Improving Programming Instruction with Subgoal Labeled Instructional Text

Improving Programming Instruction with Subgoal Labeled Instructional Text Lauren 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 Abstract (LeFevre & Dixon, 1986) because they take less effort to understand than instructional text (Eiriksdottir & Catrambone, 2011). Using worked examples in this way, however, can inhibit transfer to novel problems because they are specific to a particular context, and learners are commonly not able to glean abstract information from these concrete examples. To improve this type of transfer, examples that emphasize subgoals have been used (e.g., Catrambone, 1998; see Figure 1). In science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education, problem solving tends to be highly procedural, and these procedures are typically taught with general instructional text and specific worked examples. Subgoal labels have been used in worked examples to help learners understand the procedure being demonstrated and improve problem solving performance. The effect of subgoal labels in instructional text, however, has not been explored. The present study examined the efficacy of subgoal labeled instructional text and worked examples for programming education. The results show that learners who received subgoal labels in both the text and example are able to solve novel problems better than those who do not. Subgoal labels in the text appear to have a different effect, rather than an additive effect, on learners than subgoal labels in the example. Specifically, subgoal labels in text appear to help the learner articulate the procedure, and subgoal labels in the example appear to help the learner apply the procedure. Furthermore, having subgoal labels in both types of instruction might help learners integrate the information from those sources better. Subgoal Labeled Worked Example Create Component 1. From the basic palette drag out a label. 2. Place the label underneath the image. Set Properties 3. Set the text to Click button to see your fortune. 4. Rename it to fortuneLabel. Unlabeled Worked Example 1. From the basic palette drag out a label. 2. Place the label underneath the image. 3. Set the text to Click button to see your fortune. 4. Rename it to fortuneLabel. Keywords: STEM education; subgoal learning; worked examples; procedural text. Introduction Figure 1: Worked examples with and without subgoal labels. Knowledge of computing is increasingly necessary in our society. As computing advances, individuals need to understand more about it to understand technical information and make well-informed decisions. Moreover, individuals with advanced computing knowledge are needed to fill increasingly technical jobs and promote innovation. To reflect these societal goals, a major learning goal for computing is that students understand core concepts and principles with the underlying expectation that they can transfer their knowledge to solve problems or critically evaluate information. In computing like in other STEM subjects, both instructional text and worked examples are used to provide instruction that is abstract enough to apply to novel problems and concrete enough to grasp (Trafton & Reiser, 1993). Instructional text describes a procedure abstractly (LeFevre & Dixon, 1986) and provides information about reasoning within a domain (Reder & Anderson, 1980); worked examples demonstrate how to apply procedures to specific problems. Worked examples are typically used by students as the primary method to learn procedures To understand what a subgoal is, consider a complex problem solution. Achieving the solution would be the overall goal, and the problem solver takes many individual steps towards that goal. Subgoals are in-between; they are functional pieces of the solution achieved by completing one or more individual steps. The same subgoals tend to appear across problems within a topic area; therefore, teaching learners to identify and achieve subgoals increases their success at solving novel problems (Catrambone & Holyoak, 1990). Research on subgoal labeled worked examples suggests that improved outcomes caused by subgoal labels stems from three sources: highlighting the structure of the worked example for the learner (Atkinson & Derry, 2000; Catrambone, 1995a), helping the learner mentally organize information (Catrambone, 1995b), and inducing the learner to self-explain the examples (Catrambone, 1998; Renkl & Atkinson, 2002). Though subgoal labels improve learning from worked examples, the effect of subgoal labels in instructional text has not been explored.