Classroom observations showed experimental students readily adopted the three approaches but still made mistakes with abstract concepts and problem decomposition¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q1
Currency · newest study 2013 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q1 i? The researcher observed that students easily grasped the three approaches, developed CFC sentences over time, but sometimes still made mistakes with abstract concepts like memory and disk allocations and failed at decomposing problems into subproblems. → Çakiroğlu 2013

Evidence¶

Çakiroğlu 2013¶

Çakiroğlu, Ü. (2013). Using a hybrid approach to facilitate learning introductory programming. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 12(1), 161-177. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1008878

q1 · i? · causal · r2

Qualitative classroom observations of the experimental group during the 10-week intervention, interpreted alongside the quantitative results. The article also notes "some analogies in programming concepts (memory, arrays, variables, stacks, etc.) were taught to the EG" and that analogies took the instructor extra time.

"During the intervention the researcher generally observed that students easily grasped the use of three new approaches. At the beginning they used CFC in informal ways within their own sentences, but they learnt to develop CFC sentences in time."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Experimental-group students who used all three approaches in their posttest answers tended to earn higher scores — related
• Experimental-group students taught with the hybrid CFC-analogy-template approach scored significantly higher than control-group students on the overall posttest (ProKT) — related
• Peer review helped students notice their own mistakes through reviewing others' work — related