Introductory programming: a systematic literature review

As computing becomes a mainstream discipline embedded in the school curriculum and acts as an enabler for an increasing range of academic disciplines in higher education, the literature on introductory programming is growing. Although there have been several reviews that focus on specific aspects of introductory programming, there has been no broad overview of the literature exploring recent trends across the breadth of introductory programming. This paper is the report of an ITiCSE working group that conducted a systematic review in order to gain an overview of the introductory programming literature. Partitioning the literature into papers addressing the student, teaching, the curriculum, and assessment, we explore trends, highlight advances in knowledge over the past 15 years, and indicate possible directions for future research

Measuring the cognitive load of learning to program

Cognitive load (CL) on a learner's working memory has emerged as an influential concept in computing education and beyond. CL is commonly divided in at least two components, intrinsic load (IL) and extraneous load (EL). We seek progress on two questions: (1) How can CL components be measured in the programming domain? (2) How should CL measurement deal with the "third component"of germane load (GL)? We replicate two studies: Morrison and colleagues' [49] evaluation of a questionnaire for self-assessing CL in programming, which is an adaptation of a generic instrument; and Jiang and Kalyuga's [24] study, which found support for a two-component measure of CL in language learning, with GL redundant. We crowd-sourced CL data using Morrison's questions at the end of a video tutorial on programming for beginners. A confirmatory factor analysis found strong support for a three-factor model, with factors matching the items intended to capture IL, EL, and GL, respectively. A two-factor model with IL-targeting and GL-targeting items combined gave a poorer fit. Our findings strengthen the claims of discriminant validity and internal reliability for Morrison's CL questionnaire for programming; construct validity for GL remains open, however. We affirm the need for further research on the two-component theory of CL and the sensitivity of CL self-assessments to contextual factors.Peer reviewe