Comparison of Learning Programming Between Interactive Computer Tutors and Human Teachers

People typically learn programming from teachers in in-person courses or online tutorials. Interactive computer tutors---systems that deliver learning content interactively---have become more prevalent in online settings for teaching skills such as computer programming. Research has shown the efficiency and effectiveness of learning programming from teachers, interactive computer tutors, and a combination of both. However, there is limited understanding of learners' comparative perspectives about their experience learning from these different resources. We conducted an exploratory study using semi-structured interviews, recruiting 20 participants that had experience learning programming from both teachers and interactive computer tutors. We identified factors that learners like and dislike from both learning methods and discussed the strengths and weaknesses of them. Based on our findings, we propose suggestions for designers of interactive computer tutors, and for programming educators.

[1]  R. Weiss.  Learning from strangers : the art and method of qualitative interview studies , 1995 .

[2]  Karsten Lundqvist,et al.  Teaching programming to beginners in a massive open online course , 2014 .

[3]  J. Grimshaw,et al.  What is an adequate sample size? Operationalising data saturation for theory-based interview studies , 2010, Psychology & health.

[4]  Chen-Lin C. Kulik,et al.  Educational Outcomes of Tutoring: A Meta-analysis of Findings , 1982 .

[5]  Ulrik Schroeder,et al.  What Drives a Successful MOOC? An Empirical Examination of Criteria to Assure Design Quality of MOOCs , 2014, 2014 IEEE 14th International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies.

[6]  David Pritchard,et al.  CS circles: an in-browser python course for beginners , 2012, SIGCSE '13.

[7]  Christoph Meinel,et al.  Towards practical programming exercises and automated assessment in Massive Open Online Courses , 2015, 2015 IEEE International Conference on Teaching, Assessment, and Learning for Engineering (TALE).

[8]  J. Gregory Trafton,et al.  Effective Tutoring Techniques: A Comparison of Human Tutors and Intelligent Tutoring Systems , 1992 .

[9]  Victor C. S. Lee,et al.  Learning motivation in e-learning facilitated computer programming courses , 2010, Comput. Educ..

[10]  Scott Rixner,et al.  An environment for learning interactive programming , 2014, SIGCSE '14.

[11]  Barbara A. Fox.  Cognitive and interactional aspects of correction in tutoring , 1991 .

[12]  Kevin A Hallgren,et al.  Computing Inter-Rater Reliability for Observational Data: An Overview and Tutorial. , 2012, Tutorials in quantitative methods for psychology.

[13]  Herbert Snyder,et al.  Qualitative interviewing: The art of hearing data , 1996 .

[14]  Aharon Yadin,et al.  Reducing the dropout rate in an introductory programming course , 2011, INROADS.

[15]  P. Chisnall.  Qualitative Interviewing: The Art of Hearing Data , 1996 .

[16]  John L. Campbell,et al.  Coding In-depth Semistructured Interviews , 2013 .

[17]  An Yan,et al.  Predicting abandonment in online coding tutorials , 2017, 2017 IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages and Human-Centric Computing (VL/HCC).

[18]  Choo-Yee Ting,et al.  Learning Difficulties in Programming Courses: Undergraduates' Perspective and Perception , 2009, 2009 International Conference on Computer Technology and Development.

[19]  Mark Guzdial.  Limitations of MOOCs for Computing Education- Addressing our needs: MOOCs and technology to advance learning and learning research (Ubiquity symposium) , 2014, UBIQ.

[20]  Christopher Watson,et al.  A systematic review of approaches for teaching introductory programming and their influence on success , 2014, ICER '14.

[21]  Jane Sinclair,et al.  Dropout rates of massive open online courses : behavioural patterns , 2014 .

[22]  Amy J. Ko,et al.  Personifying programming tool feedback improves novice programmers' learning , 2011, ICER.

[23]  Li Yuan,et al.  MOOCs and open education: Implications for higher education , 2013 .

[24]  P. Gill,et al.  Methods of data collection in qualitative research: interviews and focus groups , 2008, BDJ.

[25]  Janet Rountree,et al.  Learning and Teaching Programming: A Review and Discussion , 2003, Comput. Sci. Educ..

[26]  S. Berg.  Snowball Sampling—I , 2006 .

[27]  John R. Anderson,et al.  The automated tutoring of introductory computer programming , 1986, CACM.

[28]  Lauri Malmi,et al.  Why students drop out CS1 course? , 2006, ICER '06.

[29]  Briana B. Morrison,et al.  Khan academy gamifies computer science , 2014, SIGCSE.

[30]  Lauri Malmi,et al.  A survey of literature on the teaching of introductory programming , 2007, ITiCSE-WGR '07.

[31]  Chee-Wee Tan,et al.  Towards a Model of Collaborative Intention: An Empirical Investigation of a Massive Online Open Course (MOOC) , 2018, HICSS.

[32]  Philip J. Guo.  Codeopticon: Real-Time, One-To-Many Human Tutoring for Computer Programming , 2015, UIST.

[33]  Amy J. Ko,et al.  In-game assessments increase novice programmers' engagement and level completion speed , 2013, ICER.

[34]  K. Malterud,et al.  Sample Size in Qualitative Interview Studies , 2016, Qualitative health research.

[35]  T. Marteau,et al.  The Place of Inter-Rater Reliability in Qualitative Research: An Empirical Study , 1997 .

[36]  Brian L. F. Daku,et al.  An interactive computer-based tutorial for MATLAB , 2000, 30th Annual Frontiers in Education Conference. Building on A Century of Progress in Engineering Education. Conference Proceedings (IEEE Cat. No.00CH37135).

[37]  MoserRobert.  A fantasy adventure game as a learning environment , 1997 .

[38]  H. Rubin,et al.  Qualitative Interviewing: The Art of Hearing Data , 1995 .

[39]  Robert Moser,et al.  A fantasy adventure game as a learning environment: why learning to program is so difficult and what can be done about it , 1997, ITiCSE '97.

[40]  Kalyan Veeramachaneni,et al.  Likely to stop? Predicting Stopout in Massive Open Online Courses , 2014, ArXiv.

[41]  John R. Anderson,et al.  An Interactive Computer-Based Tutor for LISP , 1984, AAAI.

[42]  Gerhard Fischer,et al.  Beyond hype and underestimation: identifying research challenges for the future of MOOCs , 2014 .

[43]  B. Bloom.  The 2 Sigma Problem: The Search for Methods of Group Instruction as Effective as One-to-One Tutoring , 1984 .