An Empirical Evaluation of Live Coding in CS1
An Empirical Evaluation of Live Coding in CS1
复制标题
CS1 实时编码的实证评估
DOI：
10.1145/3568813.3600122
复制
发表时间：
2023
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Soosai Raj, Adalbert Gerald
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Shah, Anshul;Hogan, Emma;Agarwal, Vardhan;Driscoll, John;Porter, Leo;Griswold, William G.;Soosai Raj, Adalbert Gerald
背景和背景。实时编码是一种教学方法，教师在学生面前动态编写代码，努力传授增量开发和调试等技能。相比之下，传统的静态代码示例通常需要教师注释或解释预写代码的组件。尽管建议使用实时编码，并进行了大量的定性分析，以确定其感知到的学习益处，但缺乏实证评估来证实这些学习益处，特别是在学生编程过程中。我们的工作旨在对实时编码教学方法和静态编码教学方法进行全面的、实证的比较。我们评估了实况编码教学法在三个主要方面的影响：1)学生对有效编程过程的坚持，2)他们在考试和作业中的表现，3)他们的课堂体验，如课堂参与度和对代码实例的感知。在我们的治疗控制准实验设置中，一个讲座小组看到了活编码的例子，而另一个讲座组只看到了静态编码的例子。这两个授课小组都由同一位教师授课，教授完全相同的内容，并完成相同的作业和考试。我们收集了编译级别的编程过程数据、学生在考试和家庭作业问题上的表现，以及通过调查和课程评估获得的反馈。我们的发现表明，在与增量开发、调试和生产率相关的编程过程指标上，活动编码组和静态编码组之间没有统计上的显著差异。同样，两组在作业和考试上的课程表现也没有差异。最后，学生反馈表明，实时编码小组中更多的学生报告说，课程太快，无法促进笔记，这可能会削弱实时编码的好处。仅靠实时编码可能不会带来以前工作确定的许多感知和预期的好处，但未来的工作可能会研究如何在实现这些好处的同时将我们确定的缺点降至最低。
Background and Context. Live coding is a teaching method in which an instructor dynamically writes code in front of students in an effort to impart skills such as incremental development and debugging. By contrast, traditional, static-code examples typically involve an instructor annotating or explaining components of pre-written code. Despite recommendations to use live coding and a wealth of qualitative analyses that identify perceived learning benefits of it, there are a lack of empirical evaluations to confirm those learning benefits, especially with respect to students’ programming processes.Objectives. Our work aims to provide a holistic, empirical comparison of a live-coding pedagogy with a static-code one. We evaluated the impact of a live-coding pedagogy on three main areas: 1) students’ adherence to effective programming processes, 2) their performance on exams and assignments, and 3) their lecture experiences, such as engagement during lecture and perceptions of code examples.Method. In our treatment-control quasi-experimental setup, one lecture group saw live-coding examples while the other saw only static-code ones. Both lecture groups were taught by the same instructor, were taught the exact same content, and completed the same assignments and exams. We collected compilation-level programming process data, student performance on exam and homework questions, and feedback via a survey and course evaluations.Findings. Our findings showed no statistically significant differences between the live-coding and static-code groups on programming process metrics related to incremental development, debugging, and productivity. Similarly, there was no difference between the groups on course performance on assignments and exams. Finally, student feedback suggests that more students in the live-coding group reported that lectures were too fast and failed to facilitate note-taking, potentially mitigating the perceived benefits of live coding.Implications. Live coding alone may not lead to many of the perceived and intended benefits that prior work identifies, but future work may investigate how to realize these benefits while minimizing the drawbacks we identified.
登录
查看更多内容
使用 R 学习统计
DOI：
10.4135/9781506300160
发表时间：
2014
期刊：
Circulation journal : official journal of the Japanese Circulation Society
影响因子：
--
作者：
R. Schumacker
通讯作者：
R. Schumacker
程序结构与设计
DOI：
--
发表时间：
1995
期刊：
Cognitive Sciences
影响因子：
--
作者：
Robert S. Rist
通讯作者：
Robert S. Rist
基于意图的评分：衡量解决作文问题成功与否的方法
影响因子：
3.2
作者：
H. Chad Lane;K. VanLehn
通讯作者：
K. VanLehn
了解和衡量 CS1 中的增量开发
DOI：
--
发表时间：
2023
期刊：
ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (SIGCSE
影响因子：
--
作者：
Shah, Anshul;Granado, Michael;Sharma, Mrinal;Driscoll, John;Porter, Leo;Griswold, William G.;Soosai Raj, Adalbert Gerald
通讯作者：
Soosai Raj, Adalbert Gerald
实时编码：文献综述
DOI：
10.1145/3430665.3456382
发表时间：
2021
期刊：
26th ACM Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education
影响因子：
--
作者：
Selvaraj, Ana;Zhang, Eda;Porter, Leo;Soosai Raj, Adalbert Gerald
通讯作者：
Soosai Raj, Adalbert Gerald