EDUCON 2016, Abu Dhabi Comparing Computational Thinking Development Assessment Scores with Software Complexity Metrics Jes´ us Moreno-Le´ on, Gregorio Robles, Marcos Rom´ an-Gonz´ alez [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]KGB-L3, Universidad Rey Juan Carlos IEEE EDUCON 2016, Abu Dhabi, April 11 th 2016 Jes´ us Moreno-Le´on, Gregorio Robles, Marcos Rom´ an-Gonz´ alez Comparing Computational Thinking Development Assessment Sco
16
Embed
EDUCON16 "Comparing Computational Thinking Development Assessment Scores with Software Complexity Metrics" by Gregorio Robles. URJC. 11/04/16.
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
EDUCON 2016, Abu Dhabi
Comparing Computational Thinking DevelopmentAssessment Scores with Software Complexity
Metrics
Jesus Moreno-Leon, Gregorio Robles, Marcos Roman-Gonzalez
Jesus Moreno-Leon, Gregorio Robles, Marcos Roman-Gonzalez Comparing Computational Thinking Development Assessment Scores with Software Complexity Metrics
EDUCON 2016, Abu Dhabi
(cc) 2016 Jesus Moreno-Leon, Gregorio Robles and Marcos Roman-GonzalezSome rights reserved. This work licensed under Creative Commons
Attribution-ShareAlike License. To view a copy of full license, seehttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/ or write to
Creative Commons, 559 Nathan Abbott Way, Stanford,California 94305, USA.
Some of the figures have been taken from the InternetSource, and author and licence if known, is specified.
For those images, fair use applies.
Jesus Moreno-Leon, Gregorio Robles, Marcos Roman-Gonzalez Comparing Computational Thinking Development Assessment Scores with Software Complexity Metrics
EDUCON 2016, Abu Dhabi
Code to learn (I)
Logo programming language
Developed in the 1960s
Its educational impact wasintensively investigated inthe 70s and 80s
Students’ improvements inmaths (and otherdisciplines) were proved
“Disappeared” from theeducational landscape sincemid-90s
Seymour Papert’s picture: jgora.net
Jesus Moreno-Leon, Gregorio Robles, Marcos Roman-Gonzalez Comparing Computational Thinking Development Assessment Scores with Software Complexity Metrics
EDUCON 2016, Abu Dhabi
Code to learn (and II)
Computational Thinking is back in town
Alice, Greenfoot, Kodu, Scratch...
Code.org, EU Code Week, Africa Code Week, ArabCode.org...
If there is no evidence showing educational impact ofprogramming, this resurgence of programming in schoolscould disappear in a few years.
Jesus Moreno-Leon, Gregorio Robles, Marcos Roman-Gonzalez Comparing Computational Thinking Development Assessment Scores with Software Complexity Metrics
EDUCON 2016, Abu Dhabi
Dr. Scratch: Analysis of CT skills
Measuring logic development skills
Jesus Moreno-Leon, Gregorio Robles, Marcos Roman-Gonzalez Comparing Computational Thinking Development Assessment Scores with Software Complexity Metrics
EDUCON 2016, Abu Dhabi
Dr. Scratch: Analysis of CT skills
Dr. Scratch allows learners to evaluate their projects toreceive a computational thinking score
Gamified feedback with tips and tricks
The computational thinking score ranges from 0 to 21 points
It is based on the degree of development of differentdimensions of the computational thinking competence:
1 abstraction and problem decomposition2 logical thinking3 synchronization4 parallelism5 algorithmic notions of flow control6 user interactivity7 and data representation
Jesus Moreno-Leon, Gregorio Robles, Marcos Roman-Gonzalez Comparing Computational Thinking Development Assessment Scores with Software Complexity Metrics
EDUCON 2016, Abu Dhabi
Dr. Scratch: Analysis of CT skills
Example Dr. Scratch feedback: http://www.drscratch.org
Jesus Moreno-Leon, Gregorio Robles, Marcos Roman-Gonzalez Comparing Computational Thinking Development Assessment Scores with Software Complexity Metrics
EDUCON 2016, Abu Dhabi
Classic Software Complexity Metrics
Cyclomatic Complexity (CC)
is a graph-theoretic complexity measure that can be used tomanage and control program complexity.based on the number of linear independent paths in a program,and can be used to establish the number of test cases in thebasis path testing methodology.
Halstead’s metrics
identifiy certain properties of a program that can be measuredand the relationships between them to assess softwarecomplexity.widely used in software engineering to estimate maintenanceefforts and guide software testing by identifying complex, hardto maintain modules.
Jesus Moreno-Leon, Gregorio Robles, Marcos Roman-Gonzalez Comparing Computational Thinking Development Assessment Scores with Software Complexity Metrics
EDUCON 2016, Abu Dhabi
Example Scratch program
Figure: Example Scratch program
Jesus Moreno-Leon, Gregorio Robles, Marcos Roman-Gonzalez Comparing Computational Thinking Development Assessment Scores with Software Complexity Metrics
EDUCON 2016, Abu Dhabi
Software Metrics
Figure: Software metrics for the previous program
Jesus Moreno-Leon, Gregorio Robles, Marcos Roman-Gonzalez Comparing Computational Thinking Development Assessment Scores with Software Complexity Metrics
EDUCON 2016, Abu Dhabi
Research question
Is the Computational Thinkingscore given by Dr. Scratch acomplexity value that could becompared with the classic
software engineering metrics?
Background picture: rebel-performance.com
Jesus Moreno-Leon, Gregorio Robles, Marcos Roman-Gonzalez Comparing Computational Thinking Development Assessment Scores with Software Complexity Metrics
EDUCON 2016, Abu Dhabi
Methodology
Random selection of 25 projects of each of the followingcategories:
1 stories2 animations3 games4 and art creations.
Although 100 projects were downloaded, 5 of them producedan error while being analyzed, which limits the sample size to95 projects.
We developed a plug-in to obtain CC and Halstead fromScratch projects
The mean score was 13.75, while both median and mode were15.
Jesus Moreno-Leon, Gregorio Robles, Marcos Roman-Gonzalez Comparing Computational Thinking Development Assessment Scores with Software Complexity Metrics
EDUCON 2016, Abu Dhabi
Correlation between Dr. Scratch and CC and Halstead
Figure: Correlation between Dr. Scratch and CC and Halstead
Jesus Moreno-Leon, Gregorio Robles, Marcos Roman-Gonzalez Comparing Computational Thinking Development Assessment Scores with Software Complexity Metrics
EDUCON 2016, Abu Dhabi
Correlation by dimension
Figure: Correlation by dimension
Jesus Moreno-Leon, Gregorio Robles, Marcos Roman-Gonzalez Comparing Computational Thinking Development Assessment Scores with Software Complexity Metrics
EDUCON 2016, Abu Dhabi
In short...
There is correlation between Dr. Scratch CT score andMcCabe’s Cyclomatic Complexity and Halstead’s metrics
Provides validation of the complexity assessment process ofDr. Scratch
The range of Dr. Scratch CT scores, from 0 to 21 points,could not be flexible enough to represent the differences ofcomplexity for complex projectsAn increment in the range of the evaluation of dimensionscould enhance correlation
But beware... not everything is (computational) complexity!
Background picture: flamingcow.co.uk
Jesus Moreno-Leon, Gregorio Robles, Marcos Roman-Gonzalez Comparing Computational Thinking Development Assessment Scores with Software Complexity Metrics
EDUCON 2016, Abu Dhabi
Comparing Computational Thinking DevelopmentAssessment Scores with Software Complexity
Metrics
Jesus Moreno-Leon, Gregorio Robles, Marcos Roman-Gonzalez