Strategies that students use to trace code: an analysis based in grounded theory

ABSTRACT

How do beginning students approach problems which require them to read and understand code? We report on a Grounded Theory-based analysis of student transcripts from 12 institutions where students were asked to "think aloud" when solving such problems. We identify 19 strategies used by students. Primary results are that all students employ a range of strategies, there were (in total) many different strategies that were applied, students use multiple strategies on each individual problem, students applied different strategies to different types of questions, and students often applied strategies poorly. We show that strategies conform with existing education theories including Bloom's Taxonomy and the Approaches to Study Inventory. Additionally, we discuss emergent theories developed through a card sort process.

References

1. Bloom, B. S., Mesia, B. B. and Krathwohl, D. R. Taxonomy of Educational Objectives (two vols: The Affective Domain & The Cognitive Domain). Addison-Wesley, 1956.
2. Borgatti, S. Introduction to Grounded Theory, <http://www.analytictech.com/mb870/introtoGT.htm> (last accessed April 29, 2005).
3. Bush, M. Alternative Marking Schemes for On-Line Multiple-Choice Tests. In Proceedings of the Seventh Annual Conference on the Teaching of Computing (Belfast, Ireland, 1997). CTI Computing, 1999.
4. du Boulay, J. B. H., O'Shea, T. and Monk, J. The black box inside the glass box: Presenting computing concepts to novices. In E. Soloway and J.C. Spohrer (Eds), Studying the Novice Programmer. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, 1989, 431-446. Reprinted from du Boulay, O'Shea and Monk (1981).
5. Entwistle, N.J. and Tait, H. The Revised Approaches to Study Inventory. Edinburgh: Centre for Learning and Instruction, University of Edinburgh, 1994.
6. Farthing, D. W., Jones, D.M., McPhee, D. Permutational Multiple-Choice Questions: An Objective and Efficient Alternative to Essay-Type Examination Questions. In Proceedings of the Third Annual Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education (ITiCSE '98), (Dublin City University, Ireland, August 18-28, 1998). ACM Press, New York, NY, 1998, 81-85.
7. Glaser, B.G. and Strauss, A.L. The discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Aldine: Chicago, 1967.
8. Grounded Theory: a thumbnail sketch, <http://www.scu.edu.au/schools/gcm/ar/arp/grounded.html> (last accessed April 29, 2005).
9. Lawson, A.E., Karplus, R. and Adi, H. The acquisition of logic and formal operational schemata during the secondary school years. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 15, 6 (1978), 465-478.
10. Learning Domains or Bloom's Taxonomy, <http://www.nwlink.com/ donclark/hrd/bloom.html> (last accessed August 18, 2005).
11. Learning Skills Program: Bloom's Taxonomy, <http://www.coun.uvic.ca/learn/program/hndouts/bloom.html>, (last accessed August 18, 2005).
12. Lister, R. Personal communication, 2005.
13. Lister, R. Objectives and Objective Assessment in CSl. In Proceedings of the thirty-second SIGCSE technical symposium on Computer Science Education (SIGCSE 2001) (Charlotte, NC, USA, February 21-25, 2001). ACM Press, New York, NY, 2001, 292-296.
14. Lister, R. On Blooming First Year Programming, and its Blooming Assessment. In Proceedings of the fourth Australasian computing education conference (ACE 2000) Melbourne, Australia, December, 2000). ACM Press, New York, NY, 2000, 158-162
15. Lister, R., Adams, E., Fitzgerald, S., Fone, W., Hamer, J., Lindholm, M., McCartney, R., Mostrom, J. E., Sanders, K., Seppala, O., Simon, B. and Thomas, L., A Multi-National Study of Reading and Tracing Skills in Novice Programmers. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 36, 4 (December 2004), 119-150.
16. McCartney, R., Mostrom, J.E., Sanders, K., and Seppala, O. Take note: The effectiveness of novice programmers' annotations on examinations. Informatics in Education. 4. 1, (2005), 69-86.
17. McCracken, M., Almstrum, V., Diaz, D., Guzdial, M., Hagen, D., Kolikant, Y., Laxer, C., Thomas, L., Utting, I., and Wilusz, T. A Multi-National, Multi-Institutional Study of Assessment of Programming Skills of First-Year CS Students. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 33, 4 (2001), 125-140.
18. Perkins, D. and Martin, F. Fragile Knowledge and Neglected Strategies in Novice Programmers. In Soloway, E. and Iyengar, S. (Eds). Empirical Studies of Programmers. Ablex, NJ, USA, 1986, 213-229.
19. Richardson, J. T. E., Using Questionnaires to Evaluate Student Learning: Some Health Warnings. Gibbs, G. (ed.) Improving Student Learning - Theory and Practice. Oxford: Oxford Centre for Staff Development, 1994. (<http://www.city.londonmet.ac.uk/deliberations/ocsd-pubs/isltp-richardson.html> )
20. Robins, A., Rountree, J., and Rountree, N. Learning and Teaching Programming: A Review and Discussion, Computer Science Education, 13, 2 (2003), 137-172.
21. Rugg, G., and McGeorge, P. The sorting techniques: a tutorial paper on card sorts, picture sorts and item sorts. Expert Systems, 14, 2 (1997), 80-93.
22. Soloway, E. and Iyengar, S. (Eds). Empirical Studies of Programmers. Ablex, NJ, USA, 1986.
23. Soloway, E. and Spohrer, J. (Eds). Studying the Novice Programmer. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ, 1989.

Index Terms

• Social and professional topics

  • Professional topics

    • Computing education

      • Computing education programs

        • Computer science education