The Computer Journal
User-tailorable systems: pressing the issues with buttons
CHI '90 Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
The design of children's technology
The design of children's technology
Alice: lessons learned from building a 3D system for novices
Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
Python and Tkinter programming
Python and Tkinter programming
Studying the language and structure in non-programmers' solutions to programming problems
International Journal of Human-Computer Studies
Using HCI Techniques to Design a More Usable Programming System
HCC '02 Proceedings of the IEEE 2002 Symposia on Human Centric Computing Languages and Environments (HCC'02)
Mulspren: a MUltiple Language Simulation PRogramming ENvironment
HCC '02 Proceedings of the IEEE 2002 Symposia on Human Centric Computing Languages and Environments (HCC'02)
A language and task-based taxonomy of programming environments
HCC '03 Proceedings of the 2003 IEEE Symposium on Human Centric Computing Languages and Environments
Interaction Design and Children
Foundations and Trends in Human-Computer Interaction
K-12 game programming course concept using textual programming
Proceedings of the 42nd ACM technical symposium on Computer science education
| Hi-index | 0.00 |
Many researchers have developed many programming environments for children. Typically each of these environments contains its own programming notation ranging from computer code to animated virtual 3D robots and in some case the notation consists of physical objects. While some of these notations were created by examining how children naturally describe computer programs, little research has examined how children understand programs written using these notations. Even less research has examined how children understand programs written using multiple notations.This paper describes an evaluation that compares how children can understand computer programs written using different programming notations: conventional code, English, or a combination of the two. The children were about eleven years old and we measured speed in answering questions about computer programs and the accuracy of their answers. We found that children reading computer programs written in a conventional-style notation were more efficient (faster with no reliable difference in accuracy) than children reading programs written in English. Children with access to a combination of both notations performed between the two other conditions.