PenFlowchart 1,a) 2,b) 3,c) 2015 3 4 2015 5 12, 2015 9 5 PEN & PenFlowchart PEN Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Programming Education with Flowcharts Using PenFlowchart Wataru Nakanishi 1,a) Takeo Tatsumi 2,b) Tomohiro Nishida 3,c) Received: March 4, 2015, Revised: May 12, 2015, Accepted: September 5, 2015 Abstract: Programming environments used in programming education may be text-based or use visual objects. In this study, we developed and evaluated PenFlowchart, which generates codes for PEN (a text-based programming environment for novices) by making flowcharts using objects manipulated by a mouse being used for programming education for high school students. The results of learning using PenFlowchart were compared with results using PEN alone. Also, we found that students grades are improved (particularly in the case of poorly performing students) on the reference questions in term-end examinations, which ask conversion from text-based programs to flowcharts or vice versa. Keywords: programming learning, flowchart 1. 1 Nagoya Senior High School, Nagoya, Aichi 461 8676, Japan 2 The Open University of Japan, Chiba 261 8586, Japan 3 Osaka Gakuin University, Suita, Osaka 564 8511, Japan a) watayan@meigaku.ac.jp b) ttmtko@gmail.com c) nishida@ogu.ac.jp 2005 [1] [2] IT IT 21 IT c 2015 Information Processing Society of Japan 75
2006 [3] Scratch Squeak PEN [4] PenFlowchart 2 3 PenFlowchart 4 PenFlowchart 5 6 2. 2.1 PEN xdncl PEN [5] PEN xdncl DNCL 1 1 [6] 1 PEN Fig. 1 The PEN programming environment. [4] PEN JavaScript PEN PEN [7] PenFlowchart 2.2 Flowgorithm [8] [9] [10] PenFlowchart 1 PEN [11] PAD JPADet C c 2015 Information Processing Society of Japan 76
1 Table 1 Numbers of flowcharts and programs in textbooks (previous curriculum). H15 7 4 Visual Basic H17 7 4 Visual Basic H15 3 5 DNCL H17 5 5 DNCL H15 2 1 BASIC H17 2 1 BASIC H15 5 3 Pascal H15 3 7 DNCL H15 0 12 DNCL JPADet [12] BlockEditor Java Java Java BlockEditor BlockEditor 80% BlockEditor Java GUI 2.3 2006 [13] B 1 DNCL PEN DNCL 1 2 2 Table 2 Numbers of flowcharts and programs in textbooks (current curriculum). H25 13 17 Visual Basic H25 7 8 Visual Basic H27 13 12 JavaScript H25 2 8 JavaScript 4 2 DNCL H25 3 1 Visual Basic 3. PEN PenFlowchart PEN PenFlowchart 3.1 PEN PEN a=0 a=0 IF ENDIF PEN c 2015 Information Processing Society of Japan 77
3.2 PenFlowchart PEN PenFlowchart 2011 [14] PAD 2.3 PenFlowchart 2 & & PEN PEN 1 PenFlowchart PNG EPS 2012 PEN PEN switch else if 2.3 PenFlowchart Java GPL http:// 2 PenFlowchart Fig. 2 The PenFlowchart programming environment. watayan.net/prog/ 4. 2 PenFlowchart 4.1 1 2007 3 1 PEN c 2015 Information Processing Society of Japan 78
Table 3 3 5 Course contents and numbers of programs (Lessons 1 5). (1) BMI 1 1 1 1 1 (2) 1 1 2 1 (3) 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 2 1 (4) 2 1 for 1 1 while 1 1 1 for 2 2 while 1 (5) 2 2 1 1 2 2 2 3 3 2012 PenFlowchart 2012 PenFlowchart 5 3 3 3 Fig. 3 Trend of number of programs submitted by students. 15 3 5 2011 10 2012 9 2012 3 PenFlowchart 4.2 1 B 1 2 2006 PEN PenFlowchart 2011 PEN PenFlowchart PenFlowchart 2009 2010 2011 2012 2011 PEN PenFlowchart 4 5 2012 4 5 PenFlowchart 2011 2011 PenFlowchart PEN c 2015 Information Processing Society of Japan 79
4 Table 4 Which did students use PEN or PenFlowchart? (number and ratio). (%) 2011 2012 2011 2012 PEN 75 22 28.4 7.8 PenFlowchart 64 172 24.2 60.8 50 33 18.9 11.7 3 9 1.1 3.2 56 32 21.2 11.3 16 15 6.1 5.3 5 Table 5 Which did students prefer PEN or PenFlowchart? (number and ratio). (%) 2011 2012 2011 2012 PEN 131 32 49.6 11.3 PenFlowchart 115 235 43.6 83.0 18 16 6.8 5.7 Fig. 5 5 Trend of average scores of the reference question. 4 Fig. 4 An example of reference question of term-end examination. PenFlowchart PenFlowchart 2012 PenFlowchart 4 IF-ELSE xdncl 6 Fig. 6 Score distributions of the reference question. PenFlowchart 1:1:1 10 5 PenFlowchart 2011 6 0 5. 4 c 2015 Information Processing Society of Japan 80
Table 6 6 5 Average scores of term-end examination (PEN vs. PenFlowchart). 2011 2012 PEN 57.5 64.0 PenFlowchart 56.8 55.2 5.1 4.1 1 2 3 3.1 PenFlowchart Fig. 7 7 Score distributions of the question about trace of variables. 5.2 PEN PenFlowchart 4.2 PEN PenFlowchart PenFlowchart PEN PenFlowchart 2011 PEN 2012 PenFlowchart PEN 5 6 2011 4.2 PenFlowchart 2012 PEN Welch p =0.043 5.3 PenFlowchart PenFlowchart 4.2 0.3 0.4 7 PenFlowchart 6. PenFlowchart PenFlowchart PEN DNCL PenFlowchart BASIC JavaScript [15] JSPS 26350327 [1] 2005 http://www.ipsj.or.jp/12kyoiku/proposal- 20051029.html 2014-11-06. [2] JAPAN is BACK http://www.kantei.go.jp/ jp/singi/keizaisaisei/pdf/saikou jpn.pdf 2014-11- 06. [3] 2006 (2006). [4] c 2015 Information Processing Society of Japan 81
PEN Vol.48, No.8 (2007). [5] PEN http://www.media.osaka-cu.ac.jp/pen/ 2014-11-06. [6] PEN CE Vol.2005-CE-081, No.104 (2005). [7] PEN Journals of Informatics, Vol.8, No.1 (2011). [8] Cook, D.: Flowgorithm (online), available from http://www.flowgorithm.org (accessed 2015-03-30). [9] Vol.18, pp.140 141 (2006). [10] 4 pp.102 103 (2011). [11] Vol.45, No.10, pp.2454 2467 (2004). [12] CE Vol.2013-CE-119, No.2 (2013). [13] JavaScript 2006 pp.6 11 (2006). [14] PenFlowchart CE Vol.2012-CE-113, No.13 (2012). [15] PenFlowchart 1 pp.17 20 (2013). 1993 2014 1993 1999 2003 2014 ICT CIEC 1991 1996 2000 2010 ACM 1989 c 2015 Information Processing Society of Japan 82