A methodology for the capture and analysis of hybrid data: a case study of program debugging

No description supplie

Pirate plunder: game-based computational thinking using scratch blocks

Policy makers worldwide argue that children should be taught how technology works, and that the ‘computational thinking’ skills developed through programming are useful in a wider context. This is causing an increased focus on computer science in primary and secondary education. Block-based programming tools, like Scratch, have become ubiquitous in primary education (5 to 11-years-old) throughout the UK. However, Scratch users often struggle to detect and correct ‘code smells’ (bad programming practices) such as duplicated blocks and large scripts, which can lead to programs that are difficult to understand. These ‘smells’ are caused by a lack of abstraction and decomposition in programs; skills that play a key role in computational thinking. In Scratch, repeats (loops), custom blocks (procedures) and clones (instances) can be used to correct these smells. Yet, custom blocks and clones are rarely taught to children under 11-years-old. We describe the design of a novel educational block-based programming game, Pirate Plunder, which aims to teach these skills to children aged 9-11. Players use Scratch blocks to navigate around a grid, collect items and interact with obstacles. Blocks are explained in ‘tutorials’; the player then completes a series of ‘challenges’ before attempting the next tutorial. A set of Scratch blocks, including repeats, custom blocks and clones, are introduced in a linear difficulty progression. There are two versions of Pirate Plunder; one that uses a debugging-first approach, where the player is given a program that is incomplete or incorrect, and one where each level begins with an empty program. The game design has been developed through iterative playtesting. The observations made during this process have influenced key design decisions such as Scratch integration, difficulty progression and reward system. In future, we will evaluate Pirate Plunder against a traditional Scratch curriculum and compare the debugging-first and non-debugging versions in a series of studies

Where Are My Intelligent Assistant's Mistakes? A Systematic Testing Approach

Intelligent assistants are handling increasingly critical tasks, but until now, end users have had no way to systematically assess where their assistants make mistakes. For some intelligent assistants, this is a serious problem: if the assistant is doing work that is important, such as assisting with qualitative research or monitoring an elderly parent’s safety, the user may pay a high cost for unnoticed mistakes. This paper addresses the problem with WYSIWYT/ML (What You See Is What You Test for Machine Learning), a human/computer partnership that enables end users to systematically test intelligent assistants. Our empirical evaluation shows that WYSIWYT/ML helped end users find assistants’ mistakes significantly more effectively than ad hoc testing. Not only did it allow users to assess an assistant’s work on an average of 117 predictions in only 10 minutes, it also scaled to a much larger data set, assessing an assistant’s work on 623 out of 1,448 predictions using only the users’ original 10 minutes’ testing effort