SIGCSE 2004 School of Computer and Information Sciences

1
Houston, we have a problemTheres a leak in
the CS1 affective oxygen tank

• Dawn McKinney and Leo F. Denton

2
Houston, we have a problemTheres a leak in
the CS1 affective oxygen tank

• Dawn McKinney and Leo F. Denton

3
Affective Taxonomy Krathwohl, Bloom, et. al.

• 1.0 Receiving
• 2.0 Responding
• 3.0 Valuing
• 4.0 Organization
• 5.0 Characterization

4
In contrast to the perception that

• low graduation rates in the STEM disciplines are
  a result of a normal weed-out process,
• studies show that large percentages of students
  are capable but choose not to persist,
• while others despite their dissatisfaction
  persist to graduation.

5
Causes of the problem

• Loss of student interest
• Poor teaching/instruction
• Difficulty of discipline
• Inadequate prior knowledge
• Cultural issues
• External factors

6
Focusing on excellence

• NACE industrys top ten qualities for
  graduates
• Communication skills
• Honesty/integrity
• Teamwork skills
• Interpersonal skills
• Motivation/initiative
• Strong work ethic
• Analytical skills
• Flexibility/adaptability
• Computer skills
• Organizational skills

7
Parallelism and interdependence of cognitive and
affective domains

• The division between the affective and cognitive
  domains is artificial.
• Throughout the educational process affective and
  cognitive behaviors are inseparably linked.
• Growth in each domain may lead to further growth
  in the other domain.
• - Bloom, Krathwohl, Martin and Briggs

8
Keeping the oxygen flowing the affective domain
can encourage

• Internalization of cognitive content
• Development of habits
• Professional practices
• Interest and belonging
• in the discipline
• Increased effort
• Perceived competence

9
Examples of Affective Objectives

• 1.0 Receiving
• Students become aware that testing is a part of
  the software development life cycle during the
  initial programming labs.
• 2.0 Responding
• Students use coding standards as taught in the
  lectures with minimal prompting in the lab.
• 3.0 Valuing
• Students consistently show strong work ethic,
  cooperation, and initiative while working in
  groups.
• 4.0 Organization
• Students discuss a wide variety of useful
  personal initiatives indicative of a growing
  commitment to life-long learning.

10
Our broader research recommends

• the integration of discipline-based affective
  objectives into curricula
• to enliven, incorporate, and sustain the energy
  of students
• in order to attain higher cognitive and affective
  achievement.

11
Gauging the oxygen level

• Factors measured
• Interest
• Value
• Perceived competence
• Effort
• Lack of Pressure
• Sense of Belonging
• Student surveys
• Intrinsic Motivation Inventory (IMI)
• Institutional Integration Scale

12
CS1 sections studied

• 2 sections using specific affective initiatives
• 2 sections not using specific affective
  initiatives

Questions asked

1. Do the affective factors significantly correlate
   with course grade?
2. Do the levels of these affective factors change
   during the semester?
3. Do affective initiatives impact the levels of
   affective factors?

13
Course Grade Correlated with Affective Factors
Pearson Correlations Factors with Course Grade N p-value Pearson Correlations Factors with Course Grade N p-value Pearson Correlations Factors with Course Grade N p-value Pearson Correlations Factors with Course Grade N p-value
Pretest Value 0.215 86 0.047
Posttest Interest 0.640 56 0.000
Posttest Competence 0.588 56 0.001
Posttest Effort 0.445 56 0.001
Posttest Lack of Pressure 0.614 56 0.004
Posttest Value 0.614 56 0.000
Significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed) Significant at the 0.05 level (two-tailed) Significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed) Significant at the 0.05 level (two-tailed) Significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed) Significant at the 0.05 level (two-tailed) Significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed) Significant at the 0.05 level (two-tailed)
14
(No Transcript)
15
(No Transcript)
16
The crew reported...

• This class wasn't interesting to me and
  basically I didn't learn much.
• This course involves programming assignments
  back-to-back. There is definitely an added
  pressure associated.
• The work load in this class is tremendous.
  Coupled with this course and others I'm
  struggling to pass most of my classes because I
  am unable to manage my time.
• I just got here. Maybe it will be different
  later, but people seem to stick to their little
  subgroups around here.
• Programming is harder than I thought and I don't
  quite understand everything. I'm not sure that I
  should major in something that I don't completely
  understand.
• Since I do not feel highly experienced in CIS, I
  feel I may decide to change my major.

17
Keeping the oxygen flowing

• Use of cognitive/affective objectives
• Classroom discussion
• Student self-reflection
• Cooperative and
• active learning
• Learning communities

18
Recent reports from the crew
Due to the hard nature of this course and my
doing well in it, I feel that the pressure has
decreased because if I can do it in this course
then I can do it in other CIS courses. (sense
of competence) Before I took CIS 120 I didn't
know for sure I wanted to go into computer
science for a living. Now I am sure this is what
I want to go into. (sense of belonging)
19
Recent reports from the crew

• The value I place in this class on a scale of
  1-10 would be a 10. Because we are a team in
  here and I know that I am an asset to my team. I
  have to be here. (teamwork)
• My instructor has high expectations and I, like
  others, respond to that positively and work
  harder in this class as well as other classes.
  (work ethic)

20
Recent reports from the crew

• The reason my effort has increased is that this
  class has made me work harder and think harder.
  So this has made me want to go on with the CIS
  courses. (motivation/initiative)
• Now that I actually know what working with
  programs is somewhat like, I find I enjoy it! I
  also like the challenge that problem solving
  involves. (analytical skills)

21
(No Transcript)
22
Dawn McKinney and Leo F. Denton School of
Computer and Information Sciences University of
South AlabamaMobile, Alabama 36688(251)
460-6390 dmckinney, ldenton_at_usouthal.edu