Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online 2007-4
Assessing the Success Rate of Students Using a Learning Management System Together with a Collaborative Tool in Web-Based Teaching of Programming Languages
The development of collaborative studies in learning has led to a renewed interest in the field of Web-based education. In this experimental study a highly interactive and collaborative virtual teaching environment has been created by supporting Moodle LMS with collaborative learning tool GREWPtool. The aim of this experimental study has been to find out the success rate of students when using an advanced and a standard collaborative tool in teaching programming languages over the Internet. The system has been tested with a total of 58 students whose aim was to learn the programming language Java. Success rate of students have been measured using two different assessments. Our results show a higher success rate when an LMS system is combined with an advanced collaborative tool during the teaching of programming languages in a Web-based environment.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Bannan-RitlandB.BraggW., & CollinsM. (2001). Linking theory, educational constructs, and instructional strategies in Web-based course development. In RobinsonP. & Bannan-RitlandB. (Eds.), Web-based computer conferencing.Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing. Retrieved February 1, 2006, from http://www.provost.harvard.edu/factech/factech01/BannanWB.pdf.
2.
BoozW. (2004). The virtual curriculum laboratory: An online collaboration sandbox. In CrawfordC.WillisD.CarlsenR.GibsonI.McFerrinK.PriceJ., & WeberR. (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education International Conference 2004 (pp. 2821–2826). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.
3.
ChaseJ., & OkieE. (2000). Combining cooperative learning and peer instruction in introductory computer science, SIGCSE Bulletin, 32(1), 372–376.
4.
ChiM. T. H.BassokM.LewisM. W.ReimannP., & GlaserR. (1989). Self-explanations: How students study and use examples in learning to solve problems. Cognitive Science, 13, 145–182.
5.
FraenkelJ. R., & WallenN. E. (2006). How to design and evaluate research in education (6th ed., McGraw-Hill International ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
6.
HallJ. (2003). Assessing learning management systems.Oracle University, Web site: www.clomedia.com.
7.
HarasimL. (1990). Online education: An environment for collaboration and intellectual amplification. In HarasimL. (Ed.), Online education: perspectives on a new environment (pp. 39–64). New York: Praeger.
8.
Hubscher-YoungerT., & NarayananN. H. (2003). Constructive and collaborative learning of algorithms. Proceedings of the 34th SIGCSE technical symposium on computer science education, 1–58113–648-X, 6–10, Reno, NV.
9.
JonassenD.DavidsonM.CollinsM.CampbellJ., & Bannan-HaagB. (1995). Constructivism and computer-mediated communication in distance education. The American Journal of Distance Education, 9 (2), 7–26.
10.
JonesC., & TimpsonW. M. (1991). Technologically mediated staff development: A retrospective case study. The American Journal of Distance Education, 5(1), 51–56.
11.
JungI.ChoiS.LimC., & LeemJ. (2002). Effects of different types of interaction on learning achievement, satisfaction and participation in Web-Based Instruction. Innovation in Education and teaching International, 39(2), 153–162.
12.
KieslerS. (1992). Talking, teaching, and learning in network groups: Lessons from research. In KayeA. (Ed.), Collaborative learning through computer conferencing: The Najaden papers (pp. 117–136). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
LebowD. (1993). Constructivist values for instructional systems design: Five principles towards a new mindset. Educational Technology Research and Development, 41(3), 4–16.
15.
LiuS. (2005). Faculty use of technologies in online courses. International Journal of Instructional Technology & Distance Learning. Retrieved November 02, 2005, from: http://www.itdl.org/Journal/Aug_05/article03.htm.
16.
McDowellC.WernerL.BullockH., & FernaldJ. (2002). The effects of pair-programming on performance in an introductory programming course. Proceedings of SIGCSE 2003 (pp. 38–42). New York: ACM Press.
17.
MooreM. (1994). Autonomy and interdependence. American Journal of Distance Education, 8(2), 1–5.
18.
RoschelleJ. (2003). Learning by collaborating: Conceptual change. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2, 235–276.
19.
SabinR. E., & SabinE. (1994). Collaborative learning in an introductory computer science course, SIGCSE Symposium on Computer Science Education, (pp. 304–308).
20.
SharanY., & SharanS. (1992). Expanding cooperative learning through group investigation.New York: Teachers College Press.
21.
SheingoldK. (1991, September). Restructuring for learning with technology: The potential for synergy. Phi Delta Kappan, 17–27.
22.
TanevaS.AltermanR.GranvilleK.HeadM. R., & HickeyT. J. (2004). GREWPtool: A system for studying online collaborative learning.Computer Science Department, Brandeis University, Waltham, MA 02454. Retrieved August 03, 2006, from: http://group.cs.brandeis.edu/∼group/papers/GREWPtool.pdf.
23.
TruongN.BancroftP., & RoeP. (2003). A web based environment for learning to program. ACM International Conference Proceeding Series, Vol. 35 (pp. 255–264), Australian Computer Society, Inc., Darlinghurst, Australia, ISSN: 1445–1336, 0–909–92594–1.
24.
UzunboyluH. (2006). A review of two mainline e-Learning projects in the European Union. Educational Technology Research and Development, 54(2), 2006.
25.
WilliamL., & UpchurchR. L. (2001). In support of student pair-programming. Proceedings of the 32nd SIGCSE Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, 1–58113–329–4, 327–331, Charlotte, NC.
26.
WisherR. A.BelanichJ., & OrvisK. L. (2004). A question-collaboration approach to web-based learning. American Journal of Distance Education, 18(3), 169–185 (doi:10.1207/s15389286ajde1803_4).
27.
ZhaiM., & LiuS. (2005). Technology use in an online program. 21st Annual Conference on Distance Teaching and Learning. Madison, WI.
