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

skip to main content
10.1145/2445196.2445216acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagessigcseConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Peer instruction in computing: the role of reading quizzes

Published: 06 March 2013 Publication History

Abstract

Peer Instruction has recently gained interest in computing as an effective active learning pedagogy. The general focus of PI research has been on the in-class portion of PI: multiple choice questions and group discussion. Here, our focus is the reading quizzes completed by students for purposes of class preparation. These quizzes contain content questions but also ask for difficulties or confusion with course material. Consistent with expectations, we demonstrate that providing correct responses to quiz questions positively correlates with other course assessments. Somewhat counter-intuitively, we find that identifying confusions, noting problematic sections, or asking questions about the reading are also correlated with lab grades.

References

[1]
I. D. Beatty, W. J. Gerace, W. J. Leonard, and R. J. Dufresne. Designing effective questions for classroom response system teaching. American Journal of Physics, 74:31--39, 2006.
[2]
J. Carter. Introduction to Computer Science Using C. McGraw-Hill Ryerson, 2008.
[3]
C. H. Crouch and E. Mazur. Peer instruction: Ten years of experience and results. American Journal of Physics, 69:970--977, 2001.
[4]
C. H. Crouch, J. Watkins, A. P. Fagen, and E. Mazur. Peer instruction: Engaging students one-on-one, all at once. In E. F. Redish and P. J. Cooney, editors, Research-Based Reform of University Physics. American Association of Physics Teachers, 2007.
[5]
Q. Cutts, S. Esper, M. Fecho, S. R. Foster, and B. Simon. The abstraction transition taxonomy: Developing desired learning outcomes through the lens of situated cognition. In ICER '12: Proceedings of the Eighth international Workshop on Computing Education Research, New York, NY, USA, 2012. ACM.
[6]
Q. Cutts, G. Kennedy, C. Mitchell, and S. Draper. Maximising dialogue in lectures using group response systems. 7th IASTED international conference on computers and advanced technology in education. www.dcs.gla.ac.uk/ quintin/papers/cate2004.pdf (accessed August 19, 2011)., 2004.
[7]
K. A. Ericsson, R. T. Krampe, and C. Tesch-Roemer. The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance. Psychological Review, 100(3):363--406, 1993.
[8]
S. Esper, B. Simon, and Q. Cutts. Exploratory homeworks: An active learning tool for textbook reading. In ICER '12: Proceedings of the Eighth international Workshop on Computing Education Research, New York, NY, USA, 2012. ACM.
[9]
J. K. Knight and W. B. Wood. Teaching more by lecturing less. Cell Biology Education, 4:298--310, 2005.
[10]
N. Lasry. Clickers or flashcards: Is there really a difference? The Physics Teacher, 46:242--244, 2008.
[11]
N. Lasry, E. Mazur, and J. Watkins. Peer instruction: From Harvard to the two-year college. American Journal of Physics, 76:1066--1069, 2008.
[12]
E. Mazur. ICER 2011 keynote address, 2011.
[13]
R. P. Pargas and D. M. Shah. Things are clicking in computer science courses. In SIGCSE '06: Proceedings of the 37th SIGCSE technical symposium on Computer science education, pages 474--478, New York, NY, USA, 2006. ACM.
[14]
L. Porter, C. Bailey-Lee, B. Simon, and D. Zingaro. Peer instruction: Do students really learn from peer discussion in computing? In ICER '11: Proceedings of the Seventh international Workshop on Computing Education Research, New York, NY, USA, 2011. ACM.
[15]
B. Simon and Q. Cutts. CS principles pilot at University of California, San Diego. ACM Inroads, 3(2):61--63, June 2012.
[16]
B. Simon, M. Kohanfars, J. Lee, K. Tamayo, and Q. Cutts. Experience report: Peer instruction in introductory computing. In SIGCSE '10: Proceedings of the 41st SIGCSE technical symposium on Computer science education, pages 341--345, New York, NY, USA, 2010. ACM.
[17]
M. K. Smith, W. B. Wood, W. K. Adams, C. Wieman, J. K. Knight, N. Guild, and T. T. Su. Why peer discussion improves student performance on in-class concept questions. Science, 323:122--124, 2009.
[18]
D. Zingaro. Experience report: Peer instruction in remedial computer science. In Ed-Media 2010: Proceedings of the 22nd World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia & Telecommunications, pages 5030--5035. AACE, 2010.
[19]
D. Zingaro. Pi-cs resource page. www.danielzingaro.com/pics.php, 2012.

Cited By

View all
  • (2022)Reactions of Computer Science Students to Peer Instruction Activities in Class2022 IEEE International Conference on Teaching, Assessment and Learning for Engineering (TALE)10.1109/TALE54877.2022.00112(661-664)Online publication date: Dec-2022
  • (2021)A Qualitative Study on How Students Interact with Quizzes and Estimate Confidence on Their AnswersProceedings of the 26th ACM Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education V. 110.1145/3430665.3456377(32-38)Online publication date: 26-Jun-2021
  • (2021)Applying Peer Instruction to Computer Science Students Using Non-native Language: A Study with Undergraduate Students2021 IEEE International Conference on Engineering, Technology & Education (TALE)10.1109/TALE52509.2021.9678789(854-858)Online publication date: 5-Dec-2021
  • Show More Cited By

Recommendations

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences
SIGCSE '13: Proceeding of the 44th ACM technical symposium on Computer science education
March 2013
818 pages
ISBN:9781450318686
DOI:10.1145/2445196
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

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 06 March 2013

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. active learning
  2. classroom response
  3. clickers
  4. cs1
  5. peer instruction

Qualifiers

  • Research-article

Conference

SIGCSE '13
Sponsor:

Acceptance Rates

SIGCSE '13 Paper Acceptance Rate 111 of 293 submissions, 38%;
Overall Acceptance Rate 1,595 of 4,542 submissions, 35%

Upcoming Conference

SIGCSE Virtual 2024
1st ACM Virtual Global Computing Education Conference
December 5 - 8, 2024
Virtual Event , NC , USA

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)10
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)2
Reflects downloads up to 14 Nov 2024

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2022)Reactions of Computer Science Students to Peer Instruction Activities in Class2022 IEEE International Conference on Teaching, Assessment and Learning for Engineering (TALE)10.1109/TALE54877.2022.00112(661-664)Online publication date: Dec-2022
  • (2021)A Qualitative Study on How Students Interact with Quizzes and Estimate Confidence on Their AnswersProceedings of the 26th ACM Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education V. 110.1145/3430665.3456377(32-38)Online publication date: 26-Jun-2021
  • (2021)Applying Peer Instruction to Computer Science Students Using Non-native Language: A Study with Undergraduate Students2021 IEEE International Conference on Engineering, Technology & Education (TALE)10.1109/TALE52509.2021.9678789(854-858)Online publication date: 5-Dec-2021
  • (2020)A Longitudinal Evaluation of a Best Practices CS1Proceedings of the 2020 ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research10.1145/3372782.3406274(182-193)Online publication date: 10-Aug-2020
  • (2019)Hacking the Non-Technical BrainProceedings of the 20th Annual SIG Conference on Information Technology Education10.1145/3349266.3351411(112-117)Online publication date: 26-Sep-2019
  • (2019)A Case Study of Peer InstructionThe Cambridge Handbook of Computing Education Research10.1017/9781108654555.031(861-874)Online publication date: 15-Feb-2019
  • (2019)The Cambridge Handbook of Computing Education Research10.1017/9781108654555Online publication date: 15-Feb-2019
  • (2018)Student Behaviour in Unsupervised Online QuizzesProceedings of the 23rd Western Canadian Conference on Computing Education10.1145/3209635.3209650(1-6)Online publication date: 4-May-2018
  • (2018)A multi-institution exploration of peer instruction in practiceProceedings of the 23rd Annual ACM Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education10.1145/3197091.3197144(308-313)Online publication date: 2-Jul-2018
  • (2016)A multi-institutional study of peer instruction in introductory computingACM Inroads10.1145/29381427:2(76-81)Online publication date: 16-May-2016
  • Show More Cited By

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