KaydedilenlerDerginizi ekleyin

Dergiler / Turkish Online Journal of Qualitative Inquiry / 2019 / Cilt: 10 - Sayı: 1

Investigation of Students' Cognitive Processes in Computer Programming: A Cognitive Ethnography Study

Bilgisayar Programlamada Öğrencilerin Zihinsel Süreçlerinin İncelenmesi: Bir Bilişsel Etnografya Çalışması

Sibel DOĞAN
Orhan ASLAN
Mehmet DÖNMEZ
Soner YILDIRIM
Sayfa
1–25
DOI
—
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

Theresults showed that participants differed in terms of their decision making and task completiondurations, the path they followed, and their perspectives about handling the question.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:The aim of the current study is to investigate how cognitive processes of students categorized as novice,semi-expert and expert differ in terms of creating pseudocode for a given programming task.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:To conductthis aim, cognitive ethnography research design was employed to reveal the cognitive process of theparticipants behind the specified task.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:Theresults showed that participants differed in terms of their decision making and task completiondurations, the path they followed, and their perspectives about handling the question.
🔬Tür:Literatür & Derleme Çalışması
📍Kapsam:Genişletilmiş Akademik Örneklem
⚙️Değişkenler:Alan Parametreleri

Özet

The aim of the current study is to investigate how cognitive processes of students categorized as novice,semi-expert and expert differ in terms of creating pseudocode for a given programming task. To conductthis aim, cognitive ethnography research design was employed to reveal the cognitive process of theparticipants behind the specified task. In the study, three undergraduate students from a ComputerEducation and Instructional Technology (CEIT) department were included as participants. Thesestudents were categorized based on two parameters. The first one was the courses that took and thesecond on was their experiences on programming. While selecting participants, purposeful andsnowball sampling methods were used. To collect data, semi-structured interviews, video recording,think aloud procedure, retrospective reviews, observations and document analysis were used. Theresults showed that participants differed in terms of their decision making and task completiondurations, the path they followed, and their perspectives about handling the question.

Abstract

Bu çalışmanın amacı, programlama ile ilgili belirlenen bir öğrenme görevinde acemi, yarı uzman ve uzman olarak sınıflandırılan öğrencilerin sözde kod oluşturma esnasındaki zihinsel süreçlerinin nasıl farklılaştığını araştırmaktır. Bu amacı gerçekleştirebilmek için bilişsel etnografya araştırma deseni olarak tercih edilmiştir. Çalışmada, Bilgisayar Eğitimi ve Öğretim Teknolojileri (CEIT) bölümünden üç lisans öğrencisi katılımcı olarak yer almıştır. Bu öğrenciler, öncelikle aldıkları dersler ve programlama konusundaki deneyimlerini göz önünde bulundurarak sınıflandırılmıştır. Katılımcı seçerken, amaçlı ve kartopu örnekleme yöntemleri kullanıldı. Verilerin toplanması için yarı yapılandırılmış görüşmeler, video kaydı, yüksek sesli düşünme, geriye dönük inceleme, gözlem ve doküman analizi kullanılmıştır. Sonuçlar, katılımcıların karar verme ve görev tamamlama süreleri, takip ettikleri yol ve bu soruları ele alma perspektifleri açısından farklılaştıklarını göstermiştir.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

DOĞAN, S., ASLAN, O., DÖNMEZ, M., YILDIRIM, S. (2019). Investigation of Students' Cognitive Processes in Computer Programming: A Cognitive Ethnography Study. Turkish Online Journal of Qualitative Inquiry, Cilt: 10 - Sayı: 1, 1–25. https://ajindex.com/articles/375692

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (13)

  1. Ball, L.J., & Ormerod, T.C. (2000). Putting ethnography to work: The case for a cognitive ethnography of design. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 53(1), 147– 168. http://doi.org/10.1006/ijhc.2000.0372
  2. Driscoll, M.P. (2000). Psychology of learning for instruction. Allyn & Bacon: Needham Heights, MA. Dubbels, B. (2011). Cognitive ethnography: A methodology for measure and analysis of learning for game studies. International Journal of Gaming and Computer-Mediated Simulations (IJGCMS), 3(1), 68–78.
  3. Garner, S. (2006). The development, use and evaluation of a program design tool in the learning and teaching of software development. Issues in Informing Science and Information Technology, 3, 253–260.
  4. Henderson, P.B., Cortina, T.J., Hazzan O. & Wing, J.M. (2007). Computational thinking. In ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 39(1), 195-196.
  5. Huberman, A.M., & Miles, M.B. (1994). Data Management and Analysis Methods. In N.K. Denzin & Y.S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of Qualitative Research (pp. 428-444). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. Hutchins, E. (1991). The social organization of distributed cognition. In L.B. Resnick, J.M. Levine, & S.D. Teasley (Eds.), Perspectives on socially shared cognition (pp. 283–307).
  6. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. http://doi.org/10.1037/10096- 012. Hutchins, E. (1995a).
  7. Cognition in the Wild. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. http://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008642111457
  8. Hutchins, E. (1995b). How a cockpit remembers its speeds. Cognitive Science, 19(3), 265– 288. http://doi.org/10.1016/0364-0213(95)90020-9
  9. Hutchins, E. (2003, July). Cognitive ethnography (Plenary address). In R. Alterman, & D. Kirsh (Chairs), 25th meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, Boston. Hutchins, E., & Klausen, T. (1996). Distributed Cognition in an Airline Cockpit. In Y. Engeström & D. Middleton (Eds.), Cognition and Communication at Work (pp. 15- 34). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. http://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139174077.002
  10. Johnson, R.B. (1997). Examining the validity structure of qualitative research. Education, 118(2), 282-292.
  11. Kalelioglu, F., & Gulbahar, Y. (2014). The effects of teaching programming via Scratch on problem solving skills: A discussion from learners’ perspective. Informatics in Education-An International Journal, 13(1), 33–50.
  12. Mathison, S. (1988). Why triangulate ? American Educational Research Association, 17(2), 13–17. http://doi.org/10.2307/1174583
  13. Merikle, P.M., Smilek, D., & Eastwood, J.D. (2001). Perc