen, Christian D Schunn, and Peter Brusilovsky. 2018. PCEX: interactive program construction examples for learning programming. In Proceedings of the 18th Koli Calling International Conference on Computing Education Research. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1--9.
[48]
Xinying Hou, Barbara Jane Ericson, and Xu Wang. 2022. Using Adaptive Parsons Problems to Scaffold Write-Code Problems. In Proceedings of the 2022 ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research V. 1. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 15--26.
[49]
Xinying Hou, Barbara Jane Ericson, and Xu Wang. 2023. Parsons Problems to Scaffold Code Writing: Impact on Performance and Problem-Solving Efficiency. In Proceedings of the 2023 Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education V. 2. ACM, New York, NY, 665--665.
[50]
Slava Kalyuga, Paul Ayres, Paul Chandler, and John Sweller. 2003. The Expertise Reversal Effect. Educational Psychologist 38, 1 (2003), 23--31. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3801_4
[51]
Sandra Katz, David Allbritton, John Aronis, Christine Wilson, and Mary Lou Soffa. 2006. Gender, achievement, and persistence in an undergraduate computer science program. ACM SIGMIS Database: the DATABASE for Advances in Information Systems 37, 4 (2006), 42--57.
[52]
United Kingdom and Ireland Computing Education Research (UKICER) Conference. 2023. UKICER 2023: Call for Participation. UK ACM SIGCSE. https://www.ukicer.com/participation.html Retrieved July 8, 2023 from
[53]
Paivi Kinnunen and Beth Simon. 2010. Experiencing programming assignments in CS1: the emotional toll. In Proceedings of the Sixth international workshop on Computing education research. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 77--86.
[54]
Päivi Kinnunen and Beth Simon. 2011. CS majors' self-efficacy perceptions in CS1: results in light of social cognitive theory. In Proceedings of the seventh international workshop on Computing education research. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 19--26.
[55]
Jo-Anne LeFevre and Peter Dixon. 1986. Do written instructions need examples? Cognition and Instruction 3, 1 (1986), 1--30.
[56]
Raymond Lister, Elizabeth S. Adams, Sue Fitzgerald, William Fone, John Hamer, Morten Lindholm, Robert McCartney, Jan Erik Moström, Kate Sanders, Otto Seppälä, Beth Simon, and Lynda Thomas. 2004. A Multi-National Study of Reading and Tracing Skills in Novice Programmers. In Working Group Reports from ITiCSE on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education (Leeds, United Kingdom) (ITiCSE-WGR '04). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 119--150. https://doi.org/10.1145/1044550.1041673
[57]
Nelson Lojo and Armando Fox. 2022. Teaching Test-Writing as a Variably-Scaffolded Programming Pattern. In Proceedings of the 27th ACM Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education Vol. 1. ACM, New York, NY, 498--504.
[58]
Dastyni Loksa, Lauren Margulieux, Brett A. Becker, Michelle Craig, Paul Denny, Raymond Pettit, and James Prather. 2022. Metacognition and Self-Regulation in Programming Education: Theories and Exemplars of Use. ACM Trans. Comput. Educ. 22, 4 (dec 2022), 1--31. https://doi.org/10.1145/3487050
[59]
Andrew Luxton-Reilly and Andrew Petersen. 2017. The Compound Nature of Novice Programming Assessments. In Proceedings of the Nineteenth Australasian Computing Education Conference (Geelong, VIC, Australia) (ACE '17). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 26--35. https://doi.org/10.1145/3013499.3013500
[60]
Andrew Luxton-Reilly, Simon, Ibrahim Albluwi, Brett A. Becker, Michail Giannakos, Amruth N. Kumar, Linda Ott, James Paterson, Michael James Scott, Judy Sheard, and Claudia Szabo. 2018. Introductory Programming: A Systematic Literature Review. In Proceedings Companion of the 23rd Annual ACM Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education (Larnaca, Cyprus) (ITiCSE 2018 Companion). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 55--106. https://doi.org/10.1145/3293881.3295779
[61]
Jane Margolis. 2017. Stuck in the Shallow End, updated edition: Education, Race, and Computing. MIT press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
[62]
Jane Margolis and Allan Fisher. 2002. Unlocking the clubhouse: Women in computing. MIT press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
[63]
Catherine Marshall and Gretchen B. Rossman. 1999. Designing Qualitative Research 3rd ed.). Sage Publications, London.
[64]
Michael McCracken, Vicki Almstrum, Danny Diaz, Mark Guzdial, Dianne Hagan, Yifat Ben-David Kolikant, Cary Laxer, Lynda Thomas, Ian Utting, and Tadeusz Wilusz. 2001. A Multi-National, Multi-Institutional Study of Assessment of Programming Skills of First-Year CS Students. SIGCSE Bull. 33, 4 (dec 2001), 125--180. https://doi.org/10.1145/572139.572181
[65]
Brad Miller and David Ranum. 2014. Runestone Interactive: Tools for Creating Interactive Course Materials. In Proceedings of the First ACM Conference on Learning @ Scale Conference (Atlanta, Georgia, USA) (L@S '14). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 213--214. https://doi.org/10.1145/2556325.2567887
[66]
George A Miller. 1956. The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological review 63, 2 (1956), 81.
[67]
Briana B. Morrison, Lauren E. Margulieux, Barbara Ericson, and Mark Guzdial. 2016. Subgoals Help Students Solve Parsons Problems. In Proceedings of the 47th ACM Technical Symposium on Computing Science Education. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 42--47.
[68]
Kasia Muldner, Jay Jennings, and Veronica Chiarelli. 2022. A Review of Worked Examples in Programming Activities. ACM Transactions on Computing Education 23, 1 (2022), 1--35.
[69]
Fred Paas, Alexander Renkl, and John Sweller. 2003. Cognitive load theory and instructional design: Recent developments. Educational psychologist 38, 1 (2003), 1--4.
[70]
Fred Paas, Tamara Van Gog, and John Sweller. 2010. Cognitive load theory: New conceptualizations, specifications, and integrated research perspectives. Educational psychology review 22, 2 (2010), 115--121.
[71]
Jennifer Parham-Mocello, Martin Erwig, Margaret Niess, Jason Weber, Madelyn Smith, and Garrett Berliner. 2023. Putting Computing on the Table: Using Physical Games to Teach Computer Science. In Proceedings of the 54th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education V. 1. ACM, New York, NY, 444--450.
[72]
Miranda C. Parker, Mark Guzdial, and Shelly Engleman. 2016. Replication, Validation, and Use of a Language Independent CS1 Knowledge Assessment. In Proceedings of the 2016 ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research (Melbourne, VIC, Australia) (ICER '16). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 93--101. https://doi.org/10.1145/2960310.2960316
[73]
Jack Parkinson, Sebastian Dziallas, Gary Lewandowski, Fiona Mcneill, Jim Williams, and Quintin Cutts. 2022. Experience Report: Running and Participating in a Multi-Institutional Research in Practice Project Activity (RIPPA). In Proceedings of the 2022 Conference on United Kingdom & Ireland Computing Education Research (Dublin, Ireland) (UKICER '22). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 4, 7 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3555009.3555014
[74]
Dale Parsons and Patricia Haden. 2006. Parson's Programming Puzzles: A Fun and Effective Learning Tool for First Programming Courses. In Proceedings of the 8th Australasian Conference on Computing Education - Volume 52 (Hobart, Australia) (ACE '06). Australian Computer Society, Inc., AUS, 157--163.
[75]
Dale Parsons, Krissi Wood, and Patricia Haden. 2015. What are we doing when we assess programming. In Proceedings of the 17th Australasian Computing Education Conference (ACE 2015), Vol. 27. Australian Computer Society, Inc., AUS, 30.
[76]
Yulia Pechorina, Keith Anderson, and Paul Denny. 2023. Metacodenition: Scaffolding the Problem-Solving Process for Novice Programmers. In Proceedings of the 25th Australasian Computing Education Conference. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 59--68.
[77]
Peter L Pirolli and John R Anderson. 1985. The role of learning from examples in the acquisition of recursive programming skills. Canadian Journal of Psychology/Revue canadienne de psychologie 39, 2 (1985), 240.
[78]
Leo Porter, Dennis Bouvier, Quintin Cutts, Scott Grissom, Cynthia Lee, Robert McCartney, Daniel Zingaro, and Beth Simon. 2016. A Multi-Institutional Study of Peer Instruction in Introductory Computing. In Proceedings of the 47th ACM Technical Symposium on Computing Science Education (Memphis, Tennessee, USA) (SIGCSE '16). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 358--363. https://doi.org/10.1145/2839509.2844642
[79]
James Prather, Brett A Becker, Michelle Craig, Paul Denny, Dastyni Loksa, and Lauren Margulieux. 2020. What do we think we think we are doing? Metacognition and self-regulation in programming. In Proceedings of the 2020 ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 2--13.
[80]
James Prather, John Homer, Paul Denny, Brett Becker, John Marsden, and Garrett Powell. 2022. Scaffolding Task Planning Using Abstract Parsons Problems. In Proceedings of the 2022 World Conference on Computers in Education (WCCE '22). IFIP, Japan, 1--10.
[81]
James Prather, Lauren Margulieux, Jacqueline Whalley, Paul Denny, Brent N Reeves, Brett A Becker, Paramvir Singh, Garrett Powell, and Nigel Bosch. 2022. Getting By With Help From My Friends: Group Study in Introductory Programming Understood as Socially Shared Regulation. In Proceedings of the 2022 ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research-Volume 1. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 164--176.
[82]
James Prather, Raymond Pettit, Brett A Becker, Paul Denny, Dastyni Loksa, Alani Peters, Zachary Albrecht, and Krista Masci. 2019. First things first: Providing metacognitive scaffolding for interpreting problem prompts. In Proceedings of the 50th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 531--537.
[83]
James Prather, Raymond Pettit, Kayla McMurry, Alani Peters, John Homer, and Maxine Cohen. 2018. Metacognitive difficulties faced by novice programmers in automated assessment tools. In Proceedings of the 2018 ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 41--50.
[84]
James Prather, Raymond Pettit, Kayla Holcomb McMurry, Alani Peters, John Homer, Nevan Simone, and Maxine Cohen. 2017. On novices' interaction with compiler error messages: A human factors approach. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 74--82.
[85]
Integrating Parsons puzzles within Scratch enables efficient computational thinking learning. 2023. Integrating Parsons puzzles within Scratch enables efficient computational thinking learning. Integrating Parsons puzzles within Scratch enables efficient computational thinking learning 18, 22 (2023), 25.
[86]
Yizhou Qian and James Lehman. 2017. Students' misconceptions and other difficulties in introductory programming: A literature review. ACM Transactions on Computing Education (TOCE) 18, 1 (2017), 1--24.
[87]
Keith Quille and Susan Bergin. 2018. Programming: Predicting Student Success Early in CS1. a Re-Validation and Replication Study. In Proceedings of the 23rd Annual ACM Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education (Larnaca, Cyprus) (ITiCSE 2018). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 15--20. https://doi.org/10.1145/3197091.3197101
[88]
Keith Quille, Natalie Culligan, and Susan Bergin. 2017. Insights on Gender Differences in CS1: A Multi-Institutional, Multi-Variate Study. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education (Bologna, Italy) (ITiCSE '17). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 263--268. https://doi.org/10.1145/3059009.3059048
[89]
Keith Quille, Soohyun Nam Liao, Eileen Costelloe, Keith Nolan, Aidan Mooney, and Kartik Shah. 2022. PreSS: Predicting Student Success Early in CS1. A Pilot International Replication and Generalization Study. In Proceedings of the 27th ACM Conference on on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education Vol. 1 (Dublin, Ireland) (ITiCSE '22). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 54--60. https://doi.org/10.1145/3502718.3524755
[90]
Brent Reeves, Sami Sarsa, James Prather, Paul Denny, Brett A. Becker, Arto Hellas, Bailey Kimmel, Garrett Powell, and Juho Leinonen. 2023. Evaluating the Performance of Code Generation Models for Solving Parsons Problems With Small Prompt Variations. In Proceedings of the 2023 Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education V. 1. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 299--305.
[91]
Alexander Renkl. 2005. The worked-out-example principle in multimedia learning. The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning 1 (2005), 229--245.
[92]
Emma Riese, Madeleine Lorås, Martin Ukrop, and Tomáš Effenberger. 2021. Challenges Faced by Teaching Assistants in Computer Science Education Across Europe. In Proceedings of the 26th ACM Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education V. 1 (Virtual Event, Germany) (ITiCSE '21). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 547--553. https://doi.org/10.1145/3430665.3456304
[93]
Judy Sheard, Simon, Julian Dermoudy, Daryl D'Souza, Minjie Hu, and Dale Parsons. 2014. Benchmarking a Set of Exam Questions for Introductory Programming. In Proceedings of the Sixteenth Australasian Computing Education Conference - Volume 148 (Auckland, New Zealand) (ACE '14). Australian Computer Society, Inc., AUS, 113--121.
[94]
Yu Sheng, Bin Li, Zequan Wu, Ping Zhong, and Guihua Duan. 2022. AC Language Learning Platform Based on Parsons Problems. In International Conference on Computer Science and Education. Springer, Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 541--552.
[95]
Dermot Shinners-Kennedy and Sally A. Fincher. 2013. Identifying Threshold Concepts: From Dead End to a New Direction. In Proceedings of the Ninth Annual International ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research (San Diego, San California, USA) (ICER '13). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 9--18. https://doi.org/10.1145/2493394.2493396
[96]
Angela A. Siegel, Mark Zarb, Bedour Alshaigy, Jeremiah Blanchard, Tom Crick, Richard Glassey, John R. Hott, Celine Latulipe, Charles Riedesel, Mali Senapathi, Simon, and David Williams. 2022. Teaching through a Global Pandemic: Educational Landscapes Before, During and After COVID-19. In Proceedings of the 2021 Working Group Reports on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education (Virtual Event, Germany) (ITiCSE-WGR '21). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1--25.
[97]
Angela A. Siegel, Mark Zarb, Emma Anderson, Brent Crane, Alice Gao, Celine Latulipe, Ellie Lovellette, Fiona McNeill, and Debbie Meharg. 2022. The Impact of COVID-19 on the CS Student Learning Experience: How the Pandemic Has Shaped the Educational Landscape. In Proceedings of the 2022 Working Group Reports on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education (Dublin, Ireland) (ITiCSE-WGR '22). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 165--190. https://doi.org/10.1145/3571785.3574126
[98]
Teemu Sirkiä. 2016. Combining Parson's problems with program visualization in CS1 context. In Proceedings of the 16th Koli Calling International Conference on Computing Education Research. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 155--159.
[99]
John A Sloboda, Jane W Davidson, Michael JA Howe, and Derek G Moore. 1996. The role of practice in the development of performing musicians. British journal of psychology 87, 2 (1996), 287--309.
[100]
David Smith and Craig Zilles. 2023. Discovering, Autogenerating, and Evaluating Distractors for Python Parsons Problems in CS1. In Proceedings of the 54th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education V. 1 (SIGCSE 2023). ACM, New York, NY, 924--930.
[101]
David H. Smith, Max Fowler, and Craig Zilles. 2023. Investigating the Role and Impact of Distractors on Parsons Problems in CS1 Assessments. In Proceedings of the 2023 Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education V. 1. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 417--423.
[102]
Elliot Soloway. 1986. Learning to program= learning to construct mechanisms and explanations. Commun. ACM 29, 9 (1986), 850--858.
[103]
Sylvia Stuurman, Harrie Passier, and Erik Barendsen. 2016. Analyzing Students' Software Redesign Strategies. In Proceedings of the 16th Koli Calling International Conference on Computing Education Research (Koli, Finland) (Koli Calling '16). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 110--119. https://doi.org/10.1145/2999541.2999559
[104]
Lovisa Sundin, Nourhan Sakr, Juho Leinonen, Sherif Aly, and Quintin Cutts. 2021. Visual Recipes for Slicing and Dicing Data: Teaching Data Wrangling Using Subgoal Graphics. In Proceedings of the 21st Koli Calling International Conference on Computing Education Research (Joensuu, Finland) (Koli Calling '21). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 29, 10 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3488042.3488063
[105]
John Sweller. 1988. Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive science 12, 2 (1988), 257--285.
[106]
John Sweller. 2006. The worked example effect and human cognition. Learning and instruction 16, 2 (2006), 165--169.
[107]
John Sweller, Jeroen JG van Merriënboer, and Fred Paas. 2019. Cognitive architecture and instructional design: 20 years later. Educational Psychology Review 31 (2019), 261--292.
[108]
Kok Cheng Tan, Daniel Zantedeschi, Amruth Kumar, and Alessio Gaspar. 2022. Genetic algorithm cleaning in sequential data mining: analyzing solutions to parsons' puzzles. In Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference Companion. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 2330--2333.
[109]
Dirk Tempelaar, Bart Rienties, and Quan Nguyen. 2018. Investigating Learning Strategies in a Dispositional Learning Analytics Context: The Case of Worked Examples. In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge (Sydney, New South Wales, Australia) (LAK '18). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 201--205. https://doi.org/10.1145/3170358.3170385
[110]
John Gregory Trafton and Brian J Reiser. 1994. The contributions of studying examples and solving problems to skill acquisition. Ph.D. Dissertation. Citeseer.
[111]
Ian Utting, Allison Elliott Tew, Mike McCracken, Lynda Thomas, Dennis Bouvier, Roger Frye, James Paterson, Michael Caspersen, Yifat Ben-David Kolikant, Juha Sorva, and Tadeusz Wilusz. 2013. A Fresh Look at Novice Programmers' Performance and Their Teachers' Expectations. In Proceedings of the ITiCSE Working Group Reports Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education-Working Group Reports (Canterbury, England, United Kingdom) (ITiCSE -WGR '13). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 15--32. https://doi.org/10.1145/2543882.2543884
[112]
Jeroen JG Van Merriënboer and Marcel BM De Croock. 1992. Strategies for computer-based programming instruction: Program completion vs. program generation. Journal of Educational Computing Research 8, 3 (1992), 365--394.
[113]
Valdemar Švábenský, Richard Weiss, Jack Cook, Jan Vykopal, Pavel Čeleda, Jens Mache, Radoslav Chudovský, and Ankur Chattopadhyay. 2022. Evaluating Two Approaches to Assessing Student Progress in Cybersecurity Exercises. In Proceedings of the 53rd ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education - Volume 1 (Providence, RI, USA) (SIGCSE 2022). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 787--793. https://doi.org/10.1145/3478431.3499414
[114]
Lev S Vygotsky. 1978. Mind in society: The development of higher mental processes (E. Rice, Ed. & Trans.).
[115]
Lev Semenovich Vygotsky. 1980. Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard university press, Cambridge, MA.
[116]
Nathaniel Weinman, Armando Fox, and Marti Hearst. 2020. Exploring Challenging Variations of Parsons Problems. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1349. https://doi.org/10.1145/3328778.3372639
[117]
Nathaniel Weinman, Armando Fox, and Marti A Hearst. 2021. Improving Instruction of Programming Patterns with Faded Parsons Problems. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1--4.
[118]
Jacqueline L. Whalley and Raymond Lister. 2009. The BRACElet 2009.1 (Wellington) Specification. In Proceedings of the Eleventh Australasian Conference on Computing Education - Volume 95 (Wellington, New Zealand) (ACE '09). Australian Computer Society, Inc., AUS, 9--18.
[119]
Joseph B Wiggins, Joseph F Grafsgaard, Kristy Elizabeth Boyer, Eric N Wiebe, and James C Lester. 2017. Do you think you can? the influence of student self-efficacy on the effectiveness of tutorial dialogue for computer science. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education 27, 1 (2017), 130--153.
[120]
Zihan Wu, Barbara J. Ericson, and Christopher Brooks. 2023. Using Micro Parsons Problems to Scaffold the Learning of Regular Expressions. In Proceedings of the 2023 Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education. ACM, New York, NY, 457--463.
[121]
Mark Zarb, Bedour Alshaigy, Dennis Bouvier, Richard Glassey, Janet Hughes, and Charles Riedesel. 2018. An International Investigation into Student Concerns Regarding Transition into Higher Education Computing. In Proceedings Companion of the 23rd Annual ACM Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education (Larnaca, Cyprus) (ITiCSE 2018 Companion). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 107--129. https://doi.org/10.1145/3293881.3295780
[122]
Angela Zavaleta Bernuy and Brian Harrington. 2020. What Are We Asking Our Students? A Literature Map of Student Surveys in Computer Science Education. In Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education (Trondheim, Norway) (ITiCSE '20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 418--424. https://doi.org/10.1145/3341525.3387383
[123]
Rui Zhi, Min Chi, Tiffany Barnes, and Thomas W Price. 2019. Evaluating the effectiveness of parsons problems for block-based programming. In Proceedings of the 2019 ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 51--59.
[124]
Xinming Zhu and Herbert A Simon. 1987. Learning mathematics from examples and by doing. Cognition and instruction 4, 3 (1987), 137--166.
[125]
Athanasios Zitouniatis, Fotis Lazarinis, and Dimitris Kanellopoulos. 2022. Teaching Computational Thinking Using Scenario-Based Learning Tools. Education and Information Technologies 28, 4 (oct 2022), 4017--4040. io

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)CONVERSATIONS: Conversation with a Prominent Propagator: Susan H. RodgerACM Inroads10.1145/369972015:4(9-13)Online publication date: 11-Nov-2024
  • (2024)Exploring the Acceptance and Effectiveness of Parsons Problems on Scaffolding CS1 RetakersProceedings of the 2024 on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education V. 110.1145/3649217.3653590(681-687)Online publication date: 3-Jul-2024
  • (2024)Evaluating Micro Parsons Problems as Exam QuestionsProceedings of the 2024 on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education V. 110.1145/3649217.3653583(674-680)Online publication date: 3-Jul-2024
  • Show More Cited By

Index Terms

  1. Multi-Institutional Multi-National Studies of Parsons Problems

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

    Information & Contributors

    Information

    Published In

    cover image ACM Conferences
    ITiCSE-WGR '23: Proceedings of the 2023 Working Group Reports on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education
    December 2023
    238 pages
    ISBN:9798400704055
    DOI:10.1145/3623762
    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: 28 December 2023

    Permissions

    Request permissions for this article.

    Check for updates

    Author Tags

    1. code puzzles
    2. multi-institutional multi-national study
    3. multi-institutional study
    4. multi-national study
    5. parson's problems
    6. parson's programming puzzles
    7. parson's puzzles
    8. parsons problems
    9. parsons puzzles

    Qualifiers

    • Research-article

    Funding Sources

    • Fulbright Scholar Program

    Conference

    ITiCSE 2023
    Sponsor:

    Acceptance Rates

    Overall Acceptance Rate 552 of 1,613 submissions, 34%

    Contributors

    Other Metrics

    Bibliometrics & Citations

    Bibliometrics

    Article Metrics

    • Downloads (Last 12 months)149
    • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)8
    Reflects downloads up to 19 Nov 2024

    Other Metrics

    Citations

    Cited By

    View all
    • (2024)CONVERSATIONS: Conversation with a Prominent Propagator: Susan H. RodgerACM Inroads10.1145/369972015:4(9-13)Online publication date: 11-Nov-2024
    • (2024)Exploring the Acceptance and Effectiveness of Parsons Problems on Scaffolding CS1 RetakersProceedings of the 2024 on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education V. 110.1145/3649217.3653590(681-687)Online publication date: 3-Jul-2024
    • (2024)Evaluating Micro Parsons Problems as Exam QuestionsProceedings of the 2024 on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education V. 110.1145/3649217.3653583(674-680)Online publication date: 3-Jul-2024
    • (2024)Distractors Make You Pay Attention: Investigating the Learning Outcomes of Including Distractor Blocks in Parsons ProblemsProceedings of the 2024 ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research - Volume 110.1145/3632620.3671114(177-191)Online publication date: 12-Aug-2024
    • (2024)Insights from Social Shaping Theory: The Appropriation of Large Language Models in an Undergraduate Programming CourseProceedings of the 2024 ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research - Volume 110.1145/3632620.3671098(114-130)Online publication date: 12-Aug-2024

    View Options

    Login options

    View options

    PDF

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    Media

    Figures

    Other

    Tables

    Share

    Share

    Share this Publication link

    Share on social media