It seems the children's model is BASIC-like in that a function call is just equivalent to "GOTO <#LINE>", and that the program state is just the line number currently being executed.
The part that is missing is the stack. So I wonder what would happen if you let them step through while showing the stack state at every point. This would clue them in immediately that there is nested control flow.
The part about alternative explanations is funny but just reflects the fact that there is an element of the language not reflected in the code, that they can't just reify visually (unlike the instruction counter).
That is, the kid who inferred that there was an invisible "demon"... was right.
The part that is missing is the stack. So I wonder what would happen if you let them step through while showing the stack state at every point. This would clue them in immediately that there is nested control flow.
The part about alternative explanations is funny but just reflects the fact that there is an element of the language not reflected in the code, that they can't just reify visually (unlike the instruction counter).
That is, the kid who inferred that there was an invisible "demon"... was right.