IDE Tools for Novice Programmers

1. IDE Tools for Novice Programmers -Arthur Lewis (alew525)

2. Contents • Background and Introduction • Overview of Popular Environments • Empirical Studies • Borland Delphi v/s SimplifIDE • Gild v/s Eclipse • BlueJ • Eclipse and other IDEs • Discussion

3. Introduction • Programming is not easy for new comers to grasp • Moreover, exposure to a professional development environment/IDE can be an added burden • A number of pedagogical IDEs have been designed to address this issue

4. Overview of Popular Environments • From current studies, BlueJ and DrJava are the most popular pedagogic environments • Both have been designed for novice programmers picking up Java • DrJava focused on providing a less “intimidating” interface as compared to Eclipse • BlueJ focused on simplifying the learning of OO concepts via a visual interface

5. Overview of Popular Environments • DrJava’s prominent feature is a read-eval-print (RELP) loop • Intuitive testing and debugging capabilities also supported along with error detection • However, no research done to test its effectiveness • Empirical studies are a must to ascertain its actual impact with respect to learning

6. Overview of Popular Environments • BlueJ had a visual interface designed to make OO concepts in Java easier for novices • Another study compared the features of BlueJ with DrJava Main Window of the BlueJ Interface (Source: Kölling, M., Quig, B., Patterson, A., & Rosenberg, J. (2003). The BlueJ system and its pedagogy. Computer Science Education, 13(4), 249-268.)

7. Overview of Popular Environments • Other tools included Penumbra, DrScheme and Gild • Penumbra was designed for Eclipse but never really took off • DrScheme’s purpose was to simplify the functional programming language Scheme • Researchers made claims which require empirical evidence to support validity • Gild was made to create a “Student Perspective” for Eclipse

8. Borland Delphi v/s SimplifIDE • Two related studies (part of the same work) compared a pedagogical environment (SimplifIDE) with a professional one (Borland Delphi) • Studied 2 groups: treatment and control • Took students academic abilities into account based on past performance by implicitly classifying them into two further categories

9. Borland Delphi v/s SimplifIDE • One study focused on academic performance and programming behavior of students • The other study took into account the perceived sense of learning derived by students • Results: • Weaker students benefited more from the pedagogical environment • Improved programming behavior observed in weaker students • Overall academic performance remained unaffected

10. Borland Delphi v/s SimplifIDE • Categorizing the students into weak and strong categories was a crucial aspect of this study • The sample size was adequately large and the study was conducted in a naturalistic environment • Some students opted out • Choice of pedagogical environments doesn’t affect academic performance

11. Gild v/s Eclipse • Study considered metrics such as efficiency, effectiveness, understanding and satisfaction • Hypothesized Gild will perform better than Eclipse • Consisted of problems followed by a qualitative feedback to measure understanding and satisfaction • Students preferred Gild over Eclipse

12. Gild v/s Eclipse • Study sample was small (N=6) • Participation was voluntary • Some students were familiar with other IDE tools • Students had trouble using some complex features of Eclipse such as a debugger • Customizing Eclipse’s interface to help students would lower its standards as a professional IDE

13. Empirical Studies: BlueJ • One study tested BlueJ in an academic setting • An initial evaluation using a beta version • Students were reported to have a higher passing rate as compared to previous years • However, this was the first time Java was taught and BlueJ was being used • Second evaluation evaluated students understanding of abstract OO concepts

14. Empirical Studies: BlueJ • Students pursuing their second programming unit were asked to complete a survey • Results were positive • Study claimed students had a better comprehension of the study material • More evidence is needed to support these claims

15. Empirical Studies: BlueJ • Another study compared BlueJ with TextPad • Sample populated comprised students of different disciplines • Opting out wasn’t an option • Course was taught in two sections, one using BlueJ and the other with TextPad • Two different samples were used for each section

16. Empirical Studies: BlueJ • Student performance was assessed • BlueJ didn’t have a significant impact on student performance • Students liked some features of the environment • Sample size was small i.e. within the 10-17 range • Sample had students from non computing disciplines

17. Eclipse and Other Professional IDES • Some researchers argue that Eclipse or other IDE tools are suited for classroom purposes • However these studies had limitations: • Small sample size • Mental manipulation of students • One of them did agree with the notion of academic performance being independent of the IDE

18. Discussion and Conclusion • Most of the existing pedagogical environments support OO languages (preferably Java) • More empirical analysis needed to ascertain their limitations and actual impact on learning • An individual’s programming aptitude is strongly related to his/her analytical skills • Tools may affect programming behaviors

19. Thank You!!!

20. Questions