research-article

Public Access

Subgoals Help Students Solve Parsons Problems

Authors:

Briana B. Morrison,

Lauren E. Margulieux,

Barbara Ericson,

Mark GuzdialAuthors Info & Claims

SIGCSE '16: Proceedings of the 47th ACM Technical Symposium on Computing Science Education

Pages 42 - 47

https://doi.org/10.1145/2839509.2844617

Published: 17 February 2016 Publication History

Abstract

We report on a study that used subgoal labels to teach students how to write while loops with a Parsons problem learning assessment. Subgoal labels were used to aid learning of programming while not overloading students' cognitive abilities. We wanted to compare giving learners subgoal labels versus asking learners to generate subgoal labels. As an assessment for learning we asked students to solve a Parsons problem -- to place code segments in the correct order. We found that students who were given subgoal labels performed statistically better than the groups that did not receive subgoal labels or were asked to generate subgoal labels. We conclude that a low cognitive load assessment, Parsons problems, can be more sensitive to student learning gains than traditional code generation problems.

References

[1]

Atkinson, R.K. et al. 2003. Aiding Transfer in Statistics: Examining the Use of Conceptually Oriented Equations and Elaborations During Subgoal Learning. Journal of Educational Psychology. 95, 4 (2003), 762.

[2]

Atkinson, R.K. et al. 2000. Learning from examples: Instructional principles from the worked examples research. Review of educational research. 70, 2 (2000), 181--214.

[3]

Atkinson, R.K. 2002. Optimizing learning from examples using animated pedagogical agents. Journal of Educational Psychology. 94, 2 (2002), 416.

[4]

Atkinson, R.K. and Derry, S.J. 2000. Computer-based examples designed to encourage optimal example processing: A study examining the impact of sequentially presented, subgoal-oriented worked examples. (2000).

[5]

Bjork, R.A. 1994. Memory and metamemory considerations in the training of human beings. Metacognition: Knowing about Knowing. MIT Press.

[6]

Bransford, J.D. et al. 2000. How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School. National Academy Press.

[7]

Catrambone, R. 1995. Aiding subgoal learning: Effects on transfer. Journal of educational psychology. 87, 1 (1995), 5.

[8]

Catrambone, R. 1996. Generalizing solution procedures learned from examples. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition; Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. 22, 4 (1996), 1020.

[9]

Catrambone, R. 1994. Improving examples to improve transfer to novel problems. Memory & Cognition. 22, 5 (1994), 606--615.

[10]

Catrambone, R. 1998. The subgoal learning model: Creating better examples so that students can solve novel problems. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General. 127, 4 (1998), 355.

[11]

Chi, M.T. et al. 1989. Self-explanations: How students study and use examples in learning to solve problems. Cognitive science. 13, 2 (1989), 145--182.

[12]

Denny, P. et al. 2008. Evaluating a new exam question: Parsons problems. Proceeding of the Fourth international Workshop on Computing Education Research (Sydney, Australia, 2008), 113--124.

Digital Library

[13]

Eiriksdottir, E. and Catrambone, R. 2011. Procedural instructions, principles, and examples how to structure instructions for procedural tasks to enhance performance, learning, and transfer. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society. 53, 6 (2011), 749--770.

[14]

Johnson, W.L. and Soloway, E. 1985. PROUST: Knowledge-based program understanding. Software Engineering, IEEE Transactions on. 3 (1985), 267--275.

Digital Library

[15]

Leppink, J. et al. 2013. Development of an instrument for measuring different types of cognitive load. Behavior research methods. 45, 4 (2013), 1058--1072.

[16]

Leppink, J. et al. 2014. Effects of pairs of problems and examples on task performance and different types of cognitive load. Learning and Instruction. 30, (2014), 32--42.

[17]

Margulieux, L.E. et al. 2012. Subgoal-labeled instructional material improves performance and transfer in learning to develop mobile applications. Proceedings of the ninth annual international conference on International computing education research (2012), 71--78.

Digital Library

[18]

Margulieux, L.E. and Catrambone, R. 2014. Improving problem solving performance in computer-based learning environments through subgoal labels. Proceedings of the first ACM conference on Learning@ scale conference (2014), 149--150.

Digital Library

[19]

van Merriënboer, J.J. and Sweller, J. 2005. Cognitive load theory and complex learning: Recent developments and future directions. Educational psychology review. 17, 2 (2005), 147--177.

[20]

Morrison, B.B. et al. 2014. Measuring cognitive load in introductory CS: adaptation of an instrument. Proceedings of the tenth annual conference on International computing education research (2014), 131--138.

Digital Library

[21]

Morrison, Briana B. et al. 2015. Subgoals, Context, and Worked Examples in Learning Computing Problem Solving. ICER 2015 (Aug. 2015).

Digital Library

[22]

Palmiter, S. and Elkerton, J. 1993. Animated demonstrations for learning procedural computer-based tasks. Human-Computer Interaction. 8, 3 (1993), 193--216.

Digital Library

[23]

Parsons, D. and Haden, P. 2006. Parson's Programming Puzzles: A Fun and Effective Learning Tool for First Programming Courses. Proceedings of the 8th Australasian Conference on Computing Education - Volume 52 (Darlinghurst, Australia, Australia, 2006), 157--163.

Digital Library

[24]

Plass, J.L. et al. 2010. Cognitive load theory. Cambridge University Press.

[25]

Renkl, A. and Atkinson, R.K. 2002. Learning from examples: Fostering self-explanations in computer-based learning environments. Interactive learning environments. 10, 2 (2002), 105--119.

[26]

Renkl, A. and Atkinson, R.K. 2003. Structuring the transition from example study to problem solving in cognitive skill acquisition: A cognitive load perspective. Educational psychologist. 38, 1 (2003), 15--22.

[27]

Spanjers, I.A. et al. 2012. Segmentation of worked examples: Effects on cognitive load and learning. Applied Cognitive Psychology. 26, 3 (2012), 352--358.

[28]

Sweller, J. et al. 1998. Cognitive architecture and instructional design. Educational psychology review. 10, 3 (1998), 251--296.

[29]

Sweller, J. et al. 2011. Cognitive load theory. Springer.

[30]

Sweller, J. 2010. Element interactivity and intrinsic, extraneous, and germane cognitive load. Educational psychology review. 22, 2 (2010), 123--138.

[31]

Tew, A.E. and Guzdial, M. 2011. The FCS1: a language independent assessment of CS1 knowledge. Proceedings of the 42nd ACM technical symposium on Computer science education (2011), 111--116.

Digital Library

[32]

van Gog, Tamara and Paas, Fred 2012. Cognitive Load Measurement. Encyclopedia of the Sciences of Learning. Springer.

Cited By

Wu ZSmith DMonga MLonati VBarendsen ESheard JPaterson J(2024)Evaluating Micro Parsons Problems as Exam QuestionsProceedings of the 2024 on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education V. 110.1145/3649217.3653583(674-680)Online publication date: 3-Jul-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3649217.3653583
Smith DPoulsen SEmeka CWu ZHaynes-Magyar CZilles C(2024)Distractors Make You Pay Attention: Investigating the Learning Outcomes of Including Distractor Blocks in Parsons ProblemsProceedings of the 2024 ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research - Volume 110.1145/3632620.3671114(177-191)Online publication date: 12-Aug-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3632620.3671114
Tabarsi BReichert HLytle NCatete VBarnes T(2024)Scaffolding Novices: Analyzing When and How Parsons Problems Impact Novice Programming in an Integrated Science AssignmentProceedings of the 2024 ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research - Volume 110.1145/3632620.3671110(42-54)Online publication date: 12-Aug-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3632620.3671110
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

Subgoals Help Students Solve Parsons Problems
1. Social and professional topics
  1. Professional topics
    1. Computing education
      1. Student assessment

Recommendations

Subgoals, Context, and Worked Examples in Learning Computing Problem Solving
ICER '15: Proceedings of the eleventh annual International Conference on International Computing Education Research

Recent empirical results suggest that the instructional material used to teach computing may actually overload students' cognitive abilities. Better designed materials may enhance learning by reducing unnecessary load. Subgoal labels have been shown to ...
Using Subgoals to Improve Student Performance in CS1: (Abstract Only)
SIGCSE '18: Proceedings of the 49th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education

Subgoal labels are function-based instructional explanations that describe the problem-solving steps to the learner, highlighting the solution process. There is strong evidence that the use of subgoal labels within worked examples improves student ...
Using Subgoal Labeling in Teaching CS1 (now in Python!)
SIGCSE 2023: Proceedings of the 54th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education V. 2

Subgoal labeling is an instructional design framework for breaking down problems into pieces that are small enough for novices to grasp, and often difficult for instructors (i.e., experts) to articulate. Subgoal labels have been shown to improve student ...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences

SIGCSE '16: Proceedings of the 47th ACM Technical Symposium on Computing Science Education

February 2016

768 pages

ISBN:9781450336857

DOI:10.1145/2839509

General Chairs:
Carl Alphonce
University at Buffalo
,
Jodi Tims
Baldwin Wallace University
,
Program Chairs:
Michael Caspersen
Aarhus University
,
Stephen Edwards
Virginia Tech University

Copyright © 2016 ACM.

Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

Sponsors

SIGCSE: ACM Special Interest Group on Computer Science Education

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 17 February 2016

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article

Funding Sources

National Science Foundation

Conference

SIGCSE '16

Sponsor:

SIGCSE

SIGCSE '16: The 47th ACM Technical Symposium on Computing Science Education

March 2 - 5, 2016

Tennessee, Memphis, USA

Acceptance Rates

SIGCSE '16 Paper Acceptance Rate 105 of 297 submissions, 35%;

Overall Acceptance Rate 1,595 of 4,542 submissions, 35%

Upcoming Conference

SIGCSE TS 2025

Sponsor:
sigcse

The 56th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education

February 26 - March 1, 2025

Pittsburgh , PA , USA

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

64
Total Citations
View Citations
1,588
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)169
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)25

Reflects downloads up to 25 Dec 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Wu ZSmith DMonga MLonati VBarendsen ESheard JPaterson J(2024)Evaluating Micro Parsons Problems as Exam QuestionsProceedings of the 2024 on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education V. 110.1145/3649217.3653583(674-680)Online publication date: 3-Jul-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3649217.3653583
Smith DPoulsen SEmeka CWu ZHaynes-Magyar CZilles C(2024)Distractors Make You Pay Attention: Investigating the Learning Outcomes of Including Distractor Blocks in Parsons ProblemsProceedings of the 2024 ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research - Volume 110.1145/3632620.3671114(177-191)Online publication date: 12-Aug-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3632620.3671114
Tabarsi BReichert HLytle NCatete VBarnes T(2024)Scaffolding Novices: Analyzing When and How Parsons Problems Impact Novice Programming in an Integrated Science AssignmentProceedings of the 2024 ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research - Volume 110.1145/3632620.3671110(42-54)Online publication date: 12-Aug-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3632620.3671110
Bai GJiang ZPrice TStolee K(2024)Evaluating the Effectiveness of a Testing Checklist Intervention in CS2: An Quasi-experimental Replication StudyProceedings of the 2024 ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research - Volume 110.1145/3632620.3671102(55-64)Online publication date: 12-Aug-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3632620.3671102
Figueiredo JGarcía-Peñalvo F(2024)Design science research applied to difficulties of teaching and learning initial programmingUniversal Access in the Information Society10.1007/s10209-022-00941-423:3(1151-1161)Online publication date: 1-Aug-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/s10209-022-00941-4
Hou XEricson BWang X(2023)Understanding the Effects of Using Parsons Problems to Scaffold Code Writing for Students with Varying CS Self-Efficacy LevelsProceedings of the 23rd Koli Calling International Conference on Computing Education Research10.1145/3631802.3631832(1-12)Online publication date: 13-Nov-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3631802.3631832
Ericson BPearce JRodger SCsizmadia AGarcia RGutierrez FLiaskos KPadiyath AScott MSmith DWarriem JZavaleta Bernuy ALaakso MMonga MSimon Sheard J(2023)Multi-Institutional Multi-National Studies of Parsons ProblemsProceedings of the 2023 Working Group Reports on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education10.1145/3623762.3633498(57-107)Online publication date: 22-Dec-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3623762.3633498
Reeves BSarsa SPrather JDenny PBecker BHellas AKimmel BPowell GLeinonen JLaakso MMonga MSimon Sheard J(2023)Evaluating the Performance of Code Generation Models for Solving Parsons Problems With Small Prompt VariationsProceedings of the 2023 Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education V. 110.1145/3587102.3588805(299-305)Online publication date: 29-Jun-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3587102.3588805
Fromont FJayamanne HDenny P(2023)Exploring the Difficulty of Faded Parsons Problems for Programming EducationProceedings of the 25th Australasian Computing Education Conference10.1145/3576123.3576136(113-122)Online publication date: 30-Jan-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3576123.3576136
Hayatpur DHelfenbaum TXia HStuerzlinger WGries P(2023)Structuring Collaboration in Programming Through Personal-SpacesExtended Abstracts of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3544549.3585630(1-7)Online publication date: 19-Apr-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3544549.3585630
Show More Cited By

View Options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Table of Contents