You are here:

Supporting Debugging Skills: Using Embodied Instructions in Children’s Programming Education
PROCEEDING

, , , , Teachers College, Columbia University, United States

Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference, in Austin, TX, United States ISBN 978-1-939797-27-8 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Waynesville, NC USA

Full Text

Abstract

This study focuses on the effects of different embodied instructions on young children’s debugging performance and self-efficacy in ScratchJr, a block-based iPad programming language. Students were asked to practice how to detect errors and fix coding in a pre-coding activity with different types of embodiment and then moved onto a pre-programmed debugging task on the iPad. Findings showed that both full and low embodiment groups outperformed the control group. Low embodiment group preferred deleting and rewriting as a debugging strategy and tended to have higher self-efficacy in the computer usage. This study provides an example of effective instructions in programming education to teach young children how to cope with errors and have confidence in their problem-solving ability.

Citation

Ahn, J.H., Mao, Y., Sung, W. & Black, J.B. (2017). Supporting Debugging Skills: Using Embodied Instructions in Children’s Programming Education. In P. Resta & S. Smith (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 19-26). Austin, TX, United States: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved August 10, 2024 from .

© 2017 Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE)

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
  2. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman.
  3. Barsalou, L.W. (2008). Grounded cognition. Annual Review of Psychology, 59(1), 617–645.
  4. Bers, M., Doyle-Lynch, A., & Chau, C. (2012). Positive technological development: The multifaceted nature of youth technology use towards improving self and society. Constructing the self in a digital world, 110-136.
  5. Bers, M.U. (2014). Tangible Kindergarten. The Go-To Guide for Engineering Curricula PreK-5: Choosing and using the best instructional materials for your students, 133-145.
  6. Bers, M., Doyle-Lynch, A., & Chau, C. (2012). Positive technological development: The multifaceted nature of youth technology use towards improving self and society. Constructing the self in a digital world, 110-136.
  7. AUTHOR. (2010). An embodied/grounded cognition perspective on educational technology. In New science of learning (pp. 45-52). Springer New York.
  8. Brennan, K., & Resnick, M. (2012). New frameworks for studying and assessing the development of computational thinking. In Proceedings of the 2012 annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Vancouver, Canada (pp. 1-25).
  9. Carver, S.M., & Klahr, D. (1986). Assessing children’s Logo debugging skills with a formal model. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 2(4), 487–525.
  10. Cunha, F., & Heckman, J. (2007). The technology of skill formation (No. W12840). National Bureau of Economic Research.
  11. AUTHOR. (2009). Instructional embodiment and videogame programming in an afterschool program. Paper presented at the World Conference on Educational Media and Technology 2009, Honolulu, HI. Retrieved from http://www.editlib.org/p/32064 Fadjo, C.L. (2012). Developing computational thinking through grounded embodied cognition (Doctoral dissertation, Columbia University). Retrieved from http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED549372
  12. Fum, D., & Del Missier, F. (2000). Climbing the mazes: A cognitive model of spatial planning. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Cognitive Modeling.
  13. Goulet, D.V., & Slater, D. (2009). Alice and the introductory programming course: An Invitation to Dialogue. Information Systems Education Journal, 7(20), 3–16.
  14. Grover, S., & Pea, R. (2013). Computational Thinking in K–12 A Review of the State of the Field. Educational Researcher, 42(1), 38-43. Guzdial, M. (2014, 10/15). Teaching Computer Science Better to get Better Results [Weblog post]. Retrieved from http://computinged.wordpress.com/2016/08/15/we-need-to-fixthe-computer-scienceteaching-problem/
  15. Holbert, N.R., & Wilensky, U. (2011). Racing games for exploring kinematics: A computational thinking approach. In Proceedings of the 7th international conference on Games+ Learning+ Society Conference (pp. 109-118). ETC Press.
  16. Johnson-Glenberg, M.C., Birchfield, D., Megowan-Romanowicz, C., & Savio-Ramos, C. (2013). Embodiment in action: Better retention of several physics force concepts. Submitted for publication.
  17. Johnson-Glenberg, M.C., Birchfield, D.A., Tolentino, L., & Koziupa, T. (2014). Collaborative embodied learning in mixed reality motion-capture environments: Two science studies. Journal of Educational Psychology,106(1), 86.
  18. Kelleher, C., Pausch, R., & Kiesler, S. (2007, April). Storytelling alice motivates middle school girls to learn computer programming. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems (pp. 1455-1464). ACM.
  19. Klahr, D., & Carver, S.M. (1988). Cognitive objectives in a LOGO debugging curriculum: Instruction, learning, and transfer. Cognitive Psychology, 20(3), 362-404.
  20. Ko, A.J. (2009). Attitudes and self-efficacy in young adults' computing autobiographies. In 2009 IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages and Human-Centric Computing (VL/HCC) (pp. 67-74). IEEE.
  21. Law, L.C. (1998). A situated cognition view about the effects of planning and authorship on computer program debugging. Behaviour& Information Technology, 17(6), 325-337.
  22. Lee, M.J. (2015). Teaching and Engaging with Debugging Puzzles (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from https://digital.lib.washington.edu/researchworks/handle/1773/33985
  23. Lindgren, R. (2014). Getting into the cue: Embracing technology-facilitated body movements as a starting point for learning. In Lee, V.R. (Ed.), Learning technologies and the body: integration and implementation informal and informal environment: Routledge.
  24. Lindgren, R., & Johnson-Glenberg, M. (2013). Emboldened by embodiment: Six precepts for research on embodied learning and mixed reality. Educational Researcher, 42(8), 445-452.
  25. Maloney, J.H., Peppler, K., Kafai, Y., Resnick, M., & Rusk, N. (2008). Programming by choice: Urban youth learning programming with scratch. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 40(1), 367-371.
  26. Manches, A., & Plowman, L. (2015). Computing education in children's early years: A call for debate. British Journal of Educational Technology.
  27. National Research Council. (2005). Systems for state science assessment. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
  28. Pekrun R, Goetz T, Perry RP, Kramer K, Hochstadt M, Molfenter S.(2004). Beyond test anxiety: Development and validation of the Test Emotions Questionnaire (TEQ) Anxiety, Stress, & Coping. An International Journal. 17, 287–316.
  29. Scaffidi, C., Shaw, M., & Myers, B. (2005). Estimating the numbers of end users and end user programmers. Paper presented at the 2005 IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages and Human-Centric Computing (VL/HCC'05).
  30. Sternberg, R.J., & Sternberg, K. (2012). Cognitive psychology (6th ed.). Belmont, California: Wadsworth.
  31. AUTHOR. (2016). Incorporating Touch-Based Tablets into Classroom Activities: Fostering Children's Computational Thinking through iPad Integrated Instruction. In Handbook of Research on Mobile Learning in Contemporary Classrooms (pp. 378-406). IGI Global.
  32. Walser, N. (2011). Spotlight on Technology in Education. No. 7 in the Harvard Education Letter Spotlight Series. Harvard Education Press, Cambridge, MA.
  33. Wilson, A., & Moffat, D.C. (2010, September). Evaluating Scratch to introduce younger schoolchildren to programming. In Proc. Of the Psychology of Programming Interest Group Workshop, Madrid/Espanha.
  34. Wolman, J.M., Campeau, P.L., DuBois, R A., Mithaug, D.E., & Stolarski, V.S. (1994). AIR selfdetermination scale and user guide. Palo Alto, CA: American Institutes for Research.
  35. Wyeth, P. & Purchase, H. (2002). Designing technology for children: Moving from the computer into the physical world with electronic blocks, Information Technology in Childhood Education Annual, 2002, pp. 219-244.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.

Suggest Corrections to References

Also Read

Related Collections