Subgoal Labeled Worked Examples Improve K-12 Teacher Performance in Computer Programming Training

Subgoal Labeled Worked Examples Improve K-12 Teacher Performance in Computer Programming Training Lauren E. Margulieux (l.marg @gatech.edu) Georgia Institute of Technology, School of Psychology Atlanta, GA 30332-0170 USA Richard Catrambone (rc7@prism.gatech.edu) Georgia Institute of Technology, School of Psychology Atlanta, GA 30332-0170 USA Mark Guzdial (guzdial@cc.gatech.edu) Georgia Institute of Technology, School of Interactive Computing Atlanta, GA 30332-0760 USA studies, however, have been conducted with undergraduate students in face-to-face learning environments. These are not the conditions that would be ideal for K-12 teacher professional development. The present study explores the effectiveness of the subgoal intervention for K-12 teachers interested in learning computer science in an online learning environment (i.e., with no face-to-face interaction). Worked examples are an important instructional tool for learners in highly procedural domains like math or computer programming. Worked examples help learners because they provide specific information about how to apply domain principles to problem solving (Bassok, 1990). Furthermore, worked examples provide a step-by-step solution to a problem from which students can learn before they are able to solve problems independently (Atkinson, Derry, Renkl, & Wortham, 2000). When learners are presented with all of the steps of an example solution at once, however, they often have difficulty determining what information is important for solving problems in that domain (i.e., structural information) and what information represents details relevant for solving only that problem (Catrambone, 1994). Using subgoal labels to group steps of worked examples into meaningful units can help learners recognize structural information in the examples. Subgoals are functional components of complex problem solutions; each subgoal is a necessary part of the solution. How a subgoal is achieved might vary between and within problems, but the subgoals needed to complete a problem do not. Subgoals are specific to a domain, but not to a problem; a multitude of problems in a domain might have the same subgoal structure, so by learning the subgoals in a domain, students can learn to solve problems in that domain (Catrambone, 1994). Learners who study materials that label the subgoals of a worked example are more likely to solve novel problems than learners who study the same examples without the subgoal labels (Catrambone, 1998). There are several possible theoretical explanations for this phenomenon. Subgoal labels can help learners chunk problem-solving steps which might reduce the cognitive load required to learn them (Catrambone, 1994). Furthermore, subgoal labels might help learners create mental models in a domain by Abstract Technology has become integrated into many facets of our lives. Due to the rapid onset of this integration, many current K-12 teachers do not have the skills required to supply the sudden demand for technical training. This deficit, in turn, has created a demand for professional development programs that allow working teachers to learn computer science so that they might become qualified to teach this increasingly important field. Subgoal labeled worked examples have been found to improve the performance of learners in highly procedural domains. The present study tested subgoal labeled worked examples in an online learning program for teachers. Teachers who received the subgoal labels solved novel problems more accurately than teachers who received the same worked examples without the subgoal labels. These findings have implications for the use of subgoal labels in professional development, other types of lifelong learning, and online learning. Keywords: subgoal learning; worked examples; computer programming, K-12 teacher training. Introduction As technology becomes ubiquitous, being technically trained is frequently necessary for individuals to be effective in their professional and personal lives. Technology has advanced at such a rapid pace, however, that many of our educators are not qualified to train students in technical fields. Thus, it is important to train teachers, who have full schedules and possibly no technical training, to become qualified to teach technical subjects. Fortunately, because technical subjects tend to be highly procedural, methods used for teaching other highly procedural subjects like mathematics can be used in technical education. One of the methods that has been effective for teaching procedural domains (e.g., statistics and physics) is to manipulate the format of worked examples that students receive (e.g., Catrambone, 1996). Catrambone (1998) found that worked examples that included subgoal labels were effective for helping students learn to solve problems in a new domain. This intervention has also been found to be effective for teaching computer programming (Margulieux, Guzdial, & Catrambone, 2012). Most of these subgoal