Analysis of Progression of Scratch Users based on their Use of Elementary Patterns
Analysis of Progression of Scratch Users based on their Use of Elementary Patterns
复制标题
基于 Scratch 用户对基本模式的使用情况的进展分析
DOI：
10.1109/iccse.2019.8845495
复制
发表时间：
2019
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
T. Bell
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
K. Amanullah;T. Bell
基于模块的编程语言是向年轻学生介绍计算机编程的一种流行方式。然而，有人担心学生可能没有学到重要的编程技能。之前对在线Scratch项目的分析显示，变量、条件语句和控制循环等重要计算元素的使用频率极低，而在教学顺序中引入基本模式似乎是一种潜在的解决方案。尽管学生在Scratch环境中使用有限的构造词汇可能会取得成功，但文献中指出，向不同编程语言的过渡过程可能会很困难。对上传的Scratch项目进行静态分析的先前研究存在的一个问题是，它们可能偏向于一次性或短暂的编程体验，即学生只有短暂的经历，上传一个简单的程序，之后不再有进一步的作品。在本研究中，我们通过衡量Scratch用户多年来的进展，特别是通过他们对基本模式的使用，来解决这一问题。我们的研究确定了Scratch社区中34832名用户提交的所有项目，并针对每个用户，比较了他们项目前半部分和后半部分所展示的技能。没有明显的进步迹象，甚至有一些倒退的迹象，而且即使经过一年多的编程，我们发现对于大多数用户来说，编程关键元素的使用仍然很少。
Block based programming languages are a popular way to introduce computer programming to young students. However, concerns have been raised that students may not be learning important programming skills. Previous analyses of Scratch projects online have revealed that the use of important computational elements such as variables, if statements and controlled loops is extremely low, and introducing elementary patterns to the teaching sequence emerged as a potential solution. Although students might have success in the Scratch environment with a limited vocabulary of constructs, it has been pointed out in the literature that the transition process to a different programming language might be difficult. A concern with prior studies of a static analysis of uploaded Scratch projects is that they might be biased towards one-off or brief encounters with programming, where students have a short experience, upload a simple program, and share no further work. We address this concern in this study by measuring the progress of Scratch users over the years, particularly through their use of elementary patterns. Our study has identified all projects submitted by 34,832 users in the Scratch community, and for each user we have compared the skills demonstrated in the first half with those in the second half of their projects. There were no clear signs of any progression, and even some indications of negative progression, and even after more than a year of programming, for most users we found that the use of key elements of programming was still low.