Thought tendency evaluation device, method, and program

Abstract

In one aspect of the present invention, when a user's thought tendency with respect to a state change process is evaluated, a procedure for creating the state change process is divided into a plurality of stages in accordance with the flow of creation, and for each of the stages, small question data for evaluating the degree of understanding thereof is created. Then, user's answer data to each small question data is acquired, the degrees of the user's understanding for the respective stages are evaluated on the basis of the acquired answer data, and the evaluation results of the degrees of understanding are synthesized to evaluate the user's thought tendency with respect to the procedure for creating the state change process.

Description

Thinking tendency evaluation device, method, and program

[0001] One aspect of the present invention relates to a thinking tendency evaluation device, method, and program used to evaluate a user's tendency toward computational thinking, for example.

[0002] In recent years, software (such as low-code or no-code tools) that allows users to program by dragging and dropping blocks displayed on a device, without having to manually write source code in a programming language, has been proving effective in improving business processes. Using these tools to improve business processes requires computational thinking. However, there are differences in people's levels of understanding of programming, and training, seminars, and lecture materials tailored to each level of understanding are required. To accurately assess comprehension, it is necessary to assess not only whether or not someone understands something, but also the degree of understanding of each individual.

[0003] Therefore, for example, Non-Patent Document 1 proposes a method in which a question is presented on a system screen before and after a state change, in which the process of the state change is expressed by arranging options written in natural language in order, and the user's level of understanding is evaluated based on the answers the user gives to the question.

[0004] Miho Kasamatsu, Hidetake Koya, Hajime Nakajima, and Haruo Oishi, "Test Design for Evaluation and Analysis of Computational Thinking," IEICE Technical Report, Vol. 122, No. 442, pp. 105-110, March 2023.

[0005] However, while the method described in Non-Patent Document 1 can evaluate whether the final order of steps in a state change process is correct, it is difficult to evaluate the user's tendency to think in terms of programming when creating the state change process.

[0006] The present invention has been made in light of the above circumstances, and aims to provide a technique that makes it possible to evaluate a user's tendency toward programming-like thinking.

[0007] In order to solve the above problems, one aspect of a thinking tendency assessment device or assessment method according to the present invention, when assessing a user's thinking tendency with respect to a state change process, divides the process of creating the state change process into a plurality of stages according to the flow of creation, creates sub-question data corresponding to each of these stages for assessing the level of understanding thereof, acquires user answer data for each of the sub-question data, evaluates the user's level of understanding with respect to each of the stages based on the acquired answer data, and evaluates the user's thinking tendency with respect to the process of creating the state change process by combining the evaluation results of the levels of understanding.

[0008] According to one aspect of the present invention, it is possible to evaluate the user's level of understanding of the process of creating a state change process individually for each of multiple stages, and also to evaluate the user's level of understanding of the process creation process as a whole. This makes it possible to evaluate not only whether the user simply understands the state change process, but also the tendency of the user's understanding of the process creation process.

[0009] That is, according to one aspect of the present invention, it is possible to provide a technology that makes it possible to evaluate a user's tendency toward programming-like thinking.

[0010] FIG. 1 is a block diagram showing an example of the hardware configuration of a thinking tendency evaluation device according to an embodiment of the present invention. FIG. 2 is a block diagram showing an example of the software configuration of a thinking tendency evaluation device according to an embodiment of the present invention. FIG. 3 is a flowchart showing an example of the processing procedure and processing content of a thinking tendency evaluation process executed by a control unit of the thinking tendency evaluation device shown in FIG. 2. FIG. 4 is a diagram showing an example of multiple processes divided by a process division process in the thinking tendency evaluation processing procedure shown in FIG. 3. FIG. 5 is a diagram showing an example of sub-questions created for each divided process by a sub-question design process in the thinking tendency evaluation processing procedure shown in FIG. 3. FIG. 6 is a diagram showing an example of a system screen used to explain the sub-question design process shown in FIG. 5. FIG. 7 is a diagram showing an example of a sub-question Q1 created in the abstraction section of the multiple processes divided by the process division process shown in FIG. 4. FIG. 8 is a diagram showing an example of options prepared corresponding to the sub-question Q1 shown in FIG. 7. FIG. 9 is a flowchart showing an example of the processing procedure and processing content of a sub-question design process in the abstraction section divided in the process division process. FIG. 10 is a diagram showing an example of a sub-question Q2 created in the decomposition section of the multiple processes divided in the process division process. FIG. 11A is a diagram showing some of the options prepared corresponding to sub-question Q2 shown in FIG. 10 . FIG. 11B is a diagram showing other some of the options prepared corresponding to sub-question Q2 shown in FIG. 10 . FIG. 12 is a flowchart showing an example of the processing procedure and processing content of sub-question design processing in the decomposition section divided in the process division processing. FIG. 13 is a diagram showing an example of sub-question Q3 created in the assembly section among the multiple processes divided in the process division processing. FIG. 14 is a diagram showing an example of options prepared corresponding to sub-question Q3 shown in FIG. 13 . FIG. 15 is a flowchart showing an example of the processing procedure and processing content of sub-question design processing in the assembly section divided in the process division processing. FIG. 16 is a flowchart showing an example of the processing procedure and processing content of thinking tendency evaluation processing in the thinking tendency evaluation processing procedure shown in FIG. 3 . FIG. 17 is a flowchart showing an example of the processing procedure and processing content of evaluation processing of an answer to sub-question Q1 in the thinking tendency evaluation processing procedure shown in FIG. 16 .Fig. 18 is a flowchart showing an example of the processing procedure and processing content of the process for evaluating the answer to sub-question Q2 in the thinking tendency evaluation processing procedure shown in Fig. 16. Fig. 19 is a flowchart showing an example of the processing procedure and processing content of the process for evaluating the answer to sub-question Q3 in the thinking tendency evaluation processing procedure shown in Fig. 16. Fig. 20 is a diagram for explaining an example of the process for evaluating the answer to sub-question Q3 shown in Fig. 19.

[0011] Hereinafter, an embodiment of the present invention will be described with reference to the drawings.

[0012] [One embodiment] (Configuration example) The thinking tendency evaluation device SV is used to evaluate the programming thinking of a user who is the subject of education, for example, in a workplace or a school, and is configured by, for example, a personal computer used by an education officer, etc. Note that the thinking tendency evaluation device SV may be configured by a server computer located on the web or on the cloud.

[0013] 2 and 3 are block diagrams showing an example of the hardware and software configurations of a thinking tendency evaluation device SV according to an embodiment of the present invention.

[0014] The thinking tendency assessment device SV includes a control unit 1 that uses a hardware processor such as a central processing unit (CPU). A storage unit having a program storage unit 2 and a data storage unit 3, and an input / output interface unit (hereinafter referred to as input / output I / F unit) 4 are connected to the control unit 1 via a bus 5.

[0015] The input / output I / F unit 4 has, for example, a communication interface function, and transmits and receives information data to and from a user terminal (not shown) under the control of the control unit 1 using, for example, a communication protocol defined by the Internet.

[0016] The user terminal is a terminal such as a personal computer or a smartphone used by a user receiving programming education.

[0017] The program storage unit 2 is configured, for example, by combining a non-volatile memory such as a HDD (Hard Disk Drive) or SSD (Solid State Drive) as a storage medium that can be written to and read at any time, with a non-volatile memory such as a ROM (Read Only Memory), and stores application programs necessary for executing various processes related to one embodiment of the present invention, in addition to middleware such as an OS (Operating System).

[0018] The data storage unit 3 is, for example, a combination of a non-volatile memory such as an HDD or SSD as a storage medium that can be written to and read from at any time, and a volatile memory such as RAM (Random Access Memory), and its storage area includes a process division data storage unit 31, a short question data storage unit 32, an answer data storage unit 33, a correct answer data storage unit 34, and an evaluation data storage unit 35.

[0019] The process division data storage unit 31 stores data representing the results of dividing a process corresponding to a state change of the system screen data input as a question into a plurality of processing steps.

[0020] The sub-question data storage unit 32 stores the sub-question data created for the plurality of divided processing steps.

[0021] The answer data storage unit 33 stores the system screen data and data of answers given by the user to questions including sub-question data created for each of the divided processing steps.

[0022] The correct answer data storage unit 34 stores correct answer data used to determine whether the user's answer data to each of the above-mentioned sub-question data is correct or incorrect.

[0023] The evaluation data storage unit 35 stores data indicating the evaluation results of the user's programming thinking tendencies.

[0024] The control unit 1 includes, as processing units according to one embodiment of the present invention, a process division processing unit 11, a short question design processing unit 12, a user answer acquisition processing unit 13, a thinking tendency evaluation processing unit 14, and an evaluation data output processing unit 15.

[0025] The processing units 11 to 15 are all realized by causing a hardware processor in the control unit 1 to execute an application program stored in the program storage unit 2. Note that some or all of the processing units 11 to 15 may be realized using hardware such as an LSI (Large Scale Integration) or an ASIC (Application Specific Integrated Circuit).

[0026] The process division processing unit 11 divides the creation process of a process for realizing a state change into multiple stages, for example, for system screen data before and after the state change input by an instructor as a question. The process division processing unit 11 then stores data representing each divided stage together with the system screen data in the process division data storage unit 31. An example of the process division processing will be described in the operation example.

[0027] The sub-question design processing unit 12 designs sub-questions for each of the multiple stages divided by the process division processing unit 11, and stores data representing the designed sub-questions in the sub-question data storage unit 32. An example of the sub-question data design process will also be described below as an operational example.

[0028] The user answer acquisition processing unit 13 transmits question data consisting of the system screen data and sub-question data at each stage to the user terminal of the training target user from the input / output I / F unit 4. The user answer acquisition processing unit 13 then receives the user's answer data to the sub-question data from the user terminal via the input / output I / F unit 4, and stores the received answer data in the answer data storage unit in association with the user's identification information (hereinafter referred to as user ID).

[0029] The thinking tendency evaluation processing unit 14 evaluates the user's level of understanding for each stage for each training target user by comparing the answer data for each sub-question with the correct answer data stored in the correct answer data storage unit 34. The thinking tendency evaluation processing unit 14 also combines the evaluation results of the user's level of understanding for each stage to evaluate the user's tendency for programming-like thinking, and stores the evaluation result in association with the user ID in the evaluation data storage unit 35. Note that an example of the process for evaluating the level of understanding for each sub-question and the process for evaluating the overall thinking tendency will be described in the operation example.

[0030] The evaluation data output processing unit 15 reads out the evaluation data for each training target user from the evaluation data storage unit 35, and outputs the read-out evaluation data from the input / output I / F unit 4 to, for example, a display device (not shown) to present it to the training staff. The evaluation data may also be transmitted to the user terminal of the training target user.

[0031] (Example of Operation) Next, an example of operation of the thinking tendency evaluation device SV configured as above will be described. Fig. 3 is a flowchart showing an example of the processing procedure and processing content of the thinking tendency evaluation processing executed by the control unit 1 of the thinking tendency evaluation device SV.

[0032] (1) Dividing the State Change Process When assessing the tendency of a training target user in computational thinking, the trainer inputs the system screen data that constitutes part of the problem along with the assessment request. The system screen data consists of data showing the screen before the state change and data showing the screen after the state change.

[0033] In response to this, when the control unit 1 of the thinking tendency evaluation device SV detects the evaluation request in step S1, it first receives the system screen data in step S2 under the control of the process division processing unit 11. Then, in step S3, the process division processing unit 11 creates a process for realizing the state change based on the system screen data, and divides this state change process into a plurality of stages.

[0034] 4 shows an example of the division process of the state change process. In this example, the state change process for changing the system screen Ga before the state change to the system screen Gb after the state change is divided into three stages consisting of an abstraction section K1, a decomposition section K2, and an assembly section K3.

[0035] The abstraction section K1 identifies the components corresponding to the state change, for example, the type of operation required for the state change. The decomposition section K2 identifies the types of operations for the components related to the type of operation. The assembly section K3 assembles the process by arranging the types of operations in the correct order.

[0036] The process division processing unit 11 stores data representing the divided stages in the process division data storage unit 31 together with the system screen data before the state change and the system screen data after the state change.

[0037] The number of divisions of the state change process is not limited to three stages, but may be set to two stages or four or more stages. In short, the number of stages can be set arbitrarily depending on how detailed the tendency of the user's computational thinking is to be evaluated.

[0038] (2) Creation of Sub-Question Data Next, in step S4, the control unit 1 of the thinking tendency evaluation device SV, under the control of the sub-question design processing unit 12, performs a process of designing sub-questions for the above-mentioned multiple stages into which the process creation step is divided.

[0039] Figure 5 shows an example of sub-question data created for the abstraction section K1, the decomposition section K2, and the assembly section K3 when the process creation process is divided into three stages, i.e., the abstraction section K1, the decomposition section K2, and the assembly section K3, as shown in Figure 4. In this example, sub-question Q1 is created for the abstraction section K1, requesting it to select all options representing the types of actions required for a state change; sub-question Q2 is created for the decomposition section K2, requesting it to select all types of operations for executing the required actions from multiple options; and sub-question Q3 is created for the assembly section K3, requesting it to rearrange the options corresponding to the types of operations into the correct order of operations.

[0040] (Example of Creating a Short Question) Now, for example, suppose that system screens G1, G2, and G3, which cause state changes as shown in FIG. 6, are given as questions.

[0041] (2-1) Creation of Sub-Question Q1 The sub-question design processing unit 12 first creates sub-question Q1 for the divided abstract part K1 as follows: Figure 9 is a flowchart showing an example of the processing procedure and processing content of the creation processing of sub-question Q1.

[0042] That is, the sub-question design processing unit 12 first generates a question statement indicating the content of the sub-question Q1. For example, the sub-question design processing unit 12 generates a question statement for the sub-question Q1 written in natural language as shown in FIG.

[0043] Next, in step S411 shown in Fig. 9, the sub-question design processing unit 12 extracts a plurality of actions that can be executed on the system screen, and then in step S412, links each of the extracted actions to an action name on the system screen. Then, in step S413, a list is generated in which the plurality of actions linked to the action names are options. Fig. 8 shows an example of the generated list. This example shows the case in which a list including four actions OP1 to OP4 as options is generated.

[0044] The question statement indicating the content of the sub-question Q1 and the list of action options generated as described above are stored in the sub-question data storage unit 32 in association with the identification ID of the sub-question Q1.

[0045] (2-2) Creation of Sub-Question Q2 Next, the sub-question design processing unit 12 creates sub-question Q2 for the decomposition unit K2 as follows: Fig. 12 is a flowchart showing an example of the processing procedure and processing contents of the process of creating sub-question Q2.

[0046] That is, the sub-question design processing unit 12 first generates a question statement indicating the content of sub-question Q2. For example, the sub-question design processing unit 12 generates a question statement for sub-question Q2 written in natural language as shown in FIG.

[0047] Next, in step S421 shown in Fig. 12, the sub-question design processing unit 12 extracts elements related to the required operations on the system screen. In the example shown in Fig. 6, a "text box" and a "button" are extracted as elements related to the operations. The sub-question design processing unit 12 then selects an operation for each of the extracted elements in step S422. Then, in step S423, the sub-question design processing unit 12 generates a command statement by combining each of the elements and the operation, and sets the generated command statement as an option. Figs. 11A and 11B show an example of a list of generated command statements. This example shows the case where a list including 12 command statements R1 to R12 as options has been generated.

[0048] The question statement indicating the content of sub-question Q2 and the list of command options generated as described above are stored in the sub-question data storage unit 32 in association with the identification ID of sub-question Q2.

[0049] (2-3) Creation of Sub-Question Q3 Next, the sub-question design processing unit 12 creates sub-question Q3 for the assembly section K3 as follows: Fig. 15 is a flowchart showing an example of the processing procedure and processing contents of the creation processing of sub-question Q3.

[0050] That is, the sub-question design processing unit 12 first generates a question statement indicating the content of sub-question Q3. For example, the sub-question design processing unit 12 generates a question statement for sub-question Q3 written in natural language as shown in FIG.

[0051] Next, in step S431 shown in Fig. 15, the sub-question design processing unit 12 extracts a correct answer option from the multiple options generated for sub-question Q2. Then, in step S432, the extracted options are randomly rearranged to generate a list of options for command statements. Fig. 14 shows an example of a generated list of options for command statements. This example shows the case where a list containing six command statements R1 to R6 extracted from 12 command statements R1 to R12 as options is generated.

[0052] The question statement indicating the content of sub-question Q3 and the list of command options generated as described above are stored in the sub-question data storage unit 32 in association with the identification ID of sub-question Q3.

[0053] The sub-question design processing unit 12 determines in step S5 whether or not all sub-question data has been created. If there are any sub-questions that have not yet been created, the sub-question design processing unit 12 executes the sub-question data creation process described above for the uncreated sub-questions in step S4.

[0054] (3) Obtaining User's Answers Once the creation of the short question data is completed, the control unit 1 of the thinking tendency evaluation device SV, under the control of the user answer acquisition processing unit 13, executes the process of obtaining the user's answers to the questions as follows.

[0055] That is, first, in step S6, the user answer acquisition processing unit 13 reads the system screen data before and after the state change from the process division data storage unit 31, and also reads the sub-question data corresponding to each of the sub-questions Q1 to Q3 from the sub-question data storage unit 32. Then, it generates question data consisting of the read system screen data and the sub-question data, and transmits the generated question data from the input / output I / F unit 4 to the user terminals used by the users who are the subjects of the training.

[0056] Each user to be trained selects the correct answer for each of the sub-questions Q1 and Q2 displayed on his / her own user terminal, and then rearranges the answers in the order he / she thinks they are correct for sub-question Q3. After completing the answers to all of the sub-questions Q1 to Q3, he / she transmits data representing the answers to the thinking tendency evaluation device SV.

[0057] In response to this, the control unit 1 of the thinking tendency assessment device SV, under the control of the user response acquisition processing unit 13, receives the response data sent from each of the user terminals in step S7 via the input / output I / F unit 4, and stores the received response data in the response data storage unit 33 in association with the user ID of the respondent.

[0058] The user answer acquisition processing unit 13 executes the above-described process of acquiring answer data for each user who is the training target. Then, when the user answer acquisition processing unit 13 determines in step S8 that the process of acquiring answer data from each user has ended, the acquisition process ends.

[0059] (4) Evaluation of Thinking Tendencies When the process of acquiring response data from each user is completed, the control unit 1 of the thinking tendency evaluation device SV, under the control of the thinking tendency evaluation processing unit 14, executes the process of evaluating the programming thinking tendencies of each user in step S9 as follows.

[0060] FIG. 16 is a flowchart showing an example of the processing procedure and processing content of the thinking tendency evaluation processing executed by the thinking tendency evaluation processing unit 14.

[0061] First, in step S90, the thinking tendency evaluation processing unit 14 selects one respondent ID (Si) (i = 0 to N, N is the number of respondents) associated with the user who has responded (hereinafter referred to as the respondent). That is, one respondent Si is selected.

[0062] Then, the thinking tendency evaluation processing unit 14 reads out the answer data A1i, A2i, and A3i of the respondent Si corresponding to the selected respondent ID to the sub-questions Q1 to Q3 from the answer data storage unit 33 in steps S91, S92, and S93, respectively. Then, in steps S94, S95, and S96, evaluations are made for each of the read-out answer data A1i, A2i, and A3i.

[0063] (4-1) Evaluation of Answer Data A1i FIG. 17 is a flowchart showing an example of the procedure and content of the evaluation process performed by the thinking tendency evaluation processing unit 14 on the answer data A1i.

[0064] First, in step S941, the thinking tendency evaluation processing unit 14 reads the correct answer data C1 for the sub-question Q1 from the correct answer data storage unit 34, compares the answer data A1i with the correct answer data C1, and generates a set Pr1i of options that are common to the correct answer data C1 among the answer data A1i.

[0065] Next, in step S942, the thinking tendency evaluation processing unit 14 calculates the sum of weights WPr1i based on the weights assigned to each option included in the set of options Pr1i. At the same time, in step S943, the thinking tendency evaluation processing unit 14 calculates the sum of weights WC1 based on the weights assigned to each option included in the correct answer data C1.

[0066] Finally, in step S944, the thinking tendency evaluation processing unit 14 calculates the evaluation value P1 for the answer data A1 of the answerer Si to the sub-question Q1 by calculating P1 = WPr1 / WC1. That is, the thinking tendency evaluation processing unit 14 sets a weight for each of the above options so that the evaluation value will be high when the answerer has answered correctly to an important action.

[0067] Then, the thinking tendency evaluation processing unit 14 stores the calculated evaluation value P1i in the evaluation data storage unit 35 in association with the respondent ID (Si).

[0068] (4-2) Evaluation of Answer Data A2i FIG. 18 is a flowchart showing an example of the procedure and content of the evaluation process performed by the thinking tendency evaluation processing unit 14 on the answer data A2i.

[0069] First, in step S951, the thinking tendency evaluation processing unit 14 reads the correct answer data C2 for the sub-question Q2 from the correct answer data storage unit 34, and divides the correct answers for each action included in this correct answer data C2 into groups C2B1 to C2BL, each of which contains L actions. At the same time, in step S952, the thinking tendency evaluation processing unit 14 divides the answer data A2i of user Si for the sub-question Q2 into groups A2iB1 to A2iBL, each of which contains L actions.

[0070] Subsequently, in step S953, the thinking tendency evaluation processing unit 14 compares the group A2iB1 to A2iBL of the answer data A2i with the group C2B1 to C2BL of the correct answer data C2, and generates a set P2iB1 to P2iBL of options in which the group A2iB1 to A2iBL of the answer data A2i is common to the group C2B1 to C2BL of the correct answer data C2. That is, for each type of motion, it determines whether the selection result of each option included in the option group corresponding to that type of motion is correct or incorrect.

[0071] The thinking tendency evaluation processing unit 14 then determines in step S954 whether or not to perform evaluation for each of the L action groups. If evaluation is to be performed for each action group, first in step S955, the thinking tendency evaluation processing unit 14 calculates the sums of weights WC2B1 to WC2BL for each of the groups C2B1 to C2BL of the correct answer data C2. At the same time, in steps S9561 to S956L, the thinking tendency evaluation processing unit 14 calculates the sums of weights WP2iB1 to WP2iBL for the sets P2iB1 to P2iBL of options for the correct answer data from among the above answer data.

[0072] The thinking tendency evaluation processing unit 14 then calculates, for each group in steps S9571 to S957L, P2i B1 = WPr2i B1 / WC2B1 P2i B2 = WPr2i B2 / WC2B2 ... P2i BL = WPr2i BL / WC2BL to calculate the scores P2i B1 to P2i BL for the actions OP1 to OPL of the respondent Si in response to the sub-question Q2.

[0073] Then, in step S958, the thinking tendency evaluation processing unit 14 calculates an evaluation value P2i for the answer data A2i of the respondent Si to the sub-question Q2 by adding up the calculated scores P2iB1 to P2iBL of the actions with the weight Wbi set for each action. Then, the calculated evaluation value P2i is linked to the respondent ID (Si) and stored in the evaluation data storage unit 35.

[0074] On the other hand, suppose that it is determined in step S954 that evaluation for each of the L action groups will not be performed. In this case, the thinking tendency evaluation processing unit 14 calculates the evaluation value in the same way as in the evaluation process for the answer to sub-question Q1 in steps S941 to S944 shown in Fig. 17, and then in step S959 calculates the evaluation value P2 for the answer data A2 of respondent Si to sub-question Q2 by calculating P2 = WPr2 / WC2. The calculated evaluation value P2 is then linked to the respondent ID (Si) and stored in the evaluation data storage unit 35.

[0075] (4-3) Evaluation of Answer Data A3i FIG. 19 is a flowchart showing an example of the procedure and content of the evaluation process performed by the thinking tendency evaluation processing unit 14 on the answer data A3i.

[0076] First, in step S961, the thinking tendency evaluation processing unit 14 reads the correct answer data C3 for the sub-question Q3 from the correct answer data storage unit 34. Then, the order of the options in the answer data A3i is compared with the order of the options in the correct answer data C3.

[0077] Next, in step S962, the thinking tendency evaluation processing unit 14 calculates the distance d (j is the ID of the option) between the answer data A3 and the correct answer data C3 for each option based on the results of the comparison. More specifically, the absolute value of the difference between the answer data A3 and the correct answer data C3 is calculated, and the result is set as the distance d. Then, in step S963, the thinking tendency evaluation processing unit 14 calculates the sum of values ​​wjd, obtained by multiplying the calculated distance d for each option by the weight, that is, the weighted sum of distances WDi.

[0078] Finally, in step S964, the thinking tendency evaluation processing unit 14 calculates the difference between the weighted sum WDi of the distances to the full score F using the formula P3i = F - WDi (F is a preset full score), and sets the calculated difference value as the evaluation value P3i for the answer data A3i of the answerer Si to the sub-question Q3. Then, the calculated evaluation value P3i is stored in the evaluation data storage unit 35, linked to the answerer ID (Si).

[0079] FIG. 20 is a diagram showing the process of calculating the evaluation value P3i for the answer data A3i of the respondent Si to the sub-question Q3 described above.

[0080] (4-4) Calculation of Overall Evaluation Value When the individual evaluation processes for the answers A1i, A2i, and A3i of the respondent Si to the sub-questions Q1, Q2, and Q3 are completed in the above steps S94, S95, and S96, the thinking tendency evaluation processing unit 14 calculates the overall evaluation value for the respondent Si in step S97 as follows. As a calculation method, for example, the following two methods can be considered.

[0081] (First Calculation Method) The first calculation method is a method in which the evaluation values ​​P1i, P2i, and P3i of the answers to each of the sub-questions Q1 to Q3 are weighted and their sum is calculated as the overall evaluation value Pi. In other words, in this case, the thinking tendency evaluation processor 14 performs weighted addition as follows: Pi = w1 P1i + w2 P2i + w3 P3i to obtain the overall evaluation value Pi.

[0082] (Second Calculation Method) The second calculation method is a method of calculating the overall evaluation value Pi by taking a weighted average of the evaluation values ​​P1i, P2i, and P3i of the answers to each of the sub-questions Q1 to Q3. In other words, in this case, the thinking tendency evaluation processing unit 14 calculates the overall evaluation value Pi using the following formula: Pi = (w1 P1i + w2 P2i + w3 P3i) / (w1 + w2 + w3).

[0083] The weights used in the above calculations can be set in the following three ways.

[0084] (First Setting Method) The first setting method is used when there is a sub-question that you want to evaluate with emphasis. For example, if you want to evaluate sub-question Q1 with emphasis, set the weight w1 for the evaluation value P1i of the answer to this sub-question Q1 to a value greater than the weights for the other sub-questions Q2 and Q3.

[0085] (Second setting method) The second setting method is used when it is desired to eliminate correct answers that are the result of chance. For example, if sub-questions Q1 and Q2 are incorrect but only sub-question Q3 is correct, the weight w3 for sub-question Q3 is set to a value smaller than the weights for the other sub-questions Q1 and Q2.

[0086] (Third Setting Method) The third setting method is used to reduce the deduction of points for incorrect answers due to careless mistakes. For example, if the answers to the other sub-questions are correct but only one question is slightly different from the correct answer, the weighting for that question is reduced.

[0087] (4-5) Determining the Answerer's Level of Understanding After the calculation of the overall evaluation value is completed, the thinking tendency evaluation processing unit 14 determines the answerer's level of understanding of programming in step S98.

[0088] For example, the thinking tendency evaluation processing unit 14 sets a judgment threshold value α for the degree of understanding and compares the calculated overall evaluation value Pi with the threshold value α. If the result of this comparison shows that the overall evaluation value Pi is greater than the threshold value α, the thinking tendency evaluation processing unit 14 determines in step S99 that the respondent Si understands the process to be evaluated. On the other hand, if the result of the comparison shows that the overall evaluation value Pi is equal to or less than the threshold value α, the thinking tendency evaluation processing unit 14 determines in step S100 that the respondent Si does not understand the process to be evaluated.

[0089] Then, the thinking tendency evaluation processing unit 14 stores the above-mentioned judgment result of the overall level of understanding in the evaluation data storage unit 35, together with the individual evaluation values ​​P1i, P2i, and P3i for each of the sub-questions Q1 to Q3 obtained earlier, in association with the respondent ID.

[0090] (4-6) Control of Repetitive Processing When a series of evaluation processes for one respondent is completed, the thinking tendency evaluation processing unit 14 increments the value of i in ID(Si) (i=i+1) in step S101, and then determines in step S102 whether i=N has been reached. If the result of this determination is that i=N has not yet been reached, the process returns to step S90 to select the next respondent, and thereafter performs evaluation processing on the response data of that respondent in steps S90 to S102. Thereafter, in the same manner, the thinking tendency evaluation processing unit 14 repeatedly executes the series of evaluation processes described above until evaluation processing of the response data for all respondents is completed.

[0091] (4-7) Counting of Evaluation Data When the thinking tendency evaluation processing unit 14 has finished the evaluation process of the response data for all respondents, it proceeds to step S103. Then, the thinking tendency evaluation processing unit 14 counts up the evaluation values ​​stored in the evaluation data storage unit 35 for each respondent Si, and stores the results in the evaluation data storage unit 35 as evaluation data.

[0092] (5) Output of evaluation data In step S10 of FIG. 13, the control unit 1 of the thinking tendency evaluation device SV, under the control of the evaluation data output processing unit 15, reads out evaluation data for each respondent from the evaluation data storage unit 35 and outputs the read-out evaluation data from the input / output I / F unit 4 to a display device not shown.

[0093] Thus, the display device displays the evaluation results of each respondent's understanding of the state change process. At this time, the evaluation data displays the evaluation scores of the answers to each of the sub-questions Q1 to Q3, as well as an overall evaluation score. Therefore, the displayed evaluation data allows the trainer to grasp not only whether each respondent understands programming, but also the level of understanding at each stage of the process creation process. In other words, it becomes possible to grasp the tendency of computational thinking.

[0094] (Effects) As described above, in one embodiment, when evaluating the tendency of a user to be trained in a programming language, the process of causing a state change on a given system screen is first divided into three stages consisting of an abstraction section K1, a decomposition section K2, and an assembly section K3, and sub-question data Q1 to Q3 are created for each divided stage. Then, question data consisting of the system screen and the sub-question data Q1 to Q3 for each stage is presented to the user, and answer data A1 to A3 from the user to the sub-question data Q1 to Q3 are obtained. Next, each of the answer data A1 to A3 is evaluated, and the evaluation results are further combined to obtain comprehensive evaluation data.

[0095] Therefore, it is possible to evaluate the user's level of understanding of the process steps for each of the abstraction section K1, decomposition section K2, and assembly section K3 individually, and also to evaluate the user's level of understanding of the entire process. This makes it possible to evaluate not only whether or not the user understands the state change process, but also the tendency of the user to understand the process creation process.

[0096] As a result, it becomes possible to provide more appropriate learning support to users based on their individual understanding characteristics. For example, basic learning support can be provided to a learner who has difficulty grasping the content of state changes regardless of the type of process, and learning support can be provided intensively to a user who lacks understanding of some stages in the process creation process.

[0097] [Other embodiments] The various processing functions of the thinking tendency assessment device, their processing procedures and processing contents, the type of user, the number of divisions in the process creation process, the form and contents of the sub-questions, the method for evaluating answers to the sub-questions, the method for evaluating the level of understanding of the entire process, etc. can be modified and implemented in various ways without departing from the spirit of this invention.

[0098] Although the embodiments of the present invention have been described in detail above, the above description is merely an example of the present invention in every respect. It goes without saying that various improvements and modifications can be made without departing from the scope of the present invention. In other words, when implementing the present invention, specific configurations according to the embodiments may be appropriately adopted.

[0099] In short, this invention is not limited to the above-described embodiments, and in the implementation stage, the components can be modified and embodied without departing from the spirit of the invention. Furthermore, various inventions can be formed by appropriately combining multiple components disclosed in the above-described embodiments. For example, some components may be omitted from all the components shown in the embodiments. Furthermore, components from different embodiments may be appropriately combined.

[0100] SV...Thinking tendency evaluation device 1...Control unit 2...Program storage unit 3...Data storage unit 4...Input / output I / F unit 5...Bus 11...Process division processing unit 12...Sub-question design processing unit 13...User answer acquisition processing unit 14...Thinking tendency evaluation processing unit 15...Evaluation data output processing unit 31...Process division data storage unit 32...Sub-question data storage unit 33...Answer data storage unit 34...Correct answer data storage unit 35...Evaluation data storage unit

Claims

1. A thinking tendency evaluation device for evaluating a user's thinking tendency with respect to a process of state change, comprising: a first processing unit that divides the process of creating the process of state change into a plurality of stages according to the flow of creation; a second processing unit that creates, for each of the plurality of stages, quiz data for evaluating the degree of understanding of the stage; a third processing unit that acquires, for each of the quiz data, the user's answer data; and a fourth processing unit that evaluates, based on the answer data, the degree of understanding of the user for each of the stages, and comprehensively evaluates the evaluation results of the degree of understanding to evaluate the thinking tendency of the user with respect to the process of creating the process of state change.

2. The thinking tendency evaluation device according to claim 1, wherein the first processing unit divides the process of creating the process of state change into an abstraction unit that grasps the types of operations required for the state change, a decomposition unit that grasps the types of operations on the components related to the types of operations, and an assembly unit that arranges the types of operations in the correct order to assemble the process of state change.

3. The thinking tendency evaluation device according to claim 2, wherein the second processing unit includes: a processing unit that creates first quiz data for allowing the user to select a first option group corresponding to the types of operations required for the state change for the abstraction unit; a processing unit that creates second quiz data for allowing the user to select a second option group corresponding to the types of operations on the components related to the types of operations for the decomposition unit; and a processing unit that creates third quiz data for allowing the user to answer the execution order of the plurality of types of operations for the assembly unit.

4. The thinking tendency evaluation device according to claim 3, wherein the fourth processing unit includes: a processing unit that determines whether the user's answer to the first option group is correct based on the user's first answer data to the first quiz data; and a processing unit that sets weights according to the importance of the operations for the plurality of options included in the first option group, and obtains an evaluation value representing the degree of understanding of the user for the abstraction unit by adding the weights to the values representing the determination results of whether the answers to each of the options included in the first option group are correct and summing them up.

5. The fourth processing unit includes: A processing unit that determines the correctness of the selection result of the second option group for each type of operation based on the second response data of the user to the second sub-question data; A processing unit that sets weights according to the importance of the operation for each type of operation and a plurality of options included in the second option group corresponding to each type of operation, and synthesizes, taking into account the weights, the values representing the determination results of the correctness of the responses for each of the options included in the second option group for each type of operation, thereby calculating an evaluation value for each type of operation corresponding to the operation; A processing unit that synthesizes the calculated evaluation value for each type of operation, taking into account the weight set for each type of operation, to obtain an evaluation value representing the degree of understanding of the user with respect to the decomposition unit. The thinking tendency evaluation device according to claim 3.

6. The fourth processing unit includes: A processing unit that calculates the distance between the response result and the correct answer data for each type of operation by comparing the response result regarding the execution order of the types of operations with the correct answer data based on the third response data of the user to the third sub-question data; A processing unit that synthesizes the distances calculated for each type of operation, taking into account the weights preset for each type of operation, and obtains an evaluation value representing the degree of understanding of the user with respect to the assembly unit by comparing the synthesized value of the distances with a predetermined threshold value. The thinking tendency evaluation device according to claim 3.

7. A thinking tendency evaluation method for evaluating the thinking tendency of a user with respect to a process of state change by an information processing device, the method comprising: A first process of dividing the process of creating the process of state change into a plurality of stages according to the flow of creation; A second process of creating, for each of the plurality of stages, sub-question data for evaluating the degree of understanding of the stage; A third process of respectively obtaining the response data of the user for each of the sub-question data; A fourth process of evaluating the degree of understanding of the user for each of the stages based on the response data and comprehensively evaluating the evaluation results of the degree of understanding to evaluate the thinking tendency of the user with respect to the process of creating the process of state change.

8. A program that causes a processor included in the thinking tendency evaluation device to execute at least one of the processes executed by the first to fourth processing units included in the thinking tendency evaluation device according to any one of claims 1 to 6.

Images