4 ms·
This paper is from 2006. Its results have since been shown to be not as impressive as first thought: http://crpit.com/confpapers/CRPITV78Bornat.pdf http://crp
by Jabbles 15y ago
This paper is from 2006. Its results have since been shown to be not as impressive as first thought:
http://crpit.com/confpapers/CRPITV78Bornat.pdf http://crpit.com/confpapers/CRPITV78Bornat.pdf
We now report that after six experiments, involving more than 500 students at six institutions in three countries, the predictive e ffect of our test has failed to live up to that early promise.
- ColinWright 15y agoTowards the bottom of the lunk-to page: Meta-analysis of the effect of consistency on success in early learning of programming is our fourth paper that was presented to Psychology Programming Interested Group (PPIG) Annual workshop on July 2009. Abstract: ... The test does not very accurately predict levels of performance, but by combining the result of six replications of the experiment, five in UK and one in Australia. We show that consistency does have a strong effect on success in early learning to program but background programming experience, on the other hand, has little or no effect. http://www.eis.mdx.ac.uk/research/PhDArea/saeed/SD_PPIG_2009.pdf http://www.eis.mdx.ac.uk/research/PhDArea/saeed/SD_PPIG_2009... In short, the jury is still out, but there is some sort of effect showing up, and it's going to need careful experiments to find out what's really going on. It does seem to show promise, though, of finding a predictive effect.
- pmb 15y agoIt is superb that they have done the replication and followup and are reporting the null hypothesis.