Informatics in Education

Debugging is integral to programming. It comes into play as soon as novices make their first mistakes in creating programming artifacts. It is also consistently reported to be a skill that is difficult to learn as well as to teach effectively. Research in Informatics Education has often focused on the process of debugging, by breaking it down in steps connected by temporal and causal dependencies. In this work, we focus instead on debugging as a skill, from the standpoint of Cognitive Load Theory, and break it down into a tree-shaped model of subskills that enable one another. Debugging may thus be seen as a meta-skill that requires the coordination of multiple others. From the standpoint of Cognitive Load Theory, such a skill is cognitively expensive, which may explain the learning-related difficulties tied to debugging. Using the framework of the four-component instructional design, we hypothesize a categorization of each debugging subskill as either recurrent or nonrecurrent, dividing those that are applied consistently to different contexts from those that require problem solving. All subskills may be practised and potentially assessed with targeted exercises, whose design depends on their recurrent/nonrecurrent nature. We provide extensive examples of such exercises. Our decomposition of debugging into subskills is a novel way to address debugging in educational contexts and complements the work done on debugging processes. Although it is currently a theoretically grounded conjecture, the model provides concrete guidance for instructors on analyzing existing materials and planning cognitive-load-informed learning trajectories.

Intelligent Tutoring Systems (ITSs) for Math still use traditional data input methods: computers’ keyboard and mouse. However, students usually solve math tasks using paper and pen. Therefore, the gap between the manner the students work and the requirements imposed by these typing-based systems expose students to an extraneous cognitive load, impairing their learning. Our study investigates the impact of the data input method on students’ learning and fluency in solving equations using step-based math ITSs. More specifically, we have considered the standard typing and handwriting input methods. We hypothesized that the students would be more fluent using their handwriting with online recognition to solve math equations than using the typing input method. This fluency indicates a reduction in cognitive load, freeing working memory for logical reasoning instead of interface preconditions, leading to improved learning. We have conducted an experiment with 55 seventh-grade students from a private school to validate the hypothesis, randomly assigned to control and experimental groups. Each group used one of the input methods on two different devices (desktop computers and tablets). Although students using handwriting solved more equations and were faster than students who typed their equations, we could not find statistically significant differences in the learning between students that used typing or handwriting. Additionally, we have found that the input method used in a not ideal device (e.g., handwriting with a computer’s mouse instead of using a touch screen device) can negatively affect the students’ performance.