WWW.BOOK.XLIBX.INFO
FREE ELECTRONIC LIBRARY - Books, abstracts, thesis
 
<< HOME
CONTACTS

Pages:   || 2 | 3 | 4 |

«A Paper Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the North Dakota State University of Agriculture and Applied Science By Keith Stefan Abeyratne In ...»

-- [ Page 1 ] --

ANALYZING STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES IN PROGRAMMING COURSE USING

INDIVIDUAL STUDY VS. PAIR PROGRAMMING

A Paper

Submitted to the Graduate Faculty

of the

North Dakota State University

of Agriculture and Applied Science

By

Keith Stefan Abeyratne

In Partial Fulfillment of Requirements

for the Degree of

MASTER OF SCIENCE

Major Department:

Computer Science August 2014 Fargo, North Dakota North Dakota State University Graduate School Title

ANALYZING STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES IN PROGRAMMING

COURSE USING INDIVIDUAL STUDY VS. PAIR PROGRAMMING

By Keith Stefan Abeyratne The Supervisory Committee certifies that this disquisition complies with North Dakota State University’s regulations and meets the accepted standards for the degree of

MASTER OF SCIENCE

SUPERVISORY COMMITTEE:

Dr. Gursimran Walia Chair Dr. Saeed Salem Dr. Janet Knodel

Approved:

8/25/2014 Dr. Brian Slator Date Department Chair

ABSTRACT

Pair programming has been common practice in the programming industry during last three decades, but only recently did it start to draw the attention as a teaching strategy. This paper investigates whether we should introduce pair programming at the beginning of the semester, instead later in the semester. To perform this investigation, we performed a control group empirical study wherein pair programming was used in the first half of the semester (in one section of introductory CS course). The control group (the other section of the same course) introduced pair programming in the second half of the semester.

This study supported the implementation of specific assessment strategies to assess individual programming abilities during pair programming situations. Results found that students perceive pair programming as being beneficial and all of the subjects who used pair programming indicated that they would prefer using it again as opposed to working individually.

iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This research could not have been accomplished with only my contribution, but there were many individuals who genuinely helped me in various ways. First and foremost, I would like to thank my advisor Dr. Gursimran Walia for accepting me as a student, and providing me freedom to learn. His guidance, encouragement, patience, thoughtfulness, and genuine support for my research, academic achievements, as well as completing my thesis were enormous. I would also extend my gratitude to Dr. Saeed Salem and Dr. Janet Knodel for accepting to me on my committee in such short notice. This wouldn’t be possible without your help and quick response.

I would like to give my gratitude to my colleagues at NSDU Computer Science department for their support, friendship and collegiality, especially staff at the NDSU Graduate School and computer science department, without your help and guidance this wouldn’t have been a reality.

Last but not least my heartiest gratitude goes to my parents and my family, for giving me their blessings, strength, love, comfort, guidance, support, courage and the best education. I owe them for giving me their best throughout my life.

–  –  –

ABSTRACT

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

LIST OF TABLES

LIST OF FIGURES

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1. Problem Statement

1.2. Motivation and Research Goals

2. BACKGROUND & RELATED WORK

2.1. NDSU Studies

2.2. Problems when Using Pair Programming at NDSU

3. EXPERIMENT DESIGN

3.1. Variables

3.2. Study Subjects and Course Assignments

3.3. Study Procedure

3.4. Data Collection and Evaluation Criteria

4. RESULTS

5. THREATS TO VALIDITY

6. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

–  –  –

1: Independent and Dependent Variables.

2: Student Allocation

3: Marks Comparison of Group A and B

4: Final Grade Comparison

5: Mean & Standard Deviation of the Exam Marks

6: Introducing Pair Programming Initially versus Later

–  –  –

1: Experiment Design.

2: Experiment Procedure

3: Average Marks

4: Letter Grade Comparison

–  –  –

Pair programming (PP), by definition, is a programming technique in which two programmers work together at one computer on the same task [1]. The term “pair programming” was first used in 1999 as one of the core practices in the Extreme Programming (XP) software development methodology in industry. As defined by Williams et al. [2], pair programming refers to a practice in which two programmers sitting side by side using only one computer to work collaboratively on the design, algorithm, code or test. The person typing is called a driver, and the other partner is called a navigator. Both partners have their own; responsibilities; the driver is in charge of producing the code. The navigator’s tasks are more strategic, such as looking for errors, thinking about the overall structure of the code, finding information when necessary, and being an ever-ready brainstorming partner to the driver. This arrangement leaves the driver free to work on the tactical aspect of the program.





Challenges of creating rigorous, syntactically correct code without worrying about the big picture, gives the navigator the opportunity to consider strategic issues without being distracted by the details of coding. Together, the driver and navigator create higher-quality work more quickly than either could produce on their own. Pair programming is one of the key practices in Extreme Programming (XP) [3]. It was incorporated in XP, because it is argued to increase project members’ productivity and satisfaction while improving communication and software quality [3]. Since then, pair programming has become one of the most researched topics in the realm of agile software development techniques [4].

The practice of pair programming has been widely implemented in the industry as well as in educational settings (Domino et al [6], Chong et al. [7]). A vast amount of research on pair programming has been conducted to observe the benefits of the technique and to understand how the practice can improve students’ learning outcomes. The stated benefits of pair programming

were identified as follows:

• Improvement in students’ academic performance such as in final and midterm exams, quizzes, programming assignments and overall course grades [13, 14, 15, 18, 16, 17].

• Improvement in programming productivity in terms of the time spent on coding and quality of the software produced [24, 02, 24, 25, 08].

• Increase in students’ retention rate and course completion rate [13, 14, 18].

• Increased students’ confidence level and enjoyment in learning programming [02, 13, 14, 16, 17].

• Reduced staff workload [22, 23].

• Increased efficiency in helping female students to work in programming tasks [19, 20, 21].

Recently, many researchers have explored the suitability of pair programming to conduct the programming laboratory classes in educational institutions. The pair programming can be considered as one form of collaborative learning. In collaborative learning, small groups of students associate with each other where each member contributes his/her personal experience, information, perspective, insight, skills and attitudes, which can help, improve the learning efficiency of others [12] (Klemm, 1994). When this kind of collaborative learning is adopted to do programming assignments, generally the students divide the work among them and complete it individually with little or no help from other students of the group.

–  –  –

In literature, many benefits of pair programming have been proposed, such as increased productivity, improved code quality, and confidence, to name a few. On the other hand, pair programming has also received criticism over increasing efforts, expenditure and overall personnel costs, and bringing out conflicts and personality clashes among developers. However, the scientific empirical evidence behind these claims is currently scattered and unorganized, and thus it is difficult to draw conclusions whether the pair programming indeed claims to be beneficial for student learning or not. Researchers have also investigated the effect of the factors (e.g., student’s skill levels) on the pair performance of students.

In fact, Hanks [5] points out regarding the quality improvement claims that “There does not appear to be any empirical evidence that the programs [produced by pair programming] are better in terms of design, readability, maintainability, or other internal quality attributes.” As a consequence, the industry has been rightfully hesitant in adopting the pair programming practice.

On the contrary a study by John Nosek [33] examined how pair programming impacted the amount of time it took to complete a programming task. His results found that pairs took about 70% of the time to complete a task as individuals. There are many studies that conclude pair programming helps create better quality code, and improve student learning.

A recent study held at NDSU by Radermacher et.al [26,27,28,29,30] indicates some valid points, which may be overlooked in other studies. Radermacher’s study [30] provided increased support that the pair programming is more effective in improving student’s learning of programming concepts compared to individual learning Radermacher found that overall assignment scores improved for students participating in pair programming.

Pair programming has proved its usefulness in teaching and learning programming skills.

It also has received many criticism; therefore, the data we have is widely scattered. Furthermore, there are very few studies which indicate when pair programming should be introduced in introductory computer science courses to maximize its benefits. The main objective is to understand when pair programming should be introduced in courses for the students. Our goal is to use pair programming to improve student’s learning capacity.

1.2. MOTIVATION AND RESEARCH GOALS

In recent years, the growth of extreme programming (XP) has brought considerable attention to collaborative programming. Pair programming is a collaborative approach that makes working in pairs rather than individually the primary work style for code development.

Because pair programming is a radically different approach than many developers are used to, it can be hard to predict the effects when a team switches to pair programming. Despite the advantages proposed for pair programming, many still suspect the overall usefulness and benefit over traditional solo programming. One of the most questioned aspects lies on the feasibility of achieving superliner speedup as compared to the legacy pattern [02].From a simple management’s viewpoint, there is no reason to pair up developers if they cannot do things twice faster. In addition to productivity, people also doubt if the improved software quality deserves hiring twice many programmers [02]. Although pair programming is claimed to cost an insignificant 15% more effort yet achieve a higher quality than solitary programming on the same task [02], the paradigm is still questioned if solo programming plus an additional review phase, which might be cheaper and equally effective, will achieve the same goal. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of pair programming on student performance based on the time it was introduced, and subsequent pursuit of computer science related degrees among college students.

–  –  –

The pattern of pair programming in which two individuals develop one software module together has attracted researcher and practitioner’s interest for almost 15 years. People following the pair programming protocol sit in front of one screen, use a set of keyboard and mouse to collaboratively solve a programming task [02]. While one developer is modifying the source code, another is required to perform continuous code-review. This pattern was claimed by it advocators to yield earlier release and higher software quality [02], and was included as one of the rules of Extreme Programming (XP) [11], a popular software development methodology used widely in the software industry.

Studies conducted on pair programming identified some of its advantages for the teaching learning situation (Tomayko, 2002; Williams & Kessler, 2001; Williams & Upchurch, 2001). For example, it has been found that when programmers work in pairs, fewer errors are made than in individual programming situations (Tomayko, 2002), resulting in better programming performance, increased confidence, and decreased frustration levels of the programmers (VanDeGrift,2004). A possible explanation for these findings could be that pair members help each other to solve the problem and complete the programming task together. Thus, there seems to be some agreement among researchers that pair programming could be a promising teaching strategy for teaching programming skills (VanDeGrift, 2004).



Pages:   || 2 | 3 | 4 |


Similar works:

«CHEMISTRY OF RHENIUM(I) TRICARBONYL COMPLEXES OF BIOMEDICAL RELEVANCE A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in The Department of Chemistry by Theshini Perera B.Sc. University of Colombo, Sri Lanka, 2004 August 2010 Dedicated with love to my late mother And to my loving father ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I most sincerely acknowledge my...»

«Member-funds and cooperative performance Rajesh Agrawal Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad K V Raju Institute of Rural Management Anand K Prathap Reddy Institute of Rural Management Anand R Srinivasan Indian Institute of Management Bangalore M S Sriram Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad September 2002 Corresponding Author. Member-funds and cooperative performance Rajesh Agrawal, K V Raju, K Prathap Reddy, R Srinivasan and M S Sriram Abstract This research examines the role of...»

«INDIAN INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT AHMEDABAD INDIA Research and Publications Productivity of Rural Credit: A Review of Issues and Some Recent Literature M.S. Sriram W.P. No.2007-06-01 June 2007 The main objective of the working paper series of the IIMA is to help faculty members, Research Staff and Doctoral Students to speedily share their research findings with professional colleagues, and to test out their research findings at the pre-publication stage INDIAN INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT AHMEDABAD-380...»

«Gwen Varley, Student Participant West Central Valley High School Stuart, IA Sustainable Agriculture in Honduras On March 8, 1968, William S. Gaud gave a speech before the Society for International Development at the Shoreham Hotel in Washington, D.C. He spoke of an exciting future for the world of agriculture. Indeed, astonishing events had recently come to pass. All over the world, countries were reporting record-shattering harvests. Poor farmers were sowing what must have seemed like magic...»

«Connecting Across Language and Distance: Linguistic and Rural Access to Legal Information and Services Karen Cohl and George Thomson December 2008 Connecting Across Language and Distance: Linguistic and Rural Access to Legal Information and Services Final report of the Linguistic and Rural Access to Justice Project This is the report of the Linguistic and Rural Access to Justice Project conducted by Karen Cohl and George Thomson at the request of The Law Foundation of Ontario. We would like to...»

«Conditions and results of the accession negotiations in the milk and beef sectors in Poland and the Czech Republic Podmínky a výsledky jednání o vstupu do Evropské Unie. P ípad produkce mléka a hov zího masa v Polsku a v eské republice. Dr. M. Bavorova, Dr. H. Hockmann, Dr. A. Pieniadz Institute of Agricultural Development in Central and Eastern Europe; Theodor-Lieser Str., 06108 Halle, Germany Tel: 0049 0345 2928 224 e-mail: bavorova@iamo.de www.iamo.de Abstract: The paper reviews...»

«CONDITION ASSSESSMENT OF ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT IN POWER PLANTS Nagu Srinivas, DTE Energy Technologies Dr. Oscar Morel, DTE Energy Technologies 37849 Interchange Dr., Farmington Hills, MI 48335 Tel:(248) 427-2243 Fax: (248)427-2336 Email:srinivasn@dteenergy.com Abstract— Plant Operations personnel can avoid a forced shutdown by applying a predictive maintenance program to power cable and equipment systems. However, the condition of an electrical power system, down to the individual component...»

«Journal of Central European Agriculture, 2015, 16(4), p.476-488 DOI: 10.5513/JCEA01/16.4.1655 Sensitivity of selected crops to lead, cadmium and arsenic in early stages of ontogenesis Citlivosť vybraných poľnohospodárskych plodín na olovo, kadmium a arzén v skorých štádiách individuálneho vývinu Beáta PIRŠELOVÁ*, Andrej TREBICHALSKÝ and Roman KUNA Constantine the Philosopher University in Nitra, Faculty of Natural Sciences, Department of Botany and Genetics, Nábrežie mládeže...»

«Journal of Central European Agriculture, 2014, 15(2), p.119-128 DOI: 10.5513/JCEA01/15.2.1462 Usage of abrasion-resistant materials in agriculture Využití otěruvzdorných materiálů v zemědělství Jiří VOTAVA* Mendel University in Brno, Faculty of Agronomy, Department of Engineering and Automobile Transport. Zemědělská 1, 613 00 Brno, Czech Republic, * correspondence: jiri.votava@mendelu.cz Abstract Agricultural soil-processing machines are subject to an extensive abrasive wear. This...»

«BIOMECHANICAL EVALUATION OF MODIFIED TRACK SHOES A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Louisiana State University and Agricultural Mechanical College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Science in Industrial Engineering in The Department of Construction Management and Industrial Engineering By Marlon Alberetos Greensword B.S., L.S.U., 2007 B.A., L.S.U., 2005 May 2010 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I must first give thanks to God the Father, Jesus the Son and the...»

«Journal of Central European Agriculture, 2016, 17(1), p.40-47 DOI: 10.5513/JCEA01/17.1.1666 Differentiation of stress load resistant calves by the help of insulin-like growth factor–I (IGF–I) in serum Diferencovanie teliat odolných stresovej záťaži pomocou inzulínu podobného rastového faktoru–I (IGF–I) z krvného séra Juraj PETRÁK* and Ondrej DEBRECÉNI Slovak University of Agriculture in Nitra, Faculty of Agrobiology and Food Resources, Tr. A. Hlinku 2, 949 76 Nitra, Slovak...»

«Sophie Spencer Director CPRE Avonside Poole Court, Yate director@cpreavonside.org.uk Campaign to Protect Rural England, Avonside branch Response to Bath Park and Ride Consultation October 2015 Summary CPRE Avonside is strongly opposed to a further park and ride facility being introduced to the East of Bath. It would cause serious damage to the Avon Green Belt, and be a negative visual intrusion on the Cotswold AONB and the Bath World Heritage City. We feel that the supposed benefits of a park...»





 
<<  HOME   |    CONTACTS
2016 www.book.xlibx.info - Free e-library - Books, abstracts, thesis

Materials of this site are available for review, all rights belong to their respective owners.
If you do not agree with the fact that your material is placed on this site, please, email us, we will within 1-2 business days delete him.