Insights and Conflicts in Discussing Recursion: A Case Study
Abstract
Recursion is a significant concept, appearing in almost every introductory course in Computer Science (CS). CS educators and educational researchers often refer to difficulties in learning and teaching recursion. However, the research literature barely addresses the unique ways in which students relate to this interdisciplinary concept and the particular learners’ language concerning recursive phenomena. The gap is most apparent when seen through a constructivist lens, where the students’ prior knowledge and idiosyncratic conceptions should be referred to and reflected upon in order to serve as a basis for further knowledge construction. This paper reports on a study in which a collaborative classification of several recursive phenomena are used to facilitate the construction of recursion. The student discourse was recorded and analyzed, and a grounded categorical system was formed and examined. Preliminary results indicate some basic aspects of recursion in the student discourse, although the students apparently talk a very different language from that of the experts. Some ‘potentially rich’ discourse episodes were evident as well, representing conflicts among alternative conceptions. Such episodes can serve as a springboard for further learning.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The two-phase organisation of dialogues is based on the theoretical idea that recursion is a useful and powerful problem-solving strategy.
“Similarly, the organisation of the dialogues in two phases is based on the theoretical idea that recursion is a useful and powerful problem-solving strategy (Levy, 2001;Sooriamurthi, 2001).”
From Teaching argumentative synthesis writing through deliberative dialogues: instructional practices in secondary education (2021) · cites this paper as Levy, 2001
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Casado-Ledesma, L., Cuevas, I., Van den Bergh, H., Rijlaarsdam, G., Mateos, M., Granado-Peinado, M., & Martín, E. (2021) · Instructional Science · doi:10.1007/s11251-021-09548-3 · Cited by 29 · see citing works
- Authors
- Levy, D.
- Corresponding author
- Levy, Dalit
- Venue
- Computer Science Education
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2001-12
- Volume
- 11
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 305-322
- ISSN
- 0899-3408 (ISSN-L)
- 1744-5175
- OpenAlex
- W2164113162
- Cited by
- 23
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 2 · 2014: 3
- FWCI
- 6.35
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Computer Science Education (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Science Applications › Teaching and Learning Programming
- Social Sciences › Education › Science Education and Pedagogy
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Mechanical Engineering › Design Education and Practice
- Keywords
- recursion, student conceptions, student discourse, misconceptions, collaborative classification, constructivism, prior knowledge, conceptual disputes
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