My colleagues and I have just published a paper in Computer Science Education (Taylor & Francis). The abstract, citation, and link are below:

Effective compiler error message enhancement for novice programming students

Abstract:

Programming is an essential skill that many computing students are expected to master. However, programming can be difficult to learn. Successfully interpreting compiler error messages (CEMs) is crucial for correcting errors and progressing toward success in programming. Yet these messages are often difficult to understand and pose a barrier to progress for many novices, with struggling students often exhibiting high frequencies of errors, particularly repeated errors. This paper presents a control/intervention study on the effectiveness of enhancing Java CEMs. Results show that the intervention group experienced reductions in the number of overall errors, errors per student, and several repeated error metrics. These results are important as the effectiveness of CEM enhancement has been recently debated. Further, generalizing these results should be possible at least in part, as the control group is shown to be comparable to those in several studies using Java and other languages.

Citation:

Please see Google Scholar or my publications page.

Or, see the paper on the Taylor & Francis site.

Full text here

Abstract:

Encountering the same compiler error repeatedly, particularly several times consecutively, has been cited as a strong indicator that a student is struggling with important programming concepts. Despite this, there are relatively few studies which investigate repeated errors in isolation or in much depth. There are also few data-driven metrics for measuring programming performance, and fewer for measuring repeated errors. This paper makes two contributions. First we introduce a new metric to quantify repeated errors, the repeated error density (RED). We compare this to Jadud’s Error Quotient (EQ), the most studied metric, and show that RED has advantages over EQ including being less context dependent, and being useful for short sessions. This allows us to answer two questions posited by Jadud in 2006 that have until now been unanswered. Second, we compare the EQ and RED scores using data from an empirical control/intervention group study involving an editor which enhances compiler error messages. This intervention group has been previously shown to have a reduced overall number of student errors, number of errors per student, and number of repeated student errors per compiler error message. In this research we find a reduction in EQ, providing further evidence that error message enhancement has positive effects. In addition we fi nd a signifi cant reduction in RED providing evidence that this metric is valid.

I have just launched a project I have been meaning to for some time – a blog on Computer Science Education. There are a few other excellent CSED blogs out there which have inspired me to start my own.

I called it CS0 because CS1 refers to the introductory programming course in university computer science education, and I think that computing education needs the rethink that is already underway. Besides the fact that a significant focus of modern computing education is at pre-university, or “pre-CS1” levels, the Computing Education community needs to continue to come up with ways to engage and encourage not just traditional students, but anyone and everyone who wants to learn more about the age we live in.

Head on over and check it out.