Search for: All records

Objective To meaningfully organize scientific computing based on evidence gathered through user feedback, build a statistical package based on the findings and provide a replication packet to run similar studies on people with different backgrounds. Method A randomized controlled trial using a weighted, ranked choice survey (n = 118) with between-subjects design having two independent variables: Language Group (Matlab, Python and R) and Method Name options. Our dependent variable was a normalized preference rating. Findings There was a very small interaction between Language Group and Method Name. Language Group did not have a statistically significant effect, but Method Name did (F(4, 27037) = 2211.23, p < .001)(𝜂2 𝑝 = .247). Finally, many names in Matlab, Python and R were ranked so poorly that they were not statistically significantly different from a random word in 63.0%, 62.2% and 30.4% of concepts respectively. Implications We found organized and structured names were ranked by a large margin, suggesting statistical programming today likely needs considerable improvement. Finally, we outline a statistical package built using these principles, provide comparison scripts and describe some of the challenges from going from simple surveys to in-practice libraries. 

The introduction of block-based programming has gradually changed the landscape of programming education, particularly for school children. Block languages today, however, have serious technical barriers to students with disabilities. For example, block languages are generally not screen reader accessible, incompatible with braille, and contain serious problems for users with motor impairments. No student with a disability should ever be denied access to learning computer science and they do not have to be. To help rectify this, we present a new approach to the design of block languages called Quorum Blocks. Quorum Blocks uses a custom hardware accelerated graphical rendering pipeline that takes into account how screen readers and other devices work under the hood. We discuss these technical details and demonstrate that accessibility support can be fully achieved without meaningfully losing either the look of modern blocks or their visual output. We present the results from focus groups that highlight the barriers students faced with a variety of disabilities when using the first version of Quorum Blocks. We focus especially on challenges with low vision users, screen reader users, or those using no mouse and only one hand to type. Block languages built using either our techniques, or on top of our libraries, would become accessible out of the box.