Skip to main content
Log in

Improvements in Introductory Programming Course: Action Research Insights and Outcomes

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Systemic Practice and Action Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Programming is a rewarding and yet demanding field in the ICT labormarket, but it is considered a challenging and difficult area of learning for significant numbers of novice programmers. As a result, high attrition rates from introductory programming (IP) courses are reported despite extensive research which attempts to address the issue. In this research, an action research methodology was used with three cycles to investigate and improve the teaching and learning process of the IP course. There were nine activities performed during the span of these three cycles. All three entities of the didactic triangle (student, instructor, and content) together with learning context were incorporated into the research design to understand the problem better and execute the proposed solution. The result shows that three cycles of the action research methodology helps in understanding and improving the students learning outcomes in the IP course. Moreover, the attrition rate was also reduced in the IP course.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • ACM-IEEE Joint Task Force on Computing Curricula (2013). Computer science curricula 2013, ACM Press and IEEE Computer Society Press. https://doi.org/10.1145/2534860

    Google Scholar 

  • Akdere M (2003) The action research paradigm: an alternative approach in negotiation. Syst Pract Action Res 16(5):339–354. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1027354823205

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carr W, Kemmis S (1986) Becoming critical education, knowledge and action research, 1st edn. Routledge, Abingdon

    Google Scholar 

  • Collatto, D.C., Dresch, A., Lacerda, D.P., Bentz, I.G. (2017). Is action design research indeed necessary? Analysis and synergies between action research and design science research, Syst Pract Action Res, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11213-017-9424-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Raadt, M., Toleman, M., & Watson, R. (2005). Textbooks under inspection, University of Southern Queensland, Australia, Retrieved May 2013, http://eprints.usq.edu.au/167/1/TechReport_Draft_10.pdf

  • Ferrance, E. (2000). Themes in Education: Action research, Brown University, retrieved 20 July, 2014 http://www.alliance.brown.edu/pubs/themes ed/act research.pdf

  • Gill J, Johnson P (2002) Action research for managers, 3rd edn. Sage Publication Ltd, Thousand Oaks

    Google Scholar 

  • Iqbal S, Harsh Ok (2013) A self review and external review model for teaching and assessing novice programmers. International Journal of Information and Education Technology 3(2):120–123

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jenkins, T. (2002). Teaching programming – a journey from teacher to motivator‘, In Proceedings of 2nd annual LTSN-ICS conference, London, 65–71

  • Lahtinen E, Ala-Mutka K, Järvinen HM (2005) A study of the difficulties of novice programmers. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin 37(3):14–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lyndall, B. (2013). Action research and unit improvement in higher education: a case study approach‘, In Proceedings of the 19th APRRES Conference, RMIT University, Melbourne

  • Malik, S. I. (2016). Enhancing practice and achievement in introductory programming using an ADRI editor, proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Teaching, Assessment and Learning for Engineering, IEEE, Thailand, 7-9 December, pp. 32-39, https://doi.org/10.1109/TALE.2016.7851766

  • Malik SI, Mathew R, Hammood M (2017) PROBSOL, a web-based application to develop problem solving skills in introductory programming. In: proceedings of the 1st AUE international research conference, Dubai

  • McIntosh P (2010) Action research and reflective practice: creative and visual methods to facilitate reflection and learning, 1st edn. Routledge, Abingdon

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • McNiff J, Whitehead J (2010) You and your action research project, 3rd edn. Routledge, Abingdon

    Google Scholar 

  • Mills GE (2010) Action research: a guide for the teacher researcher, 4th edn. Pearson Education, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Morton-Cooper A (2000) Action research in health care, 1st edn. Blackwell Science Ltd, Great Britain

    Google Scholar 

  • Muir, P. (2007). Action research in the scholarship of learning and teaching. RMIT's magazine for the teaching community, Vol. 2, Issue 3, retrieved on 21 July, 2014, http://emedia.rmit.edu.au/edjournal/Action+research+in+the+scholarship

  • Newman JM (2000) Action research: a brief overview. Forum qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research 1(1)

  • O'Brien R (2001) An overview of the methodological approach of action research. In Roberto Richardson (Ed.), theory and practice of action research, retrieved on 20 July, 2014 http://www.web.ca/~robrien/papers/arfinal.html

  • Philips DK, Carr K (2010) Becoming a teacher through action research: process, context, and self-study, 2nd edn. Routledge, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, K. (2002). Classroom action research: a case study assessing Students' perceptions and learning outcomes of classroom teaching versus on-line teaching‘, Journal of Industrial Teacher Education, 40, 1, USA

  • Scott, R.G. (2015). Improving student success in developmental math courses at a two-year college: An action research study‘, PhD Thesis, Capella University, USA https://search.proquest.com/openview/f77cc2704675299fecfd44b17f6c83ec/1?pqpqorigsite=gscholar&cbl=18750&diss=y. Accessed Oct 2015

  • Shuhidan, S.M. (2012). Probing the minds of novice programmers through guided learning, PhD thesis, RMIT University, Australia

  • Soloway E (1986) Learning to program = learning to construct mechanisms and explanations. Commun ACM 29(9):850–858

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thota, N., Berglund, A., & Clear T. (2012). Illustration of paradigm pluralism in computing education research‘, In proceedings of Australasian Computing Education Conference (ACE 2012), Melbourne

  • Tony C (2004) Critical enquiry in computer science education. In: Fincher S, Petre M (eds) Computer science education research: the field and the Endeavour (ISBN 90 265 1969 9, pp. 101–125). Routledge Falmer, Taylor & Francis Group, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Webster M (1994) Overview of programming and problem solving. Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary, 10th edn, computerscience.jbpub.com/vbnet/pdfs/mcmillan01.pdf. Accessed 15 July 2013

  • Winslow LE (1996) Programming pedagogy—a psychological overview. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin 28(3):17–22

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yadin A (2011) Reducing the dropout rates in an introductory programming course. ACM Inroads 2(4):71–76

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sohail Iqbal Malik.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Malik, S.I. Improvements in Introductory Programming Course: Action Research Insights and Outcomes. Syst Pract Action Res 31, 637–656 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11213-018-9446-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11213-018-9446-y

Keywords

Navigation