Illustration of paradigm pluralism in computing education research

This paper argues for paradigm pluralism in computing education research. The value of mixing paradigms, and the choice of methodological eclecticism and mixed methods is explored using pragmatic knowledge claims. A research study, which focused on the design of an introductory object-oriented programming (OOP) course for undergraduate students, is introduced as an illustration of paradigm pluralism. The study demonstrates methodological eclecticism and use of mixed methods for data collection and analysis. Meaningful outcomes resulting from the choice of the research design are described. A framework that focuses on the research problem and research questions to guide research design is presented as the outcome of the study. Through the discussion and demonstration of paradigm pluralism, this paper contributes to increased awareness of theoretically anchored research in computer science.

[1]  E. Guba,et al.  Paradigmatic Controversies, Contradictions, and Emerging Confluences. , 2005 .

[2]  J. Biggs.  Student Approaches to Learning and Studying , 1987 .

[3]  R. Bullough,et al.  Guidelines for Quality in Autobiographical Forms of Self-Study Research , 2001 .

[4]  Thomas W. Christ,et al.  Designing, Teaching, and Evaluating Two Complementary Mixed Methods Research Courses , 2009 .

[5]  N. Denzin.  Moments, Mixed Methods, and Paradigm Dialogs , 2010 .

[6]  Ronan G. Reilly,et al.  Predicting introductory programming performance: A multi-institutional multivariate study , 2006, Comput. Sci. Educ..

[7]  Angela Carbone,et al.  An exploration of internal factors influencing student learning of programming , 2009, ACE '09.

[8]  G. Anderson,et al.  The Action Research Dissertation: A Guide for Students and Faculty , 2005 .

[9]  Susan Wiedenbeck,et al.  Factors affecting the success of non-majors in learning to program , 2005, ICER '05.

[10]  Cecilia Jacobs,et al.  The Evaluation of Educational Innovation , 2000 .

[11]  John W. Creswell,et al.  Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research , 2006 .

[12]  Janet Rountree,et al.  Interacting factors that predict success and failure in a CS1 course , 2004, ACM SIGCSE Bull..

[13]  A. T. Chamillard.  Using student performance predictions in a computer science curriculum , 2006, ITICSE '06.

[14]  M. Patton,et al.  Qualitative evaluation and research methods , 1992 .

[15]  Anders Berglund,et al.  Learning computer systems in a distributed project course : The what, why, how and where , 2012 .

[16]  D. Ezzy.  Qualitative Analysis: Practice and Innovation , 2002 .

[17]  T. Christ.  Teaching Mixed Methods and Action Research: Pedagogical, Practical, and Evaluative Considerations , 2010 .

[18]  N. Leech,et al.  On Becoming a Pragmatic Researcher: The Importance of Combining Quantitative and Qualitative Research Methodologies , 2005 .

[19]  J. Biggs,et al.  The revised two-factor Study Process Questionnaire: R-SPQ-2F. , 2001, The British journal of educational psychology.

[20]  Kathleen M. T. Collins,et al.  Ten Points about Mixed Methods Research to be Considered by the Novice Researcher , 2009 .

[21]  Leen-Kiat Soh,et al.  An integrated framework for improved Computer Science Education: Strategies, implementations, and results , 2007, Comput. Sci. Educ..

[22]  Jack Whitehead,et al.  Doing and writing action research , 2009 .

[23]  Patti Lather.  Issues of validity in openly ideological research: Between a rock and a soft place , 1986 .

[24]  Anthony V. Robins,et al.  Learning edge momentum: a new account of outcomes in CS1 , 2010, Comput. Sci. Educ..

[25]  N. Denzin,et al.  Introduction: The Discipline and Practice of Qualitative Research. , 2005 .

[26]  D. Morgan.  Paradigms Lost and Pragmatism Regained , 2007 .

[27]  F. Marton,et al.  Learning and Awareness , 1997 .

[28]  E. Guba.  The alternative paradigm dialog. , 1990 .

[29]  K. Howe.  Against the Quantitative-Qualitative Incompatibility Thesis or Dogmas Die Hard , 1988 .

[30]  Lauri Malmi,et al.  Problems in Problem-Based Learning - Experiences, Analysis and Lessons Learned on an Introductory Programming Course , 2005, Informatics Educ..

[31]  Graham Hitchcock,et al.  Research and the teacher , 1989 .

[32]  Orit Hazzan,et al.  Qualitative research in computer science education , 2006, SIGCSE '06.

[33]  D. Mertens.  Transformative Paradigm , 2007 .

[34]  Judithe Sheard,et al.  Analysis of research into the teaching and learning of programming , 2009, ICER '09.

[35]  Valerie J. Caracelli,et al.  Toward a Conceptual Framework for Mixed-Method Evaluation Designs , 1989 .

[36]  Lawrence Buckingham,et al.  Ways of Experiencing the Act of Learning to Program: A Phenomenographic Study of Introductory Programming Students at University , 2004, J. Inf. Technol. Educ..

[37]  A. Tashakkori.  OVERVIEW OF CONTEMPORARY ISSUES IN MIXED METHODS RESEARCH , 2010 .

[38]  Kathleen M. T. Collins,et al.  A Model Incorporating the Rationale and Purpose for Conducting Mixed-Methods Research in Special Education and Beyond , 2006 .

[39]  R. Winter.  Some Principles and Procedures for the Conduct of Action Research , 2003 .

[40]  J. Greene.  Is Mixed Methods Social Inquiry a Distinctive Methodology? , 2008 .

[41]  Arnold Pears,et al.  Structuring CSed research studies: connecting the pieces , 2003 .

[42]  A. Onwuegbuzie,et al.  Mixed Methods Research: A Research Paradigm Whose Time Has Come , 2004 .

[43]  John Mingers,et al.  Combining IS Research Methods: Towards a Pluralist Methodology , 2001, Inf. Syst. Res..

[44]  J. McNiff.  Action Research Principles and Practice , 1988 .

[45]  L. Cohen,et al.  Research Methods in Education , 1980 .

[46]  Peter Honey.  The repertory grid in action , 1979 .

[47]  Neena Thota,et al.  Holistic approach to learning and teaching introductory object-oriented programming , 2010, Comput. Sci. Educ..

[48]  Jean McNiff,et al.  You and your action research project , 1988 .

[49]  David Gries.  A principled approach to teaching OO first , 2008, SIGCSE '08.

[50]  Anders Berglund,et al.  What does it take to learn 'programming thinking'? , 2005, ICER '05.

[51]  M. Crotty.  The Foundations of Social Research: Meaning and Perspective in the Research Process , 1998 .

[52]  Tony Greening.  Paradigms for educational research in computer science , 1997, ACSE '97.

[53]  Sally Fincher,et al.  Computer Science Education Research , 2004 .

[54]  Gary L. Anderson,et al.  The New Paradigm Wars: Is There Room for Rigorous Practitioner Knowledge in Schools and Universities? , 1999 .

[55]  Tony Clear.  Research paradigms and the nature of meaning and truth , 2001, SGCS.

[56]  D. Schoen,et al.  The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action , 1985 .

[57]  Kathleen M. T. Collins,et al.  A Mixed Methods Investigation of Mixed Methods Sampling Designs in Social and Health Science Research , 2007 .

[58]  Shirley Booth,et al.  Learning to program : a phenomenographic perspective , 1992 .