Programming concepts and misconceptions in grade 5 and 6 children: Developing and testing a new assessment tool
Marco Hartmann
Peter Edelsbrunner
Michael Hielscher
Giulia Paparo
Beat Döbeli Honegger
Eva Marinus

2022

Atti del 5° Convegno sulle didattiche disciplinari

Many countries are implementing computer science education, including programming, into their school curricula. In primary school this topic is new, both for students and teachers. Even though there has been research into the difficulties that high school and adult students face when learning to program, not all these findings translate well to the cognitive abilities of younger students and the environment they learn in. Our research focuses on finding out which misconceptions about programming primary school children hold and develop. This is important because research from other fields has shown that knowledge about misconceptions can improve teaching. This project aims to develop a Programming Misconceptions Assessment Tool (ProMAT) for children in grades 5 and 6 that have learned to program using either xLogo or Scratch – two popular educational programming languages currently used in Switzerland. Ultimately, the project should result in an assessment tool that can be used both by researchers and practitioners interested in primary school children’s misconceptions about programming. In addition, it should reveal if and how educational programming environments affect the development of these misconceptions. The ProMAT is currently under development and underwent a first pilot testing phase with 57 children. In this paper, we describe the development of the first version of this tool, discuss insights gained from the pilot study, and outline the next steps of the project.

Study Information
Manually extracted from the paper by the Progmiscon.org team

Programming Languages

Scratch

Method

Quantitative systematic research

Subjects

57 grade 5 or 6 students

Artifact

https://osf.io/5bxvp/?view_only=76b81b0a145e4836a0468773fe9eb1aa
Note by Progmiscon.org Team
The ProMAT 1.1 tests for this study are in 'old Test versions', the results for this study are in 'data_Pilot.csv'. (The same OSF project contains files for this study and their 2024 study.)

Related Study Results
Phenomena studied in this paper that map to Progmiscon.org misconceptions

The following list summarizes those phenomena reported in this study that provide evidence for misconceptions documented on Progmiscon.org. (The paper may provide evidence for other misconceptions as well. This list focuses exclusively on misconceptions documented on Progmiscon.org.)

Mistakes in Test Items
ProMAT 1.1 (Scratch) Test Items

P5
ProMAT 1.1, Aufgabe P5
0 / 57
Students making this error
This provides evidence potentially relevant for the following Progmiscon.org misconceptions:
Note by Progmiscon.org Team
Information taken from artifact, paper does not show these details
P11
ProMAT 1.1, Aufgabe P11
2 / 57
Students making this error
This provides evidence potentially relevant for the following Progmiscon.org misconceptions:
Note by Progmiscon.org Team
Information taken from artifact, paper does not show these details
P13
ProMAT 1.1, Aufgabe P13
7 / 57
Students making this error
This provides evidence potentially relevant for the following Progmiscon.org misconceptions:
Note by Progmiscon.org Team
Information taken from artifact, paper does not show these details
P8
ProMAT 1.1, Aufgabe P8
12 / 57
Students making this error
This provides evidence potentially relevant for the following Progmiscon.org misconceptions:
Note by Progmiscon.org Team
Information taken from artifact, paper does not show these details
P9
ProMAT 1.1, Aufgabe P9
0 / 57
Students making this error
This provides evidence potentially relevant for the following Progmiscon.org misconceptions:
Note by Progmiscon.org Team
Information taken from artifact, paper does not show these details