Textual vs. visual programming languages in programming education for primary schoolchildren
Sábháilte in:
| Foilsithe in: | The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc. (IEEE) Conference Proceedings (2016), p. 1-7 |
|---|---|
| Príomhchruthaitheoir: | |
| Rannpháirtithe: | , , , , , |
| Foilsithe / Cruthaithe: |
The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc. (IEEE)
|
| Ábhair: | |
| Rochtain ar líne: | Citation/Abstract |
| Clibeanna: |
Níl clibeanna ann, Bí ar an gcéad duine le clib a chur leis an taifead seo!
|
MARC
| LEADER | 00000nab a2200000uu 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | 1845325077 | ||
| 003 | UK-CbPIL | ||
| 035 | |a 1845325077 | ||
| 045 | 2 | |b d20160101 |b d20161231 | |
| 084 | |a 228229 |2 nlm | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Tsukamoto, Hidekuni | |
| 245 | 1 | |a Textual vs. visual programming languages in programming education for primary schoolchildren | |
| 260 | |b The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc. (IEEE) |c 2016 | ||
| 513 | |a Conference Proceedings | ||
| 520 | 3 | |a Conference Title: 2016 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE) Conference Start Date: 2016, Oct. 12 Conference End Date: 2016, Oct. 15 Conference Location: Eire, PA, USA The purpose of this research is to compare textual programming languages and visual programming languages from the aspect of motivation. As a textual programming language, Processing programming language was used, and as visual programming languages, Scratch, a derivation of Scratch, Teaching materials offered by code.org, and LEGO Mindstorms EV3 were used. Teaching materials using the textual programming language, and those using the visual programming languages were developed separately. A trial experiment of programming education with the textual programming language was conducted to a cohort of seven primary schoolchildren. Trial experiments with the visual programming languages were conducted twice. In each of them, a cohort of eight primary schoolchildren participated. The motivation of the children was assessed using the questionnaire based on the ARCS (Attention, Relevance, Confidence, and Satisfaction) motivation model. The results with the visual programming languages suggested that the motivation scores of the children increased as the class progressed when visual programming languages were used. On the other hand, the results with Processing suggested that the variance of Satisfaction factor increased as the class progressed when textual programming languages were used, which further suggested that the Satisfaction scores of the children spread as the class progressed when textual programming languages were used. | |
| 653 | |a Programming languages | ||
| 653 | |a Visual programming languages | ||
| 653 | |a Confidence intervals | ||
| 653 | |a Education | ||
| 653 | |a Educational materials | ||
| 653 | |a Children | ||
| 653 | |a Social | ||
| 700 | 1 | |a Takemura, Yasuhiro | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Oomori, Yasumasa | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Ikeda, Isamu | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Nagumo, Hideo | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Monden, Akito | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Matsumoto, Ken-ichi | |
| 773 | 0 | |t The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc. (IEEE) Conference Proceedings |g (2016), p. 1-7 | |
| 786 | 0 | |d ProQuest |t Science Database | |
| 856 | 4 | 1 | |3 Citation/Abstract |u https://www.proquest.com/docview/1845325077/abstract/embedded/L8HZQI7Z43R0LA5T?source=fedsrch |