The BRACElet 2009.1 (Wellington) specification

BRACElet is a multi-institutional computer education research study of novice programmers. The project is open to new members. The purpose of this paper is to: (1) provide potential new members with an overview of BRACElet, and (2) specify the common core for the next data collection cycle. In this paper, BRACElet is taking the unusual step of making its study design public before data is collected. We invite anyone to run their own study using our study design, and publish their findings, irrespective of whether they formally join BRACElet. We look forward to reading their paper.

[1]  Patricia Haden,et al.  Parson's programming puzzles: a fun and effective learning tool for first programming courses , 2006 .

[2]  Jenny Edwards,et al.  The teaching of novice computer programmers: bringing the scholarly-research approach to Australia , 2008, ACE '08.

[3]  Benjamin S. Bloom,et al.  A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom's Taxonomy of Educational Objectives , 2000 .

[4]  B. Adelson.  When Novices Surpass Experts: The Difficulty of a Task May Increase With Expertise , 1984 .

[5]  Phil Robbins,et al.  Report on the fourth BRACElet workshop , 2007 .

[6]  S. Kemmis,et al.  Becoming Critical: Education Knowledge and Action Research , 1986 .

[7]  Jacqueline Whalley,et al.  Decoding doodles: novice programmers and their annotations , 2007 .

[8]  Beth Simon,et al.  Evaluating a new exam question: Parsons problems , 2008, ICER '08.

[9]  Errol Thompson,et al.  Bloom's taxonomy for CS assessment , 2008, ACE '08.

[10]  Angela Carbone,et al.  Going SOLO to assess novice programmers , 2008, SIGCSE 2008.

[11]  Raymond Lister.  The Neglected Middle Novice Programmer: Reading and Writing without Abstracting , 2007 .

[12]  Raymond Lister,et al.  Not seeing the forest for the trees: novice programmers and the SOLO taxonomy , 2006, ITICSE '06.

[13]  Lynda Thomas,et al.  Scaffolding with object diagrams in first year programming classes: some unexpected results , 2004 .

[14]  Robert McCartney,et al.  Questions, annotations and institutions: observations from a study of novice programmers , 2004 .

[15]  David Ginat.  Learning from wrong and creative algorithm design , 2008, SIGCSE '08.

[16]  Tony Clear,et al.  An Australasian study of reading and comprehension skills in novice programmers, using the bloom and SOLO taxonomies , 2006 .

[17]  Robert McCartney,et al.  A multi-national study of reading and tracing skills in novice programmers , 2004, ITiCSE-WGR '04.

[18]  Angela Carbone,et al.  Reliably classifying novice programmer exam responses using the SOLO taxonomy , 2008 .

[19]  Tony Clear,et al.  Multi-institutional, multi-national studies in CSEd Research: some design considerations and trade-offs , 2005, ICER '05.

[20]  H. Simon,et al.  Perception in chess , 1973 .

[21]  ThomasLynda,et al.  Scaffolding with object diagrams in first year programming classes , 2004 .

[22]  Angela Carbone,et al.  Going SOLO to assess novice programmers , 2008, ITiCSE.

[23]  Kevin F. Collis,et al.  Evaluating the Quality of Learning: The SOLO Taxonomy , 1977 .

[24]  Susan Bergin,et al.  Automated assessment in CS1 , 2006 .

[25]  Raymond Lister,et al.  Relationships between reading, tracing and writing skills in introductory programming , 2008, ICER '08.

[26]  Raymond Lister,et al.  Code classification as a learning and asssessment exercise for novice programmers , 2006 .

[27]  Tony Clear,et al.  The many ways of the BRACElet project , 2007 .

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

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