Advertisement

Students’ Success in the Bebras Challenge in Lithuania: Focus on a Long-Term Participation

  • Gabrielė Stupurienė
  • Lina Vinikienė
  • Valentina Dagienė
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9973)

Abstract

The paper deals with students’ participation in the Bebras challenge on Informatics and Computational Thinking in Lithuania in 2010–2015. As noticed, secondary school students have an opportunity to learn the basic informatics concepts during the participation in the Bebras challenge. Analyses of a large amount of data from participants’ task solving records are provided. Additionally, observation of the task difficulty level of the Bebras contest in the past 6 years is presented. The target group, on which a research study was focused, is a group of students who solved tasks 6 years in turn. A detailed overview of their results provides an understanding how the participants have solved tasks over these years. The importance of algorithmic thinking as an opportunity for students to learn and understand the basics of informatics as well as develop their computational thinking skills is emphasised. The results of data analysis highlight the importance of students’ achievements by a long-term participation.

Keywords

Bebras challenge Informatics education Learning algorithms Problem solving Task difficulty Computational thinking 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The research is partially supported by the Google CS4HS initiative – many thanks! Also, the authors would like to explicitly thank all members of the international Bebras challenge on informatics and computational thinking community that took part in task development and influenced in this way the outcome of this paper.

References

  1. 1.
    Aesaert, K., van Braak, J.: Gender and socioeconomic related differences in performance based ICT competences. Comput. Educ. 84, 8–25 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Atanasova, G.E., Hristova, P.T.: Methodological aspects of the initial training of students for participation. In: Programming Contest in Proceedings of 2015 Balkan Conference on Informatics: Advances in ICT, Romania, pp. 1–9 (2015)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bebras International Challenge on Informatics and Computational Thinking. http://www.bebras.org/en/facts. Accessed 30 Apr 2016
  4. 4.
    Bellettini, C., Lonati, V., Malchiodi, D., Monga, M., Morourgo, A., Torelli, M.: How challenging are bebras tasks? An IRT analysis based on the performance of Italian students. In: Proceedings of 2015 ACM Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education, pp. 27–32 (2015)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bucher, T.: The algorithmic imaginary: exploring the ordinary affects of Facebook algorithms. Inf. Commun. Soc., 1–15 (2016). http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2016.1154086
  6. 6.
    CSTA & ISTE: Operational definition of computational thinking for K-12 education (2011). https://csta.acm.org/Curriculum/sub/CurrFiles/CompThinkingFlyer.pdf
  7. 7.
    Dagienė, V., Futschek, G.: Bebras international contest on informatics and computer literacy: criteria for good tasks. In: Mittermeir, R.T., Sysło, M.M. (eds.) ISSEP 2008. LNCS, vol. 5090, pp. 19–30. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dagiene, V., Jevsikova, T.: Reasoning on the content of informatics education for beginners. Socialiniai mokslai 78(4), 84–90 (2012)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Dagienė, V., Mannila, L.A, Poranen, T., Rolandsson, L., Söderhjelm, P.: Students’ performance on programming-related tasks in an informatics contest in Finland, Sweden and Lithuania. In: Proceedings of 2014 Conference on Innovation & Technology in Computer Science Education, Uppsala, Sweden, 21–25 June 2014Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dagienė, V., Stupurienė, G.: Bebras- a sustainable community building model for the concept based learning of informatics and computational thinking. Inform. Educ. 15(1), 25–44 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Forišek, M.: The difficulty of programming contests increases. In: Hromkovič, J., Královič, R., Vahrenhold, J. (eds.) ISSEP 2010. LNCS, vol. 5941, pp. 72–85. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Futschek, G.: Algorithmic thinking: the key for understanding computer science. In: Mittermeir, R.T. (ed.) ISSEP 2006. LNCS, vol. 4226, pp. 159–168. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Yadav, A., Mayfield, Ch., Zhou, N., Hambrusch, S., Korb, J.T.: Computational thinking in elementary and secondary teacher education. ACM Trans. Comput. Educ. 14(1), 5 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kalelioğlu, F., Gülbahar, Y.: The effects of teaching programming via scratch on problem solving skills: a discussion from learners’ perspective. Inform. Educ. 13(1), 33–55 (2014)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Mannila, L., Dagiene, V., Demo, B., Grgurina, N., Mirolo, C., Rolandsson, L., Settle, A.: Computational thinking in K-9 education. In: Proceedings of Working Group Reports of the 2014 on Innovation & Technology in Computer Science Education Conference, ITiCSE-WGR 2014, pp. 1–29 (2014)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    OECD: Review of Policies to Improve the Effectiveness of Resource Use in Schools (Scholl Resources review). Country Background report for Lithuania (2015). https://www.oecd.org/edu/school/Lithuania_CBR_OECD-SRR_May2015.pdf
  17. 17.
    Palmer, D.: Research report: a motivation view of constructivist-informed teaching. Int. J. Sci. Educ. 27(10), 1853–1881 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    White, R.W.: Motivation reconsidered: the concept of competence. Psychol. Rev. 66, 297–333 (1959)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Peerear, J., Van Petegem, P.: Measuring integration of information and communication technology in education: an item response modelling approach. Comput. Educ. 58, 1247–1299 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Perrenet, J., Groote, J.F., Kaasenbrood, E.: Exploring students’ understanding of the concept of algorithm: levels of abstraction. In: Proceedings of 10th Annual SIGCSE Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education, pp. 64–68 (2005)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Strain-Seymour, E., Way, W., Dolan, R.P.: Strategies and Processes for Developing Innovative Items in Large-Scale Assessments. Pearson Education, Inc., New York (2009). http://images.pearsonassessments.com/images/tmrs/StrategiesandProcessesforDevelopingInnovativeItems.pdf
  22. 22.
    Van der Vegt, W.: Predicting the difficulty level of Bebras task. Olymp. Inform. 7, 132–139 (2013)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Vaníček, J.: Bebras informatics contest: criteria for good tasks revised. In: Gülbahar, Y., Karataş, E. (eds.) ISSEP 2014. LNCS, vol. 8730, pp. 17–28. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gabrielė Stupurienė
    • 1
  • Lina Vinikienė
    • 1
  • Valentina Dagienė
    • 1
  1. 1.Vilnius University Institute of Mathematics and InformaticsVilniusLithuania

Personalised recommendations