Cited by 42Teaching and Learning ProgrammingStudent Assessment and FeedbackScience Education and Pedagogy

Using Targeted Feedback to Address Common Student Misconceptions in Introductory Programming: A Data-Driven Approach

Open access
Qian, Yizhou, Lehman, James D.·2019·Sage Open

Abstract

With the expansion of computer science (CS) education, CS teachers in K-12 schools should be cognizant of student misconceptions and be prepared to help students establish accurate understanding of computer science and programming. Digital tools, such as automated assessment systems, can be useful and supportive in teaching CS courses. This two-stage design-based research (DBR) study investigated the effects of targeted feedback in an automated assessment system for addressing common misconceptions of high school students in a Java-based introductory programming course. Based on students’ common errors and underlying misconceptions, targeted feedback messages were designed and provided for students. The quantitative analysis found that with targeted feedback students were more likely to correct the errors in their code. The qualitative analysis of students’ solutions revealed that when improving the code, students receiving feedback made fewer intermediate incorrect solutions. In other words, the targeted feedback messages may help to promote conceptual change and facilitate learning. Although the findings of this exploratory study showed evidence of the power of digital tools, more research is needed to make technology benefit more CS teachers.

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 · 10.1177/2158244019885136

Cites

5 of 5 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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Qian, Y., & Lehman, J. D.
Affiliations
  • Jiangnan University (CN)
  • Purdue University West Lafayette (US)
Corresponding author
Qian, Yizhou
Venue
Sage Open
Published
2019-10
Volume
9
Issue
4
ISSN
2158-2440 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2981974458
Cited by
42
References
5
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 4
FWCI
3.61
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • SAGE Open (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
fundamental research funds for the central universities (JUSRP11982)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Science Applications › Teaching and Learning Programming
  • Social Sciences › Education › Student Assessment and Feedback
  • Social Sciences › Education › Science Education and Pedagogy
Keywords
targeted feedback, student misconceptions, introductory programming, automated assessment systems, high school computer science education, Java programming, conceptual change, error correction, feedback messages, K-12 computer science

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