Preparing First-Year Engineering Students to Think About Code
A Guided Inquiry Approach
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 20294358 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Briana Bettin (0000-0001-8499-0504, Michigan Technological University), Michelle Jarvie-Eggart (0000-0002-6795-3899, Michigan Technological University), Kelly S Steelman (0000-0001-6491-4547, Michigan Technological University), Charles Wallace (0000-0002-9712-7694, Michigan Technological University) |
| Year | 2022 |
| Volume | 65 |
| Issue | 3 |
| Pages | 309-319 |
| Publication date | 2022-08-01 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | IEEE Transactions on Education (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0018-9359 • E-ISSN: 1557-9638 |
| Publisher | Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1109/te.2021.3140051 |
| OpenAlex | W4206442196 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 1 |
| References cited | 26 |
In the wake of the so-called fourth industrial revolution, computer programming has become a foundational competency across engineering disciplines. Yet engineering students often resist the notion that computer programming is a skill relevant to their future profession. Here are presented two activities aimed at supporting the early development of engineering students’ attitudes and abilities regarding programming in a first-year engineering course. Both activities offer students insights into the way programs are constructed, which have been identified as a source of confusion that may negatively affect acceptance. In the first activity, a structured, language-independent way to approach programming problems through guided questions was introduced, which has previously been used successfully in introductory computer science courses. The team hypothesized that guiding students through a structured reflection on how they construct programs for their class assignments might help reveal an understandable structure to them. Results showed that students in the intervention group scored nearly a full letter grade higher on the unit’s final programming assessment than those in the control condition. The second activity aimed to help students recognize how their experience with MATLAB might help them interpret code in other programming languages. In the intervention group, students were asked to review and provide comments for code written in a variety of programming languages. A qualitative analysis of their reflections examined what skills students reported they used and, specifically, how prior MATLAB experience may have aided their ability to read and comment on the unfamiliar code. Overall, the ability to understand and recognize syntactic constructs was an essential skill in making sense of code written in unfamiliar programming languages. Syntactic constructs, lexical elements, and patterns were all recognized as essential landmarks used by students interpreting code they did not write, especially in new languages. Developing an understanding of the static structure and dynamic flow required of programs was also an essential skill which helped the students. Together, the results from the first activity and the insights gained from the second activity suggest that guided questions to build skills in reading code may help mitigate confusion about program construction, thereby better preparing engineering students for computing-intensive careers
Class (philosophy) · Code (set theory) · Computer programming · Construct (python library) · Mathematics education · Programming language · Software engineering · Artificial Intelligence · Computer Science · Experimental Learning in Engineering · Psychology · Software Engineering Techniques and Practices · Teaching and Learning Programming
| Citations per year | 0.25 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2022 - 2022 (1) |
| Highly cited | No |