CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 125Teaching and Learning ProgrammingEducational Robotics and EngineeringSpreadsheets and End-User Computing

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 29 of the 31 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

MIT App Inventor: Objectives, Design, and Development

Open access
Patton, Evan W., Tissenbaum, Michael, Harunani, Farzeen·2019·Computational Thinking Education
DOI 10.1007/978-981-13-6528-7_3
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

MIT App Inventor is an online platform designed to teach computational thinking concepts through development of mobile applications. Students create applications by dragging and dropping components into a design view and using a visual blocks language to program application behavior. In this chapter, we discuss (1) the history of the development of MIT App Inventor, (2) the project objectives of the project and how they shape the design of the system, and (3) the processes MIT uses to develop the platform and how they are informed by computational thinking literature. Key takeaways include use of components as abstractions, alignment of blocks with student mental models, and the benefits of fast, iterative design on learning.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/978-981-13-6528-7_3

Cites

29 of 29 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 31 references

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Begel, A., & Klopfer, E. (2007). Starlogo TNG: An introduction to game development. Journal of E-Learning, 53, 146.
  2. Deng, X. (2017). Group collaboration with App Inventor (Masters thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology).
  3. Morelli, R., De Lanerolle, T., Lake, P., Limardo, N., Tamotsu, E., & Uche, C. (2011, March). Can Android App Inventor bring computational thinking to k-12. In Proceedings of the 42nd ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (SIGCSE’11) (pp. 1–6).
  4. Papert, S. (1993). Mindstorms: Children, computers, and powerful ideas (2nd ed.). Basic Books.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–125 of 125

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Patton, E. W., Tissenbaum, M., & Harunani, F.
Affiliations
Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US)
Corresponding author
Patton, Evan W.
ORCID
Patton, Evan W.
Venue
Computational Thinking Education
Publisher
Springer Singapore
Published
2019
Pages
31-49
DOI
10.1007/978-981-13-6528-7_3
OpenAlex
W2966718639
Cited by
121
References
31
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 23 · 2023: 37 · 2022: 17 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 2
FWCI
30.26
Type
book chapter
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
Springer eBooks (publishedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
The Education University of Hong Kong
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Science Applications › Teaching and Learning Programming
  • Social Sciences › Education › Educational Robotics and Engineering
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Software › Spreadsheets and End-User Computing
Keywords
MIT App Inventor, computational thinking, visual programming, block-based programming, mobile application development, abstraction, student mental models, iterative design, programming education

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review