A Case Study Exploring Pre-Service Teachers’ Programming Difficulties and Strategies when Learning Programming Languages
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17140/PCSOJ-6-152Keywords:
Computational Thinking, Computer science education, Pre-service teachers, Problem solving strategiesAbstract
Understanding the importance of training young people, this study sought to explore the early experience of pre-service teachers
in their computational practices in terms of the difficulties they faced and the strategies they used while learning how to program.
Based on convenience sampling, four participants were recruited from an undergraduate course focusing on computer science
education in K-12. The literature on novice programmers’ difficulties and their strategies was used to establish the conceptual
background for this study. We collected four semi-structured interviews with pre-service teachers, a total of five hour-long classroom
observations, and 19 class activities (archival data). After conducting a content analysis, findings showed four categories in
which pre-service teachers face difficulties: (a) understanding the computational concepts (semantic); (b) using the concepts inappropriately
(syntax); (c) developing a program (algorithmic thinking), and (d) identifying problems (debugging). We also found
five categories in which pre-service teachers overcome their difficulties: planning, using resources, seeking support, guessing
and checking, and looking for visual assistance. This study emphasized that pre-service teachers encounter several difficulties in
learning computational concepts through programming languages, which should be considered in pre-service teacher education.
References
Wing JM. Computational thinking. Communications of the ACM. 2006; 49(3): 33-35. doi: 10.1145/1118178.1118215
Voogt J, Fisser P, Good J, Mishra P, Yadav A. Computational thinking in compulsory education: Towards an agenda for research and practice. Education and Information Technologies. 2015; 20(4): 715- 728. doi: 10.1007/s10639-015-9412-6
Lang K, Galanos R, Goode J, et al. Bugs in the system: Comput-er science teacher certification in the US Web site. https://www. csteachers.org/documents/en-us/3b4a70cd-2a9b-478b-95cd-376530c3e976/1. Accessed February 19, 2020.
Nager A, Atkinson RD. The case for improving US computer science education Web site. http://www2.itif.org/2016-comput-er-science-education.pdf. Accessed February 19, 2020.
Grover S, Pea R. Computational Thinking in K-12: A review of the state of the field. Educational Researcher. 2013; 42(1): 38-43. doi: 10.3102/0013189X12463051
Kalelioglu F, Gulbahar Y, Kukul V. A framework for computa-tional thinking based on a systematic research review. Baltic Journal of Modern Computing. 2016; 4(3): 583-596.
Gal-Ezer J, Stephenson C. A tale of two countries: Successes and challenges in K-12 computer science education in Israel and the United States. ACM Transactions on Computing Education (TOCE). 2014; 14(2): 8. doi: 10.1145/2602483
Guzdial, M. Learner-centered design of computing education: Research on computing for everyone. Synthesis Lectures on Hu-man-Centered Informatics. 2015; 8(6): 1-165. doi: 10.2200/S00684ED-1V01Y201511HCI033
Yadav A, Zhou N, Mayfield C, Hambrusch S, Korb JT. Intro-ducing computational thinking in education courses. Educational Studies. 2011; (2): 465-470. doi: 10.1145/1953163.1953297
Yadav A, Stephenson C, Hong H. Computational thinking for teacher education. Communications of the ACM. 2017; 60(4): 55-62. doi: 10.1145/2994591
Basu S, Biswas G, Sengupta P, Dickes A, Kinnebrew JS, Clark D. Identifying middle school students’ challenges in computation-al thinking-based science learning. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning. 2016; 11: 13. doi: 10.1186/s41039-016-0036-2
Saeli M, Perrenet J, Jochems WMG, Zwaneveld B, Nederland OU, Centrum RDM. Teaching programming in secondary school: A pedagogical content knowledge perspective. Informatics in Educa-tion. 2011; 10(1): 73-88. doi: 10.1145/2016911.2016943
Winslow LE. Programming pedagogy—a psycholog-ical overview. ACM Sigcse Bulletin. 1996; 28(3): 17-22. doi: 10.1145/234867.234872
Lahtinen E, Ala-Mutka K, Järvinen H-M. A study of the dif-ficulties of novice programmers. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin. 2005; 37(3): 14-18. doi: 10.1145/1151954.1067453
Chao PY. Exploring students’ computational practice, design and performance of problem-solving through a visual program-ming environment. Computers & Education. 2016; 95: 202-215. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2016.01.010
Navarro-Prieto R, Cañas JJ. Are visual programming languages better? The role of imagery in program comprehension. Interna-Submit your article to this journal | https://openventio.org/submit-manuscript/ Kwon K et al tional Journal of Human-Computer Studies. 2001; 54(6): 799-829. doi: 10.1006/ijhc.2000.0465
Israel M, Pearson JN, Tapia T, Wherfel QM, Reese G. Support-ing all learners in school-wide computational thinking: A cross-case qualitative analysis. Computers and Education. 2015; 82: 263-279. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2014.11.022
Merriam SB, Tisdell EJ. Qualitative Research: A Guide to Design and Implementation. 4th ed. San Francisco, CA, USA: Jossey-Bass; 2016.
Maloney J, Resnick M, Rusk N. The scratch programming lan-guage and environment. ACM Transactions on Computing Education. 2010; 10(4), 1-15. doi: 10.1145/1868358.1868363.http
Fraenkel JR, Wallen NE, Hyun HH. How to Design and Evaluate Research in Education. New York, NY, USA: McGraw-Hill Educa-tion; 2015.
Ginat D. On novice loop boundaries and range concep-tions. Computer Science Education. 2004; 14(3): 165-181. doi: 10.1080/0899340042000302709
Van Merriënboer JJ, Paas FG. Automation and schema acquisi-tion in learning elementary computer programming: Implications for the design of practice. Computers in Human Behavior. 1990; 6(3): 273-289. doi: 10.1016/0747-5632(90)90023-A
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
All content published in Psychology and Cognitive Sciences (PCS) is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). This license allows anyone to copy, distribute, transmit, and adapt the work — including for commercial purposes — provided appropriate credit is given to the original author(s) and source.
