Searcharxiv⌕ Search

arXiv subjects

Quinn K Wolter

Publications and source records attributed to Quinn K Wolter.

2 recordsLinked to original sources

Decomposing the Doer Effect in Programming Practice: Code Writing Stands Out Among Active Practice

The "doer effect" suggests that actively doing practice activities is more strongly associated with learning outcomes than passively viewing content. In the doer effect literature, "doing" refers specifically to active practice. However, this categorization treats different forms of active practice as equivalent, leaving open whether some types of active practice are more effective than others. In this paper, we investigate whether the doer effect extends to computer science instruction and whether some forms of doing stand out compared to other forms. We analyze log data from 334 students across 11 semesters of introductory and intermediate Java who used an interactive practice system with five content types: Code Writing, Code Tracing, Code Completion, Code Visualizations, and Code Explanations. Consistent with prior doer effect work, we find that active practice activities were associated with 3.2 times better learning outcomes than passive activities. Interestingly, among the active practice, code writing was the most strongly associated with improved posttest performance, while no other activity type showed a comparable association. These results highlight the importance of challenging, feedback-supported practice activities, such as code writing problems.

cs.SE↗

Interactive Counterfactual Exploration of Algorithmic Harms in Recommender Systems

Recommender systems have become integral to digital experiences, shaping user interactions and preferences across various platforms. Despite their widespread use, these systems often suffer from algorithmic biases that can lead to unfair and unsatisfactory user experiences. This study introduces an interactive tool designed to help users comprehend and explore the impacts of algorithmic harms in recommender systems. By leveraging visualizations, counterfactual explanations, and interactive modules, the tool allows users to investigate how biases such as miscalibration, stereotypes, and filter bubbles affect their recommendations. Informed by in-depth user interviews, this tool benefits both general users and researchers by increasing transparency and offering personalized impact assessments, ultimately fostering a better understanding of algorithmic biases and contributing to more equitable recommendation outcomes. This work provides valuable insights for future research and practical applications in mitigating bias and enhancing fairness in machine learning algorithms.

cs.IR↗