Abstract
With the development of science and technology, the demand for programmers has increased. However, learning computer programs is not an easy task. It might cause a significant impact on programming if misconceptions exist at the beginning of the study. Hence, it is important to discover and correct them immediately. Chatbots are effective teaching aids, they can assist students in eliminating misconceptions. They also assist teachers to instruct students according to their aptitude, which teachers found it hard to accomplish without technical supports when teaching in large classes. Therefore, this experiment uses chatbots to assist learners in the correction phase. We consider that learners who failed unit quizzes might have misunderstandings in programming concepts. We believe chatbots can teach according to individual misunderstandings and give correct responses to their unclear concepts. It is more effective than traditional teaching methods. In addition, to prevent human-computer interaction barriers, such as picking wrong keywords and giving plausible replies, or learners not being able to express their problems clearly, this experiment also adds concept maps to the chatbots’ dialogue, to work as the dialogue structure for each chatbot. The maps help the chatbots to explain concepts in each unit systematically and logically. The chatbots give questions according to the concepts on the concept maps and ask learners to reply with their answers. An ANCOVA test investigated students’ scores. Result showed the p-value is below 0.001, indicating that the group using concept map chatbots has better correction effects than the other group using only concept maps.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Data availability
The data that support the findings of this study are available in the Zenodo repository with the identifier https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7109343.
References
Burdescu, D., Mihaescu, C., Ionascu, C., Buligiu, I., & Logofatu, B. (2010). Expanding Mental Outlook with the help of Concept Maps. Informatica (Slovenia), 34, 535–540.
Chao-Huang, Y. (2003). The study of different cooperative learning model and problem based teaching to effectiveness of college student’s logical thinking ability and programming language, 270. https://hdl.handle.net/11296/zpkd95. Accessed 8 Dec 2020.
Chinedu, O., & Ade-Ibijola, A. (2021). Python-bot: a chatbot for teaching python programming. Engineering Letters, 29, 25–34.
Cunningham-Nelson, S., Boles, W., Trouton, L., & Margerison, E. (2019). A review of chatbots in education: Practical steps forward. In In: 30th Annual Conference for the Australasian Association for Engineering Education (AAEE 2019): Educators Becoming Agents of Change: Innovate, Integrate, Motivate. Brisbane, Queensland: Engineers Australia, 2019: 299–306. Engineers Australia. https://doi.org/10.3316/informit.068364390172788
Fawaz, M., El Khatib, A., El Kassas, G., & Shamieh, E. (2020). Concept mapping versus traditional teaching method on health sciences’ students’ score. BAU Journal - Health and Wellbeing, 2(2), 6. https://digitalcommons.bau.edu.lb/hwbjournal/vol2/iss2/6/
Gomes, A., & Mendes, A. (2007). Learning to program - difficulties and solutions. International Conference on Engineering Education (ICEE 2007). https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228328491_Learning_to_program_-_difficulties_and_solutions
Huang, M., Zhu, X., & Gao, J. (2020). Challenges in building intelligent open-domain dialog systems. ACM Transactions on Information Systems (TOIS), 38, 1–32.
Hwang, G. J., Yang, T. C., Tsai, C. C., & Yang, S. J. H. (2009). A context-aware ubiquitous learning environment for conducting complex science experiments. Computers & Education, 53(2), 402–413. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2009.02.016
Katagall, R., Dadde, R., Goudar, R. H., & Rao, S. (2015). Concept mapping in education and semantic knowledge representation: an illustrative survey. Procedia Computer Science, 48, 638–643. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2015.04.146
Keppens, J., & Hay, D. (2008). Concept map assessment for teaching computer programming. Computer Science Education, 18, 31–42. https://doi.org/10.1080/08993400701864880
Kinnunen, P., & Malmi, L. (2006). Why students drop out CS1 course? Proceedings of the second international workshop on Computing education research, Canterbury, United Kingdom. https://doi.org/10.1145/1151588.1151604
Kordaki, M., & Psomos, P. (2015). Diagnosis and treatment of students’ misconceptions with an intelligent concept mapping tool. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 191, 838–842. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.04.478
Kukul, V., Gökçearslan, Ş, & Günbatar, M. S. (2017). Computer programming self-efficacy scale (CPSES) for secondary school students: Development, validation and reliability. Educational Technology Theory and Practice, 7, 158–179. https://doi.org/10.17943/ETKU.72918
Luxton-Reilly, A. (2016). Learning to Program is Easy. https://doi.org/10.1145/2899415.2899432
Novak, J., & Cañas, A. (2008). The theory underlying concept maps and how to construct and use them. Technical Report IHMC CmapTools 2006-01 Rev 01-2008.
Okonkwo, C. W., & Ade-Ibijola, A. (2021). Chatbots applications in education: a systematic review. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 2, 100033. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2021.100033
Pintrich, P., Smith, D., Duncan, T., & McKeachie, W. (1991). A manual for the Use of the motivated strategies for learning questionnaire (MSLQ). Ann Arbor Michigan, 48109, 1259.
Rodrigues, R. S. V., Morgado, J. F. M., & Gomes, A. J. P. (2015). A contour-based segmentation algorithm for triangle meshes in 3D space. Computers & Graphics, 49, 24–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cag.2015.04.003
Shawar, B., & Atwell, E. (2007). Chatbots: are they really useful? LDV Forum, 22, 0101.
Smutny, P., & Schreiberova, P. (2020). Chatbots for learning: a review of educational chatbots for the Facebook Messenger. Computers and Education, 151, 103862. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103862
Swidan, A., Hermans, F., & Smit, M. (2018). Programming misconceptions for school students. https://doi.org/10.1145/3230977.3230995
Watson, C., & Li, F. W. B. (2014). Failure rates in introductory programming revisited Proceedings of the 2014 conference on Innovation & technology in computer science education, Uppsala, Sweden. https://doi.org/10.1145/2591708.2591749
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
This study is supported in part by the National Science and Technology Council of the Republic of China under contract number MOST 111-2410-H-031-024.
Additional information
Publisher’s note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Kuo, YC., Chen, YA. The impact of chatbots using concept maps on correction outcomes–a case study of programming courses. Educ Inf Technol 28, 7899–7925 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11506-6
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11506-6