Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription Access

Quantifying the Theory Vs. Programming Disparity Using Spectral Bipartivity Analysis and Principal Component Analysis


Affiliations
1 Department of Electrical & Computer Engineering and Computer Science, Jackson State University, Jackson, MS, United States
 

Some students in the Computer Science and related majors excel very well in programming-related assignments, but not equally well in the theoretical assignments (that are not programming-based) and vice-versa. We refer to this as the "Theory vs. Programming Disparity (TPD)". In this paper, we propose a spectral bipartivity analysis-based approach to quantify the TPD metric for any student in a course based on the percentage scores (considered as decimal values in the range of 0 to 1) of the student in the course assignments (that involves both theoretical and programming-based assignments). We also propose a principal component analysis (PCA)-based approach to quantify the TPD metric for the entire class based on the percentage scores (in a scale of 0 to 100) of the students in the theoretical and programming assignments. The spectral analysis approach partitions the set of theoretical and programming assignments to two disjoint sets whose constituents are closer to each other within each set and relatively more different from each across the two sets. The TPD metric for a student is computed on the basis of the Euclidean distance between the tuples representing the actual numbers of theoretical and programming assignments vis-a-vis the number of theoretical and programming assignments in each of the two disjoint sets. The PCA-based analysis identifies the dominating principal components within the sets of theoretical and programming assignments and computes the TPD metric for the entire class as a weighted average of the correlation coefficients between the dominating principal components representing these two sets.

Keywords

Spectral Analysis, Principal Component Analysis, Correlation Coefficient, Theory vs. Programming Disparity, Eigenvector, Bipartivity.
User
Notifications
Font Size

  • Estrada, E, (2010) "Structural Patterns in Complex Networks through Spectral Analysis," Proceedings of the 2010 Joint IAPR International Conference on Structural, Syntactic, and Statistical Pattern Recognition, pp. 45-59. Springer-Verlag, Cesme Izmir, Turkey.
  • Sarkar, C., and Jalan, (2018) "Spectral Properties of Complex Networks," Chaos: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Nonlinear Science, vol. 28, no. 10, 102101.
  • Strang, G (2019) Linear Algebra and Learning from Data, 1st edition, Wellesley-Cambridge Press, Wellesley, MA, USA.
  • Ernada, E., and Rodriguez-Velazquez, J. A (2005) "Spectral Measures of Bipartivity in Complex Network," Physical Review E, vol. 72, no. 4, 2, 046105.
  • Birsan, T., and Tiba, D (2006) "One Hundred Years since the Introduction of the Set Distance by Dimitrie Pompeiu," Proceedings of the IFIP Conference on System Modeling and Optimization, vol. 199, pp. 35-39. Springer, Turin, Italy.
  • Wilkinson, L., and Friendly, M (2009) "The History of the Cluster Heat Map," The American Statistician, vol. 63, no. 2, pp. 179-184.
  • Godsil, C., and Royle, G. F (2013) Algebraic Graph Theory, 1st edition, Springer, Berlin, Germany.
  • Caven, M (2019) "Quantification, Inequality, and the Contestation of School Closures in Philadelphia," Sociology of Education, vol. 92, no. 1, pp. 21-40.
  • Davison, C. B., and Dustova, G (2017) "A Quantitative Assessment of Student Performance and Examination Format," Journal of Instructional Pedagogies, vol. 18, pp. 1-10.
  • Haberyan, K. (2003) "Do Weekly Quizzes Improve Student Performance on General Biology Exams?" The American Biology Teacher, vol. 65, pp. 110-114.
  • Johnson, B. C., and Kiviniemi, M. T (2009) "The Effect of Online Chapter Quizzes on Exam Performance in an Undergraduate Social Psychology Course," Teaching of Psychology, vol. 36, no. 1, pp. 33-37.
  • Master, A., Meltzoff, A. N., and Cheryan, S (2021) "Gender Stereotypes about Interests Start Early and Cause Gender Disparities in Computer Science and Engineering," Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, vol. 118, no. 48, e2100030118.
  • Kozlowski, D., Lariviere, V., Sugimoto, C. R., and Monroe-White, T (2002) "Intersectional Inequalities in Science," Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, vol. 119, no. 2, e2113067119.
  • Thune, M., and Eckerdal, A (2019) "Analysis of Students' Learning of Computer Programming in a Computer Laboratory Context," European Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 44, no. 5, pp. 769-786.
  • Farton, M (1986) "Phenomenography - A Research Approach Investigating Different Understandings of Reality," Journal of Thought, vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 28-49.
  • Bussey, T. J., Orgill, M., and Crippen, K. J (2013) "Variation Theory: A Theory of Learning and a Useful Theoretical Framework for Chemical Education Research," Chemical Education Research Practice, vol. 14, pp. 9-22.
  • Lewis, C. M., Yasuhara, K., and Anderson, R. E (2011). "Deciding to Major in Computer Science: A Grounded Theory of Students' Self-Assessment of Ability," Proceedings of the 7th International Workshop on Computing Education Research, pp. 3-10, ACM, Providence, RI, USA.
  • Yang, H., Olson, T. W., and Puder, A (2021) "Analyzing Computer Science Students' Performance Data to Identify Impactful Curricular Changes," Proceedings of the IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, pp. 1-9, IEEE, Lincoln, NE, USA.
  • Oqvist, M., and Nouri, J (2018) "Coding by Hand or on the Computer? Evaluating the Effect of Assessment Mode on Performance of Students Learning Programming," Journal of Computers in Education, vol. 5, pp. 199-219.
  • Wellons, J., and Johnson, J (2011) "A Grounded Theory Analysis of Introductory Computer Science Pedagogy," Systemics, Cybernetics and Informatics, vol. 9, no. 6, pp. 9-14.
  • Vivian, R., Falkner, K., and Falkner, N (2013) "Computer Science Students' Casual Attributions for Successful and Unsuccessful Outcomes in Programming Assignments," Proceedings of the 13th Koli Calling International Conference on Computing Education Research, pp. 125-134, ACM, Koli, Finland.
  • Jolliffe, I. T (2002) Principal Component Analysis, Springer Series in Statistics, New York, USA.

Abstract Views: 20

PDF Views: 6




  • Quantifying the Theory Vs. Programming Disparity Using Spectral Bipartivity Analysis and Principal Component Analysis

Abstract Views: 20  |  PDF Views: 6

Authors

Natarajan Meghanathan
Department of Electrical & Computer Engineering and Computer Science, Jackson State University, Jackson, MS, United States

Abstract


Some students in the Computer Science and related majors excel very well in programming-related assignments, but not equally well in the theoretical assignments (that are not programming-based) and vice-versa. We refer to this as the "Theory vs. Programming Disparity (TPD)". In this paper, we propose a spectral bipartivity analysis-based approach to quantify the TPD metric for any student in a course based on the percentage scores (considered as decimal values in the range of 0 to 1) of the student in the course assignments (that involves both theoretical and programming-based assignments). We also propose a principal component analysis (PCA)-based approach to quantify the TPD metric for the entire class based on the percentage scores (in a scale of 0 to 100) of the students in the theoretical and programming assignments. The spectral analysis approach partitions the set of theoretical and programming assignments to two disjoint sets whose constituents are closer to each other within each set and relatively more different from each across the two sets. The TPD metric for a student is computed on the basis of the Euclidean distance between the tuples representing the actual numbers of theoretical and programming assignments vis-a-vis the number of theoretical and programming assignments in each of the two disjoint sets. The PCA-based analysis identifies the dominating principal components within the sets of theoretical and programming assignments and computes the TPD metric for the entire class as a weighted average of the correlation coefficients between the dominating principal components representing these two sets.

Keywords


Spectral Analysis, Principal Component Analysis, Correlation Coefficient, Theory vs. Programming Disparity, Eigenvector, Bipartivity.

References