Teachers’ Perceptions of Student Misconceptions in Introductory ProgrammingYizhou QianSusanne HambruschAman YadavSarah GretterYue Li
Yizhou Qian
Susanne Hambrusch
Aman Yadav
Sarah Gretter
Yue Li
2020
Journal of Educational Computing Research, Volume 58, Issue 2
A quality computer science (CS) teacher needs to understand students’ common misconceptions in learning CS. This study explored one aspect of CS teachers’ understanding of student misconceptions: their perceptions of student misconceptions related to introductory programming. Perceptions in this study included three parts: teachers’ perceived frequency of a student misconception, teachers’ perceived importance of a misconception in learning, and teachers’ confidence in addressing a misconception. Teachers in our study taught a Python-based CS course for high schools students. A survey was designed and administered to assess teachers’ perceptions of students’ misconceptions. Our results indicated that teachers’ confidence of addressing misconceptions and the teaching context may affect their perceptions of student misconceptions. We also found that some latent misconceptions are likely to lead to a perception of low frequency as they can be more difficult to detect. Moreover, our study found that teachers’ degrees and additional computing training showed positive relationships with their confidence of addressing student misconceptions and that additional computing training also showed a positive relationship with teachers’ perceived importance of student misconceptions. Implications of the findings for future research and practice of CS education are discussed.
Study InformationManually extracted from the paper by the Progmiscon.org team
Programming Languages
Python
Method
A quantitative survey of teachers to assess their perceptions of the frequency and importance of student misconceptions
Subjects
44 high school teachers
Artifact
Related Study ResultsPhenomena 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.)
MisconceptionsSurvey about 37 pre-selected misconceptions
AppendixA.1(F)
A variable can hold more than one value at the same time
Average Perceived Frequency
This provides evidence potentially relevant for the following Progmiscon.org misconceptions:
AppendixA.1(I)
A variable can hold more than one value at the same time
Average Importance Rating
This provides evidence potentially relevant for the following Progmiscon.org misconceptions:
AppendixA.3(F)
The assignment statement A = B + 1 changes the value of B by 1, as well as changing A
Average Perceived Frequency
This provides evidence potentially relevant for the following Progmiscon.org misconceptions:
AppendixA.3(I)
The assignment statement A = B + 1 changes the value of B by 1, as well as changing A
Average Importance Rating
This provides evidence potentially relevant for the following Progmiscon.org misconceptions:
AppendixA.4(F)
Assigning the value of a variable to another variable 'links' the two variables, so changing the value of one changes the value of the other
Average Perceived Frequency
This provides evidence potentially relevant for the following Progmiscon.org misconceptions:
AppendixA.4(I)
Assigning the value of a variable to another variable 'links' the two variables, so changing the value of one changes the value of the other
Average Importance Rating
This provides evidence potentially relevant for the following Progmiscon.org misconceptions:
AppendixA.5(F)
The assignment statement a = b + 1 stores the formula 'b + 1' in a rather than the value of b + 1
Average Perceived Frequency
This provides evidence potentially relevant for the following Progmiscon.org misconceptions:
AppendixA.5(I)
The assignment statement a = b + 1 stores the formula 'b + 1' in a rather than the value of b + 1
Average Importance Rating
This provides evidence potentially relevant for the following Progmiscon.org misconceptions:
AppendixA.19(F)
The symbol '=' tests for equality
Average Perceived Frequency
This provides evidence potentially relevant for the following Progmiscon.org misconceptions:
AppendixA.19(I)
The symbol '=' tests for equality
Average Importance Rating
This provides evidence potentially relevant for the following Progmiscon.org misconceptions:
AppendixA.14(F)
Strings can be defined without quotation marks [...]
Average Perceived Frequency
This provides evidence potentially relevant for the following Progmiscon.org misconceptions:
AppendixA.14(I)
Strings can be defined without quotation marks [...]
Average Importance Rating
This provides evidence potentially relevant for the following Progmiscon.org misconceptions: