A Theory of Applied Mind Programming

I am far from the first to ask, “why do so many people struggle to learn programming” or to seek answers. Anyone who spends time in a classroom begins to see patterns, define reasons, and find tricks to improve instruction, many of which made their way into literature. Despite fifty years of research in computing education, the problems students face remained largely unchanged. Students enter classes full of misconceptions, forget what you tell them, are easily overloaded, and too often suffer an emotional toll from their coursework. Some say that programmers must “think differently from the rest of us,” but fail to capture how or why this must be. The gaping chasm between what we say and what we can measure was so problematic it forced me to abandon my original plan of research and first become a theorist. Computing education, by no means, holds a monopoly on struggling learners. Engineering students from all disciplines have subjects that confound progress and can use the support that theory, applied to research and classroom practice, provides. In this talk, I will introduce the tough questions that evaded explanation and how I came to build a theory that may provide some answers. I will start by summarizing the literature’s view on what programmers should know, how novices struggle, and how to improve the teaching of new programmers. I will discuss the role of theories in educational research and practice – ideas like dual process theory and names like Kahneman, Tversky, Piaget, Vygotsky, and Bruner – while touching on my original theory-building process. My theory, the Theory of Applied Mind of Programming (TAMP), looks to build model how trained programmers think thereby describing the gaps novices face in becoming programmers. For those who teach programming, I hope to offer insights into how we can better teach that specific subject, yet I believe the principles transfer to many disciplines. I hope to challenge your views on how people think and learn and start a conversation on what it means to education when we integrate advances from the cognitive sciences in the classroom.

Tony Lowe is a Ph.D. candidate graduating this Spring from Purdue’s School of Engineering Education. He is excited to pursue an academic position after spending 24 years in industry – building code for GPS receivers, the 767-400, various financial systems, non-profits, and health insurance, among others. His passion for teaching shadowed most of his career, working as a corporate trainer, educational consultant, adult-education instructor, and assistant professor. Outside work and study, the Ultimate (don’t call it frisbee) field is a favorite retreat starting in college and extending to playing around the country at pickup, club, and even an appearance at nationals as a grand-master. He is very much looking forward to completing his dissertation to get back into practice (and running shape!) and generally spending less time typing and more time with his family and dogs.