Evaluating the Efficacy and Impacts of Remote Pair Programming for Introductory Computer Science Students
Authors: 
Mustafa Hafeez, Anand Karki, Yara Radwan, Anis Saha, 
Angela Zavaleta BernuyAuthors Info & Claims
Mustafa Hafeez, Anand Karki, Yara Radwan, Anis Saha, Angela Zavaleta BernuyAuthors Info & ClaimsArticle No.: 5, Pages 1 - 7
Abstract
With the increase in online learning, instructors are looking for novel ways of supporting student learning and getting students to collaborate in online environments. Pair programming allows students to brainstorm and problem-solve in teams and has been found to help with improving code design, attitudes toward computer science, productivity, and performance. However, past work has focused on face-to-face, in-person collaboration, and it is unclear whether these benefits will translate to an online context. This work replicates several studies evaluating the effects and benefits of in-person pair programming in an online environment. In an introduction to programming course, students participated in weekly online sessions where they were asked to solve a set of exercises in pairs or individually. We measure task performance and student opinions on the activities and perceptions of remote pair programming. Our study found that remote pair programming had little to no impact on the time taken, promising but not statistically significant impacts on code correctness, and statistically significant impacts on students’ perceptions of both their own experience and the efficiency and efficacy of pair programming. Our findings show that some, but not all, of the benefits of pair programming can be replicated in an online context.
References
[1]
J. Bevan, L. Werner, and C. McDowell. 2002. Guidelines for the use of pair programming in a freshman programming class. In Proceedings 15th Conference on Software Engineering Education and Training (CSEE&T 2002). 100–107. https://doi.org/10.1109/CSEE.2002.995202
[2]
Dennis Bouvier, Ellie Lovellette, John Matta, Jing Bai, Jacqueline Chetty, Stan Kurkovsky, and Jia Wan. 2019. Factors Affecting the Adoption of Peer Instruction in Computing Courses. In Proceedings of the Working Group Reports on Global Computing Education - CompEd-WGR ’19. ACM Press, Chengdu,Sichuan, China, 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1145/3372262.3375396
[3]
Alistair Cockburn and Laurie Williams. 2001. The costs and benefits of pair programming. In Extreme programming examined. 223–243.
[4]
Bernardo José da Silva Estácio and Rafael Prikladnicki. 2015. Distributed pair programming: A systematic literature review. Information and Software Technology 63 (2015), 1–10.
[5]
Bernardo José da Silva Estácio and Rafael Prikladnicki. 2015. Distributed Pair Programming: A Systematic Literature Review. Information and Software Technology 63 (2015), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2015.02.011
[6]
Silvana Faja. 2014. Evaluating Effectiveness of Pair Programming as a Teaching Tool in Programming Courses. (2014), 10.
[7]
Kiev Gama, Carlos Zimmerle, and Pedro Rossi. 2021. Online Hackathons as an Engaging Tool to Promote Group Work in Emergency Remote Learning. In Proceedings of the 26th ACM Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education V. 1. 345–351.
[8]
Brian Hanks. 2005. Student performance in CS1 with distributed pair programming. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin 37, 3 (2005), 316–320.
[9]
Brian Hanks, Sue Fitzgerald, Renée McCauley, Laurie Murphy, and Carol Zander. 2011. Pair programming in education: a literature review. Computer Science Education 21, 2 (June 2011), 135–173. https://doi.org/10.1080/08993408.2011.579808
[10]
Janet Hughes, Ann Walshe, Bobby Law, and Brendan Murphy. 2020. Remote Pair Programming:. In Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Computer Supported Education. SCITEPRESS - Science and Technology Publications, Prague, Czech Republic, 476–483. https://doi.org/10.5220/0009582904760483
[11]
Charlie McDowell, Linda Werner, Heather E. Bullock, and Julian Fernald. 2006. Pair programming improves student retention, confidence, and program quality. Commun. ACM 49, 8 (Aug. 2006), 90–95. https://doi.org/10.1145/1145287.1145293 Number: 8.
[12]
Nachiappan Nagappan, Laurie Williams, Miriam Ferzli, Eric Wiebe, Kai Yang, Carol Miller, and Suzanne Balik. 2003. Improving the CS1 experience with pair programming. ACM Sigcse Bulletin 35, 1 (2003), 359–362.
[13]
Leo Porter, Mark Guzdial, Charlie McDowell, and Beth Simon. 2013. Success in introductory programming: what works?Commun. ACM8 (Aug. 2013), 34–36. https://doi.org/10.1145/2492007.2492020 Number: 8.
[14]
Leo Porter and Beth Simon. 2013. Retaining nearly one-third more majors with a trio of instructional best practices in CS1. In Proceeding of the 44th ACM technical symposium on Computer science education - SIGCSE ’13. ACM Press, Denver, Colorado, USA, 165. https://doi.org/10.1145/2445196.2445248
[15]
Adrian Salguero, Julian McAuley, Beth Simon, and Leo Porter. 2020. A Longitudinal Evaluation of a Best Practices CS1. In Proceedings of the 2020 ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research. ACM, Virtual Event New Zealand, 182–193. https://doi.org/10.1145/3372782.3406274
[16]
Karthikeyan Umapathy and Albert D. Ritzhaupt. 2017. A Meta-Analysis of Pair-Programming in Computer Programming Courses: Implications for Educational Practice. ACM Transactions on Computing Education 17, 4 (Sept. 2017), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1145/2996201
[17]
L. Williams, R.R. Kessler, W. Cunningham, and R. Jeffries. 2000. Strengthening the case for pair programming. IEEE Software 17, 4 (Aug. 2000), 19–25. https://doi.org/10.1109/52.854064
[18]
Laurie Williams, Eric Wiebe, Kai Yang, Miriam Ferzli, and Carol Miller. 2002. In Support of Pair Programming in the Introductory Computer Science Course. Computer Science Education 12, 3 (Sept. 2002), 197–212. https://doi.org/10.1076/csed.12.3.197.8618
[19]
Laurie Williams, Kai Yang, Eric Wiebe, Miriam Ferzli, and Carol Miller. 2002. Pair Programming in an Introductory Computer Science Course: Initial Results and Recommendations. (2002), 8.
[20]
Laurie A. Williams and Robert R. Kessler. 2000. All I really need to know about pair programming I learned in kindergarten. Commun. ACM 43, 5 (May 2000), 108–114. https://doi.org/10.1145/332833.332848 Number: 5.
Index Terms
- Evaluating the Efficacy and Impacts of Remote Pair Programming for Introductory Computer Science Students
Recommendations
Evaluating Solo vs Pair Programming in an Online Setting for Introductory Programming Students
SIGCSE 2023: Proceedings of the 54th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education V. 2Many studies have shown the efficacy of pair programming for students learning to program. However, most of these studies have taken place in an in-person environment, where the driver and navigator are physically sharing a keyboard and screen and can ...
First year students' impressions of pair programming in CS1
ICER '07: Proceedings of the third international workshop on Computing education researchPair programming, as part of the Agile Development process, has noted benefits in professional software development scenarios. These successes have led to a rise in use of pair programming in educational settings, particularly in CS1. Specifically [6] ...
First-year students' impressions of pair programming in CS1
Pair programming, as part of the Agile Development process, has noted benefits in professional software development scenarios. These successes have led to a rise in use of pair programming in educational settings, particularly in Computer Science 1 (CS1)...
Comments
Information & Contributors
Information
Published In
Copyright © 2023 ACM.
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].
Publisher
Association for Computing Machinery
New York, NY, United States
Publication History
Published: 19 July 2023
Check for updates
Author Tags
Qualifiers
- Research-article
- Research
- Refereed limited
Conference
WCCCE '23
Acceptance Rates
Overall Acceptance Rate 78 of 117 submissions, 67%
Contributors
Other Metrics
Bibliometrics & Citations
Bibliometrics
Article Metrics
- 0Total Citations
- 44Total Downloads
- Downloads (Last 12 months)37
- Downloads (Last 6 weeks)1
Reflects downloads up to 22 Sep 2024
Other Metrics
Citations
View Options
Get Access
Login options
Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.
Sign inFull Access
View options
View or Download as a PDF file.
PDFeReader
View online with eReader.
eReaderHTML Format
View this article in HTML Format.
HTML Format