Can first-year students program yet?: a study revisited

Authors:
Robert McCartney;Jonas Boustedt;Anna Eckerdal;Kate Sanders;Carol Zander
Affiliations:
University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT, USA;University of Gävle, Gävle, Sweden;Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden;Rhode Island College, Providence, RI, USA;University of Washington Bothell, Bothell, WI, USA
Venue:
Proceedings of the ninth annual international ACM conference on International computing education research
Year:
2013

Citing 7
Cited 1

A multi-national, multi-institutional study of assessment of programming skills of first-year CS students

ACM SIGCSE Bulletin
An Empirical Analysis of Roles of Variables in Novice-Level Procedural Programs

HCC '02 Proceedings of the IEEE 2002 Symposia on Human Centric Computing Languages and Environments (HCC'02)
A multi-national study of reading and tracing skills in novice programmers

Working group reports from ITiCSE on Innovation and technology in computer science education
Weighted primary trait analysis for computer program evaluation

Journal of Computing Sciences in Colleges
Commonsense computing: what students know before we teach (episode 1: sorting)

Proceedings of the second international workshop on Computing education research
Evaluating a new exam question: Parsons problems

ICER '08 Proceedings of the Fourth international Workshop on Computing Education Research
Ten years after the McCracken Working Group

ACM Inroads

A fresh look at novice programmers' performance and their teachers' expectations

Proceedings of the ITiCSE working group reports conference on Innovation and technology in computer science education-working group reports

Quantified Score

Hi-index	0.00

Visualization

Abstract

The McCracken et al. working group paper is often cited for the proposition that students can't program. In that study, students from four different institutions were each assigned to implement one of three versions of a calculator. More than half of the students failed to produce a program that compiled and executed in the time assigned. Lost in this discussion, however, is the fact that the original paper had the goal of evaluating its instrument, as well as the students. We examine and adjust their instrument, and present the results of the revised study. With a modifed instrument, we have obtained significantly improved results.