Exploring Student Behavior Using the TIPP&SEE Learning Strategy

With the rise of Computational Thinking (CT) instruction at the elementary level, it is imperative for elementary computing instruction to support a variety of learners. TIPP&SEE is a meta-cognitive learning strategy that scaffolds student learning when learning from example code. Results from a previous study show statistically-significant performance differences favoring students using the TIPP&SEE strategy on a written assessment. In this work, our goal is gain insight as to it why such dramatic learning differences may have occurred. We analyze the students' computational artifacts and TIPP&SEE worksheets. Artifact analysis reveals that students in the TIPP&SEE group are more thorough in their work, completing more elements of the required tasks. In addition, they build open-ended projects with longer scripts that utilize more learned blocks. Worksheet analysis shows that students were highly accurate on some types of questions but largely skipped others. Despite these positive behaviors, there was little statistical correlation between student worksheet correctness, project completion, and written assessment performance. Therefore, while students in the TIPP&SEE group performed actions we believe lead to more success, no individual actions directly explain the results. Like other meta-cognitive strategies, the value of TIPP&SEE may lie in cognitive processes not directly observable, and may vary based upon individual student differences.

[1]  Jacob Cohen Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences , 1969, The SAGE Encyclopedia of Research Design.

[2]  David C. Webb,et al.  Toward an emergent theory of broadening participation in computer science education , 2012, SIGCSE '12.

[3]  Sharlene A. Kiuhara,et al.  A Meta-Analysis of Writing Instruction for Students in the Elementary Grades. , 2012 .

[4]  Michail N. Giannakos,et al.  A Global Snapshot of Computer Science Education in K-12 Schools , 2015, ITiCSE-WGR.

[5]  Amy J. Ko,et al.  Comparing the Effectiveness of Online Learning Approaches on CS1 Learning Outcomes , 2015, ICER.

[6]  Roy D. Pea,et al.  Designing for deeper learning in a blended computer science course for middle school students , 2015, Comput. Sci. Educ..

[7]  Yasmin B. Kafai,et al.  Ethnocomputing with electronic textiles: culturally responsive open design to broaden participation in computing in American indian youth and communities , 2014, SIGCSE.

[8]  Diana Franklin,et al.  K-8 Learning Trajectories Derived from Research Literature: Sequence, Repetition, Conditionals , 2017, ICER.

[9]  Daniel D. Garcia,et al.  Introduction to the special issue on concurrent and parallel programming , 2013, TOCE.

[10]  Robert J. Mislevy,et al.  Implications of Evidence‐Centered Design for Educational Testing , 2007 .

[11]  Joyce Malyn-Smith,et al.  Computational thinking for youth in practice , 2011, INROADS.

[12]  Mitchel Resnick,et al.  Programming by choice: urban youth learning programming with scratch , 2008, SIGCSE '08.

[13]  Diana Franklin,et al.  Assessment of computer science learning in a scratch-based outreach program , 2013, SIGCSE '13.

[14]  Diana Franklin,et al.  Differentiating for Diversity: Using Universal Design for Learning in Elementary Computer Science Education , 2016, SIGCSE.

[15]  S. D. L. Paz Effects of Historical Reasoning Instruction and Writing Strategy Mastery in Culturally and Academically Diverse Middle School Classrooms. , 2005 .

[16]  Sue Sentance,et al.  Teachers' Experiences of using PRIMM to Teach Programming in School , 2019, SIGCSE.

[17]  Yifat Ben-David Kolikant Gardeners and Cinema Tickets: High School Students' Preconceptions of Concurrency , 2001, Comput. Sci. Educ..

[18]  UrnessTimothy,et al.  Generating interest in computer science through middle-school Android summer camps , 2013 .

[19]  Eric D. Manley,et al.  Generating interest in computer science through middle-school Android summer camps , 2013 .

[20]  M. Csíkszentmihályi Flow and the Foundations of Positive Psychology , 2014 .

[21]  Ursula Fuller,et al.  Is Bloom's taxonomy appropriate for computer science? , 2006, Baltic Sea '06.

[22]  M. Montague,et al.  The Effects of Cognitive and Metacognitive Strategy Instruction on the Mathematical Problem Solving of Middle School Students with Learning Disabilities , 1992, Journal of learning disabilities.

[23]  Juha Sorva,et al.  Notional machines and introductory programming education , 2013, TOCE.

[24]  Margaret M. Burnett,et al.  Principles of a debugging-first puzzle game for computing education , 2014, 2014 IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages and Human-Centric Computing (VL/HCC).

[25]  D. Kostons,et al.  Effectiveness of learning strategy instruction on academic performance: A meta-analysis , 2014 .

[26]  Mitchel Resnick,et al.  Designing ScratchJr: support for early childhood learning through computer programming , 2013, IDC.

[27]  Richard T. White,et al.  Book Review: Evaluating the Quality of Learning: The SOLO Taxonomy (Structure of the Observed Learning Outcome) , 1983 .

[28]  Robert McCartney,et al.  Commonsense computing (episode 3): concurrency and concert tickets , 2007, ICER '07.

[29]  Nicholas Lytle,et al.  Use, Modify, Create: Comparing Computational Thinking Lesson Progressions for STEM Classes , 2019, ITiCSE.

[30]  Stephen J. H. Yang,et al.  Effects of Annotations and Homework on Learning Achievement: An Empirical Study of Scratch Programming Pedagogy , 2015, J. Educ. Technol. Soc..

[31]  Barbara Ericson,et al.  Effective and sustainable computing summer camps , 2012, SIGCSE '12.

[32]  L. Vygotsky Interaction between learning and development , 1978 .

[33]  Sharon Vaughn,et al.  Using Collaborative Strategic Reading , 1998 .

[34]  Carsten Schulte,et al.  Block Model: an educational model of program comprehension as a tool for a scholarly approach to teaching , 2008, ICER '08.

[35]  S. Dymock Teaching Expository Text Structure Awareness , 2005 .

[36]  Thomas E. Scruggs,et al.  Mnemonic Strategies: Evidence-Based Practice and Practice-Based Evidence , 2010 .

[37]  Jean Salac,et al.  If They Build It, Will They Understand It? Exploring the Relationship between Student Code and Performance , 2020, ITiCSE.

[38]  Alison G. Boardman,et al.  Efficacy of Collaborative Strategic Reading With Middle School Students* , 2011 .

[39]  W. Schneider,et al.  COGNITIVE STRA TEGIES : GOOD STRATEGY USERS COORDINATE METACOGNITION AND KNOWLEDGE , 2010 .

[40]  Fred Martin,et al.  Computing with a community focus: outcomes from an app inventor summer camp for middle school students , 2016 .

[41]  Jean Salac,et al.  TIPP&SEE: A Learning Strategy to Guide Students through Use - Modify Scratch Activities , 2020, SIGCSE.

[42]  Kathleen F. McCoy,et al.  Increasing high school girls' self confidence and awareness of CS through a positive summer experience , 2004, SIGCSE '04.

[43]  Alexander Repenning,et al.  The zones of proximal flow: guiding students through a space of computational thinking skills and challenges , 2013, ICER.

[44]  Yasmin B. Kafai,et al.  The writers' workshop for youth programmers: digital storytelling with scratch in middle school classrooms , 2012, SIGCSE '12.

[45]  D. Krathwohl A Revision of Bloom's Taxonomy: An Overview , 2002 .

[46]  Alexander Repenning,et al.  Broadening participation through scalable game design , 2008, SIGCSE '08.

[47]  Susan Chambers Cantrell Effective Teaching and Literacy Learning: A Look Inside Primary Classrooms. , 1999 .

[48]  Ursula Fuller,et al.  Developing a computer science-specific learning taxonomy , 2007, ITiCSE-WGR '07.

[49]  K. Topping,et al.  Effective literacy teaching behaviours , 2005 .