The action research journey of designing persuasive object-oriented programming lab assignments framework using persuasive technology
List of Authors
  • Elly Johana Johan , Syahanim Mohd Salleh

Keyword
  • programming assignment framework, persuasive technology, programming education, action research

Abstract
  • The aspire of this action research is to design a persuasive object-oriented programming (OOP) lab assignments framework which benefit and appeal to students. The framework presented in this paper serves as a blue print for an action research activity to inspect how principles of persuasive technology can be adopted into undergraduate OOP lab assignments. To complete the development of the proposed framework, this research comprises of four action research cycles. The current situation analysis cycle included a theoretical study, the improvement implementation cycle included framework development and OOP lab assignment development, the review changes cycle included evaluation, and the continued action for improvement cycle included the development of E-Worksheets. Qualitative and quantitative data were collected from 202 students participated in this study. Data was gathered via questionnaires, semi-structured interviews, and observation. Overall, each persuasive technology principle adopted in this study received an 80 percent or higher score, and students agreed that each element of the lab assignment is beneficial and appealing to them. In conclusion, this action study has shown the effectiveness of the persuasive technology principles with the integration of incremental, iterative and guided approaches to improve OOP lab assignments which benefit and appeal to students.

Reference
  • 1. Carbone, A., Hurst, J., Mitchell, I., & Gunstone, D. (2000, December). Principles for designing programming exercises to minimise poor learning behaviours in students. In Proceedings of the Australasian conference on Computing education (pp. 26-33).

    2. Carr, W., & Kemmis, S. (2009). Educational action research: A critical approach. The SAGE handbook of educational action research, 74-84.

    3. Devincenzi, S., Kwecko, V., de Toledo, F. P., Mota, F. P., Casarin, J., & da Costa Botelho, S. S. (2017, October). Persuasive technology: Applications in education. In 2017 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE) (pp. 1-7). IEEE.

    4. Eckerdal, A., & Thuné, M. (2005). Novice Java programmers' conceptions of" object" and" class", and variation theory. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 37(3), 89-93.

    5. Filippou, J., Cheong, C., & Cheong, F. (2016). Modelling the impact of study behaviours on academic performance to inform the design of a persuasive system. Information & Management, 53(7), 892-903.

    6. Fogg, B. J. (2003). Persuasive technology: using computers to change what we think and do. Ubiquity, 2003(December), 2.

    7. Hannan, A. & Kelly, P. (2006). Observation Techniques. http://www.edu.plymouth.ac.uk/resined/observation/obshome.htm

    8. Harun, J., & Abidin, S. N. M. Z. (2010). Pembangunan Modul Pembelajaran Berbantukan Video Interaktif Bagi Pembelajaran Pengaturcaraan Visual Basic Berdasarkan Pendekatan Projek. http://eprints.utm.my/id/eprint/10830/1/Pembangunan_Modul_Pembelajaran_Berbantukan_Video_Interaktif_Bagi_Pembelajaran_Pengaturcaraan

    9. Hopkins, D. (2008). A teacher’s guide to classroom research. McGraw-Hill.

    10. Lomax, P. (1994). Standards, criteria and the problematic of action research within an award bearing course [1]. Educational Action Research, 2(1), 113-126.

    11. Oinas-Kukkonen, H., & Harjumaa, M. (2018). Persuasive Systems Design: Key Issues, Process Model and System Features 1. In Routledge handbook of policy design (pp. 87-105). Routledge.

    12. Phellas, C. N., Bloch, A., & Seale, C. (2011). Structured methods: interviews, questionnaires and observation. Researching society and culture, 3(1), 23-32.

    13. Piggot‐Irvine, E. (2006). Establishing criteria for effective professional development and use in evaluating an action research based programme. Journal of in-service education, 32(4), 477-496.

    14. Rodziah, L. (2018). Pendekatan pembelajaran berpusatkan pelajar (PBP) untuk mengukuhkan kemahiran penyelesaian masalah dalam kursus pengaturcaraan. Laporan Teknikal. http://www.ftsm.ukm.my/file/research/technicalreport/LP-FTSM-2018-004.pdf

    15. Rahmat, M., Shahrani, S., Latih, R., Yatim, N. F. M., Zainal, N. F. A., & Ab Rahman, R. (2012). Major problems in basic programming that influence student performance. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 59, 287-296.

    16. Sivasakthi, M., & Rajendran, R. (2011). Learning difficulties of ‘object-oriented programming paradigm using Java’: students’ perspective. Indian Journal of Science and Technology, 4(8), 983-985.

    17. Thune, M., & Eckerdal, A. (2019). Analysis of Students’ learning of computer programming in a computer laboratory context. European Journal of Engineering Education, 44(5), 769-786.