Cited by 28Teaching and Learning ProgrammingEducational Robotics and EngineeringLogic, programming, and type systems

Exploring the Applicability of Simple Syntax Writing Practice for Learning Programming

Open access
Leinonen, Antti, Nygren, Henrik, Pirttinen, Nea, Hellas, Arto, Leinonen, Juho·2019·Proceedings of the 50th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education

Abstract

When learning programming, students learn the syntax of a programming language, the semantics underlying the syntax, and practice applying the language in solving programming problems. Research has suggested that simply the syntax may be hard to learn. In this article, we study difficulty of learning the syntax of a programming language. We have constructed a tool that provides students code that they write character-by-character. When writing, the tool automatically highlights each character in code that is incorrectly typed, and through the highlight-based feedback directs students into writing correct syntax. We conducted a randomized controlled trial in an introductory programming course organized in Java. One half of the population had the tool in the course material immediately before programming exercises where the practiced syntax was used, while the other half of the course population did not have the tool, thus approaching the exercises in a traditional way. Our results imply that isolated syntax writing practice may not be a meaningful addition to the arsenal used for teaching programming, at least when the programming course utilizes a large set of small programming exercises. We encourage researchers to replicate our work in contexts where syntax seems to be an issue.

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 · 10.1145/3287324.3287378

Cites

31 of 31 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [5]5. Neil Christopher Charles Brown, Michael Kölling, Davin McCall, and Ian Utting. 2014. Blackbox: a large scale repository of novice programmers' activity. In Proceedings of the 45th ACM technical symposium on Computer science education. ACM, 223-228.
  2. [15]15. Andreas Leon Aagaard Moth, Joergen Villadsen, and Mordechai Ben-Ari. 2011. SyntaxTrain: relieving the pain of learning syntax. In Proceedings of the 16th annual joint conference on Innovation and technology in computer science education. ACM, 387-387.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Leinonen, A., Nygren, H., Pirttinen, N., Hellas, A., & Leinonen, J.
Affiliations
University of Helsinki (FI)
Venue
Proceedings of the 50th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education
Publisher
ACM
Published
2019-02-22
Pages
84-90
OpenAlex
W2917409708
Cited by
27
References
31
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 4
FWCI
2.89
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (SIGCSE) (publishedVersion)
  • Työväentutkimus Vuosikirja (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Science Applications › Teaching and Learning Programming
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Educational Robotics and Engineering
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Logic, programming, and type systems
Keywords
syntax highlighting, automated feedback, introductory programming education, Java, programming exercises, syntactic errors, 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