Mediated transfer: impact on programming misconceptions (original) (raw)

References

• Alrubaye, H., Ludi, S., & Mkaouer, M. W. (2019). Comparison of block-based and hybrid-based environments in transferring programming skills to text-based environments. Proceedings of the 29th Annual International Conference on Computer Science and Software Engineering, 100–109.
• Altadmri, A., & Brown, N. C. C. (2015). 37 million compilations: Investigating novice programming mistakes in large-scale student data. Sigcse '15. https://doi.org/10.1145/2676723.2677258
• Armoni, M., Meerbaum-Salant, O., & Ben-Ari, M. (2015). From scratch to “Real” programming. ACM Transactions on Computing Education, 14(4), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1145/2677087
  Article Google Scholar
• Austin, J., Baker, H., Ball, T., Devine, J., Finney, J., De Halleux, P., Hodges, S., Moskal, M., & Stockdale, G. (2020). The BBC micro: Bit-From the U.K. To the world. Communications of the ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3368856
• Bayman, P., & Mayer, R. E. (1983). A diagnosis of beginning programmers’ misconceptions of BASIC programming statements. Communications of the ACM, 26(9), 677–679. https://doi.org/10.1145/358172.358408
  Article Google Scholar
• Ben-Ari, M. (2001). Constructivism in computer science education. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 20(1), 45–73. https://doi.org/10.1145/274790.274308
  Article Google Scholar
• Böhm, C., & Jacopini, G. (1966). Flow diagrams, turing machines and languages with only two formation rules. Communications of the ACM, 9(5), 366–371. https://doi.org/10.1145/355592.365646
  Article Google Scholar
• Boljat, I., Mladenović, M., & Mustapić Jogun, N. (2019). Students’ attitudes towards programming after the first year of implementing a new informatics curriculum in the elementary schools. In ICERI2019 Proceedings (pp. 9486–9495). https://doi.org/10.21125/iceri.2019.2303
• Bruner, J. S. (1960). The process of education. In The Process of Education (pp. 12–13). https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004
• Cañas, J. J., Bajo, M. T., & Gonzalvo, P. (1994). Mental models and computer programming. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 40(5), 795–811. https://doi.org/10.1006/ijhc.1994.1038
  Article Google Scholar
• Chetty, J., & Barlow-Jones, G. (2012). Bridging the gap: the role of mediated transfer for computer programming. International Proceedings of Computer Science & Information Technology, 43.
• Clement, J. (1993). Using bridging analogies and anchoring intuitions to deal with students’ preconceptions in physics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30(10), 1241–1257. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660301007
  Article Google Scholar
• Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2013). Research methods in education. Routledge.
  Book Google Scholar
• Corney, M., Lister, R., & Teague, D. (2011). Early relational reasoning and the novice programmer: swapping as the "hello world" of relational reasoning. 95–104.
• Dann, W., Cosgrove, D., Slater, D., Culyba, D., & Cooper, S. (2012). Mediated Transfer: Alice 3 to Java. Proceedings of the 43rd ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, 141–146. https://doi.org/10.1145/2157136.2157180
• De Raadt, M., Watson, R., & Toleman, M. (2002). Language trends in introductory programming courses. Proceedings of the 2002 Informing Science+ Information Technology Education Joint Conference (InSITE 2002), 229–337.
• Doukakis, D., Grigoriadou, M., & Tsaganou, G. (2007). Understanding the programming variable concept with animated interactive analogies.
• Garlick, R., & Cankaya, E. C. (2010). Using Alice in CS1 - A quantitative experiment. ITiCSE'10 - Proceedings of the 2010 ACM SIGCSE Annual Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education. https://doi.org/10.1145/1822090.1822138
• Gentner, D., Loewenstein, J., & Thompson, L. (2003). Learning and transfer: A general role for analogical encoding. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(2), 393.
  Article Google Scholar
• Grover, S., & Basu, S. (2017). Measuring student learning in introductory block-based programming: examining misconceptions of loops, variables, and boolean logic. Proceedings of the 2017 ACM SIGCSE Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education - SIGCSE '17, 267–272. https://doi.org/10.1145/3017680.3017723
• Kohn, T. (2017). Variable Evaluation: an Exploration of Novice Programmers' Understanding and Common Misconceptions. 345–350. https://doi.org/10.1145/3017680.3017724
• Krishnamurthi, S., & Fisler, K. (2019). Programming Paradigms and Beyond. The Cambridge Handbook of Computing Education Research, 377.
• Krpan, D., Mladenović, S., & Zaharija, G. (2017). Mediated transfer from visual to high-level programming language. In 40th International Convention on Information and Communication Technology, Electronics and Microelectronics, MIPRO 2017 - Proceedings. https://doi.org/10.23919/MIPRO.2017.7973531
• Kwon, K. (2017). Novice programmer’s misconception of programming reflected on problem-solving plans. International Journal of Computer Science Education in Schools, 1(4), 14–24.
  Article Google Scholar
• Lewis, C. M. (2010). How Programming Environment Shapes Perception, Learning and Goals: Logo vs. Scratch. Proceedings of the 41st ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education - SIGCSE, 346–350. https://doi.org/10.1145/1734263.1734383
• Ma, L., Ferguson, J., Roper, M., & Wood, M. (2007). Investigating the viability of mental models held by novice programmers. 499–503. https://doi.org/10.1145/1227310.1227481
• Mannila, L., & de Raadt, M. (2007). An objective comparison of languages for teaching introductory programming. https://doi.org/10.1145/1315803.1315811
• Mladenović, M., Boljat, I., & Žanko, Ž. (2018). Comparing loops misconceptions in block-based and text-based programming languages at the K-12 level. Education and Information Technologies, 23(4), 1483–1500. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-017-9673-3
• Mladenović, M., Žanko, Ž., & Boljat, I. (2019). Programming misconceptions at the K-12 level. In A. Tatnall (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Education and Information Technologies (pp. 1–13). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-60013-0_234-1
• Mladenović, M., Žanko, Ž., & Granić, A. (2021). Mediated transfer: From text to blocks and back. International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction, 100279. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcci.2021.100279
• Moors, L., Luxton-Reilly, A., & Denny, P. (2018). Transitioning from block-based to text-based programming languages. International Conference on Learning and Teaching in Computing and Engineering (LaTICE), 2018, 57–64.
  Google Scholar
• Parsons, D., & Haden, P. (2007). Programming osmosis: Knowledge transfer from imperative to visual programming environments. Conference of the National Advisory Committee on Computing Qualifications.
• Pea, R. D. (1986). Language-independent conceptual “bugs” in novice programming. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 2(1), 25–36.
  Article Google Scholar
• Pea, R. D., & Kurland, D. M. (1984). On the cognitive effects of learning computer programming. New Ideas in Psychology, 2(2), 137–168. https://doi.org/10.1016/0732-118X(84)90018-7
  Article Google Scholar
• Perkins, D. N., & Salomon, G. (1992). Transfer of Learning. In International Encyclopedia of Education (2nd ed., p. 13). Pergamon Press.
• Plass, D. (2015). Identifying and Addressing Common Programming Misconceptions with Variables ( Part 1 ). Part 1. http://essay.utwente.nl/70455/1/OudeBosDanny-S0021407-Afstudeerscriptie.pdf
• Putnam, R. T., Sleeman, D., Baxter, J. A., & Kuspa, L. K. (1986). A summary of misconceptions of high school basic programmers. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 2(4), 459–472. https://doi.org/10.2190/FGN9-DJ2F-86V8-3FAU
  Article Google Scholar
• Qian, Y., & Lehman, J. (2017). Students' misconceptions and other difficulties in introductory programming: A literature review. ACM Transactions on Computing Education, 18(1), 1:1--1:24. https://doi.org/10.1145/3077618
• Sadler, P. M., Sonnert, G., Coyle, H. P., Cook-Smith, N., & Miller, J. L. (2013). The influence of teachers’ knowledge on student learning in middle school physical science classrooms. American Educational Research Journal, 50(5), 1020–1049. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831213477680
  Article Google Scholar
• Sebesta, R. (2012). Concepts of programming languages (10th ed). Pearson.
• Sekiya, T., & Yamaguchi, K. (2013). Tracing quiz set to identify novices' programming misconceptions. Proceedings of the 13th Koli Calling International Conference on Computing Education Research - Koli Calling '13, 87–95. https://doi.org/10.1145/2526968.2526978
• Simon. (2011). Assignment and sequence: Why some students can't recognise a simple swap. Proceedings - 11th Koli Calling International Conference on Computing Education Research, Koli Calling'11. https://doi.org/10.1145/2094131.2094134
• Sleeman, D., Putnam, R. T., Baxter, J., & Kuspa, L. (1986). Pascal and High School Students: A Study of Errors. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 2(1), 5–23. https://doi.org/10.2190/2XPP-LTYH-98NQ-BU77
  Article Google Scholar
• Sorva, J. (2008). The same but different students' understandings of primitive and object variables. 5–15. https://doi.org/10.1145/1595356.1595360
• Swidan, A., Hermans, F., & Smit, M. (2018). Programming Misconceptions for School Students. Proceedings of the 2018 ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research - ICER '18, 151–159. https://doi.org/10.1145/3230977.3230995
• Taber, K. S. (2015). Alternative Conceptions/Frameworks/Misconceptions. In R. Gunstone (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Science Education (pp. 37–41). Springer.
  Chapter Google Scholar
• Weintrop, D. (2015). Minding the gap between blocks-based and text-based programming: Evaluating introductory programming tools. Proceedings of the 46th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, 720. https://doi.org/10.1145/2676723.2693622
• Wing, J. M. (2006). Computational thinking. Communications of the ACM, 49(3), 33–35. https://doi.org/10.1145/1118178.1118215
  Article Google Scholar
• Žanko, Ž., Mladenović, M., & Boljat, I. (2019). Misconceptions about variables at the K-12 level. Education and Information Technologies, 24(2), 1251–1268. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-018-9824-1

Download references