1 / 14

Comparing two free programming projects used in introductory programming courses

Comparing two free programming projects used in introductory programming courses. Quintin Cutts, University of Glasgow Stephan Jamieson, Durham University. Motivations for FPP. Engagement Students with a wide range of abilities. Continual development. Cut loose, consolidate, catch-up.

yitta
Download Presentation

Comparing two free programming projects used in introductory programming courses

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Comparing two free programming projects used in introductory programming courses Quintin Cutts, University of Glasgow Stephan Jamieson, Durham University Supported by HEA-ICS General Development Fund

  2. Motivations for FPP • Engagement • Students with a wide range of abilities. • Continual development. • Cut loose, consolidate, catch-up. • Motivating learning • Personal interests. • Encourage ownership.

  3. Durham FPP • Announced in first lecture. • Web page with last year’s projects. • Ideas from current cohort added during term. • Runs in last fortnight of term 1. • After 4th Study block • Optionally over Christmas and into 1st week term 2. • Focus on consolidation. • Exemplar “gold standard” project. • Strongly encourage participation. • 1st summative assessment soon after.

  4. Glasgow FPP(S) • 2 FPPs • Ownership and engagement • Options… • FPP1 in week 8 – specification, plan, program. • Optionally start FPP1 in week 7. • Optionally over further 5 weeks. • FPP2 optional • Weekly exercises • Students must complete 2/3 of exercises. • FPP counts as one credit. • Explicit “catch-up”/FPP periods.

  5. Evaluation • Analysis of artefacts submitted by students • Focus groups conducted at each institution • Follow up questionnaire • Conducted at Durham • 21 valid responses (~25% of the cohort)

  6. Student projects Glasgow FPP1: • 97 of 157 students submitted at least a specification document. • 65 had running programs (~40%). • Tasks chosen mostly games: connect 4, blackjack, hangman, alternatives include encryption, decryption program,… Glasgow FPP2: • Fewer participants (~20%), more ambitious e.g. gene sequencer.

  7. Durham: • 91 students enrolled on the course, 72 attempted a project. • All but handful had a “running program”. • Wide range in complexity: “how happy is the sun?”, to XML adventure game. • Projects generally games, but also simulations (cyber pets, ant colonies, burger van business), cipher/deciphers (incl morse code translator).

  8. Engagement • Cutting loose: • Durham XML adventure game system, Glasgow gene sequencer… • Consolidation: • Asked about gains, responses positive. • 5 of 21 (~24%) indicate greater confidence “the knowledge that I can create a whole program, and it isn’t as hard as it looks”. • “[The FPP] used it all at once. You had to think about what to do” • Catch-up: • Glasgow students made good use of opt out. • Opt-in is a resource issue.

  9. Ownership of learning • “The whole concept of it, write your own program, write something that you want to write, work on your own through it, learn from your own mistakes” [Glasgow] • “Adding to the project as new blocks arrive is a fun way to cover the block material” [Durham]

  10. ~60% of Durham cohort tried out something new. • Asked if felt pressure to learn more Java. • 8 out of 21 (~40%) indicated positive investment. “I wanted to make something visually lovely and that sounded good”. • On assessment… • “…ultimately it’s your thing, and if you think it’s good and it works then that should be accepted by your tutor”

  11. Choosing and designing • “once you know what you’re going to do, you can just get on and do it. But it’s quite easy to get stuck with lots of bits of paper, wondering what to do.” • “… and it seems like one problem leads on to another. It’s like ‘I need this, oh no wait, to make that I’m going to need this’, ‘for this I’m going to need this”, but to make this I …, go back where I started”

  12. Expectations • “[It would] put a lot of pressure on people if you started knowing exactly what standard was expected before you start” [Glasgow] • “…some like the robot game made it look like I should be doing something awesome” [Durham] • “I think people have got to realise that it’s not that easy and you should be a bit less ambitious”

  13. Inverted expectations • “if we write our own program then we may end up with something we’d actually use” • “…getting credits for something you thought of on your own” • “it’s funny that computing, considered as one of the least creative subjects, gives you the most creativity in first year, which is quite cool”

  14. A Final Pearl… “Programming after five dark rums is a bad idea.”

More Related