nach oben

Education and Information Technologies

Erschienen in:

25.03.2020

Attitudes of IT teacher candidates towards computer programming and their self-efficacy and opinions regarding to block-based programming

verfasst von: Emre Çoban, Özgen Korkmaz, Recep Çakır, Feray Uğur Erdoğmuş

Erschienen in: Education and Information Technologies | Ausgabe 5/2020

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

The aim of this study is to determine the attitudes of pre-service teachers towards programming, the perceptions of self-efficacy about block-based programming and the opinions of pre-service teachers on the use of educational robots. This research is a quantitative and qualitative research conducted using a mixed research design. The study group of the research consisted of 140 undergraduate students from the universities in Turkey, studying in the Department of Computer Education and Instructional Technologies. The data were collected through the Attitude Scale of Computer Programming Learning, the Self-Efficacy Perception Scale Related to Block-Based Programming and the interview form developed by the researchers. The quantitative data were analyzed by arithmetic mean, standard deviation, pearson r correlation, regression, t-test and ANOVA analysis, and the qualitative data were analyzed by content analysis method and the following results were obtained: the attitudes of pre-service teachers and their perceptions of self-efficacy are above average and interrelated. The pre-service teachers’ perceptions of self-efficacy vary according to grade level. However, their attitudes do not differ according to class level. However, the perceptions of self-efficacy and the attitudes have been found to differ according to the university where they study gender and education. In addition, pre-service teachers’ opinions about educational robots are that educational robots contribute to problem solving and programming skills.

Vorheriger Artikel Teachers’ digital literacy and digital activity as digital divide components among basic schools in Ghana

Nächster Artikel Participatory design of persuasive technology in a blended learning course: A qualitative study

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Afari, E., & Khine, M. S. (2017). Robotics as an educational tool: Impact of lego mindstorms. International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 7(6), 437–442.CrossRef

Akçay, A., (2015). Analyzing self-efficacy of programming skills in terms of problem solving and inquiry skills. (Master thesis). Necmettin Erbakan University, Institute of Educational, Konya.

Altun, A., & Kasalak, İ. (2018). Perceived self-efficacy scale development study related to block-based programming: Scratch case. Educational Technology Theory and Practice, 8(1), 209–225.

Atmatzidou, S., & Demetriadis, S. (2016). Advancing students’ computational thinking skills through educational robotics: A study on age and gender relevant differences. Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 75, 661–670.CrossRef

Bardakçı, S., Kılıçer, K., & Özeke, V. (2017). A Projection from Computer Education & Instructional Technologies Departments in Turkey. Educational Technology Theory and Practice, 7(2), 123–148. https://doi.org/10.17943/etku.286627.CrossRef

Baz, F. (2018). A comparative analysis of coding software for children. Current Research in Education, 4(1), 36–47.

Chaudhary, V., Agrawal, V., Sureka, P., & Sureka, A. (2016). An Experience Report on Teaching Programming and Computational Thinking to Elementary Level Children Using Lego Robotics Education Kit. In 2016 IEEE eighth international conference on Technology for Education (T4E). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/t4e.2016.016.

Chavkin, N. F., & Williams, D. L. (1988). Critical issues in teacher training for parent involvement. Educational Horizons, 66(2), 87–89.

Chen, C., Haduong, P., Brennan, K., Sonnert, G., & Sadler, P. (2018). The effects of first programming language on college students’ computing attitude and achievement: A comparison of graphical and textual languages. Computer Science Education, 28(2), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/08993408.2018.1547564.CrossRef

Diyas, Y., Brakk, D., Aimambetov, Y., & Sandygulova, A. (2016). Evaluating peer versus teacher robot within educational scenario of programming learning. In the Eleventh ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human Robot Interaction (pp. 425-426). IEEE press.

Erol, O., & Kurt, A. A. (2017a). Investigation of CEIT students’ attitudes towards programming. Mehmet Akif Ersoy University Education Faculty Journal, 1(41), 314–325.

Erol, O., & Kurt, A. A. (2017b). The effects of teaching programming with scratch on pre-service information technology teachers’ motivation and achievement. Computers in Human Behavior, 77, 11–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.08.017.CrossRef

Ersoy, H., Madran, R. O. & Gülbahar, Y. (2016). A method profosed for teaching programming language: Robotic programming. Academic Information Conference 11-XIII.

Fidan, U., & Yalçın, Y. (2012). Lego Nxt Training Kit. The Journal of Afyon Kocatepe University Science Institute, 12(2012), 01510 1–8.

Gezgin, D. M., & Adnan, M. (2016). The Students' of mechanical engineering and econometrics perceptions of self-efficacy research. Ahi Evran University Kırşehir Education Faculty Journal, 17(2), 509–525.

Gülbahar, Y., & Kalelioğlu, F. (2018). Information and communication technologies and computer science: The process of curriculum development. National Education Journal, 47(217), 5–23.

Gunbatar, M., & Karalar, H. (2018). Gender differences in middle school students’ attitudes and self-efficacy perceptions towards mBlock programming. European Journal of Educational Research, 7(4), 925–933.

Hernández, D., Trejo, H., & Ordoñez, E. (2015). Development of an exploration land robot using low-cost andOpen Sourceplatforms for educational purposes. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 582, 12007. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/582/1/012007.CrossRef

Hu, H. (2017). A low-cost autonomous robot and educational platform for intelligent automation experiments. DEStech Transactions on Engineering and Technology Research, (ameme). https://doi.org/10.12783/dtetr/ameme2017/16221

Imhof, M., Vollmeyer, R., & Beierlein, C. (2007). Computer use and the gender gap: The issue of access, use, motivation, and performance. Computers in Human Behavior, 23(6), 2823–2837. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2006.05.007.CrossRef

Işık, A., Çiltaş, A., & Baş, F. (2010). Teacher training and teaching profession. Atatürk University Journal of Social Sciences Institute, 14(1), 53–62.

Jaipal-Jamani, K., & Angeli, C. (2017). Effect of robotics on elementary preservice teachers’ self-efficacy, science learning, and computational thinking. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 26(2), 175–192.CrossRef

Jdeed, M., Zhevzhyk, S., Steinkellner, F., & Elmenreich, W. (2017). Spiderino - A low-cost robot for swarm research and educational purposes. In 2017 13th workshop on intelligent solutions in embedded systems (WISES). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/wises.2017.7986929.

Johnson, R. B., & Christensen, L. B. (2004). Educational research: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed approaches. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33(7), 14–26.CrossRef

Kadir, W. M., Samin, R. E., & Ibrahim, B. S. (2012). Internet controlled robotic arm. Process Engineering, 41, 1065–1071.

Kallia, M., & Sentance, S. (2018). Are boys more confident than girls? In Proceedings of the 13th Workshop in Primary and Secondary Computing Education on - WiPSCE ‘18. ACM Press. https://doi.org/10.1145/3265757.3265773.

Karimi, Z., Baraani-Dastjerdi, A., Ghasem-Aghaee, N., & Wagner, S. (2016). Links between the personalities, styles and performance in computer programming. Journal of Systems and Software, 111, 228–241. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2015.09.011.CrossRef

Kazakoff, E. R., Sullivan, A., & Bers, M. U. (2012). The effect of a classroom-based intensive robotics and programming workshop on sequencing ability in early childhood. Early Childhood Education Journal, 41(4), 245–255. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-012-0554-5.CrossRef

Korkmaz, Ö., & Altun, H. (2014). A validity and reliability study of the learning computer programming attitude scale (LeCoPAS). Mevlana International Journal of Education, 4(1), 30–43.CrossRef

Korkmaz, Ö., Çakır, R., Özden, M., Oluk, A., & Sarıoğlu, S. (2015). Investigation of individuals’ computational thinking skills in terms of different variables. Ondokuz Mayıs University Faculty of Education Journal, 34(2), 68–87.

Kusuma, I. D., Utaminingrum, F., & Kakeshita, T. (2018). A toolkit to learn algorithmic thinking using mBot robot. Information Processing Society of Japan Kyushu Branch Tuesday Country Information Symposium.

Lamb, A., & Johnson, L. (2011). Scratch: Computer programming for 21st century learners.

Lego Mindstorms NXT. (2018). In Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Retrieved 22:40, Nov 20, 2018, Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lego_Mindstorms_NXT.

Lim, G. W., & Kim, C. S. (2019). The effect of modular robot programming education on learning motivation of informatics curriculum. The Journal of Korean Association of Computer Education, 22(1), 79–86.CrossRef

Luo, R. C., & Su, K. L. (2003). A multi agent multi sensor based real-time sensory control system for intelligent security robot. IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, 2, 2394–2399.

Morse, J. M. (2003). Principles of mixed methods and multimethod research design. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research (pp. 189–208). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Naya, M., Varela, G., Llamas, L., Bautista, M., Prieto, A., & Duro, R. J. (2017). Robobo: The next generation of educational robot. In ROBOT 2017: Third Iberian Robotics Conference (Vol. 2, p. 359). Springer.

Numanoğlu, M., & Keser, H. (2017). Robot usage in programming teaching - Mbot example. Bartın University Faculty of Education Journal, 6(2), 497–515. https://doi.org/10.14686/buefad.306198.CrossRef

Oktay, A. (2013). Teaching profession and Teacher's specifications. Journal of Educational Sciences, 3(3), 187–193.

Ouahbi, I., Kaddari, F., Darhmaoui, H., Elachqar, A., & Lahmine, S. (2015). Learning basic programming concepts by creating games with scratch programming environment. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 191, 1479–1482. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.04.224.CrossRef

Özdemirci, E., Ersin, Ç., & Canal, M. (2017). Realization of application set for Arduino Uno. Mehmet Akif Ersoy University Journal of the Graduate School of Natural and Applied Sciences, 8(special 1), 127–133.

Özdinç, F., & Altun, A. (2014). Factors effecting information technology teacher Trainees' programming process. Primary Education Online, 13(4).

Özmen, B., & Altun, A. (2014). Undergraduate Students' experiences in programming: Difficulties and obstacles. Turkish Online Journal of Qualitative Inquiry, 5(3), 1–27. http://dergipark.gov.tr/tojqi/issue/21404/229409.

Özyurt, Ö., & Özyurt, H. (2014). A study for determining computer programming students’ attitudes towards programming and their programming self-efficacy. Theory and Practice in Education, 11(1), 51–67.MATH

Rubio, M. A., Romero-Zaliz, R., Mañoso, C., & de Madrid, A. P. (2015). Closing the gender gap in an introductory programming course. Computers & Education, 82, 409–420. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.12.003.CrossRef

Sayın, Z., & Seferoğlu, S. S. (2016). Coding education as a new 21st century skill and its effect on educational policies. Academic Informatics Conference, 3-5.

Shukla, A., Singh, R., Agarwal, R., Suhail, M., Saha, S. K., & Chaudury, S. (2017). Development of a low-cost education platform. In proceedings of the advances in robotics on - AIR ‘17. ACM Press. https://doi.org/10.1145/3132446.3134902.

Silva, M. P., Neves, D., Gonçalves, J., & Costa, P. (2016). Proposal of the microfactory robotic competition, of the factory environment and of its official robot which is also a low cost versatile educational robot. In INTED2016 Proceedings. IATED. https://doi.org/10.21125/inted.2016.1008.

Sırakaya, M. (2018). Student views on coding training. Ondokuz Mayıs University Faculty of Education Journal, 37(2), 79–90.

Telegenov, K., Tlegenov, Y., & Shintemirov, A. (2015). A low-cost open-source 3-D-printed three-finger gripper platform for research and educational purposes. IEEE Access, 3, 638–647. https://doi.org/10.1109/access.2015.2433937.CrossRef

Toh, E., Poh, L., Causo, A., Tzuo, P. W., Chen, I., & Yeo, S. H. (2016). A review on the use of robots in education and young children. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 19(2), 136–143.

Tsan, J., Boyer, K. E., & Lynch, C. F. (2016). How early does the CS gender gap emerge? In Proceedings of the 47th ACM Technical Symposium on Computing Science Education - SIGCSE ‘16. ACM Press. https://doi.org/10.1145/2839509.2844605.

Witherspoon, E. B., Schunn, C. D., Higashi, R. M., & Shoop, R. (2018). Attending to structural programming features predicts differences in learning and motivation. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 34(2), 115–128. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12219.CrossRef

Wong, N. K. (2015). Affordable open-source Mobile robot kit for education and research. Davis: University of California.

Yağcı, M. (2016). Effect of attitudes of information technologies (IT) preservice teachers and computer programming (CP) students toward programming on their perception regarding their self-sufficiency for programming. International Journal of Human Sciences, 13(1). https://doi.org/10.14687/ijhs.v13i1.3502.

Yılmaz, N., Sağıroğlu, Ş., & Bayrak, M. (2013). General aimed web based Mobile robot: Sunar. Gazi University Journal of Faculty of Engineering and Architecture, 21(4).

Yu, B. G., Lee, W. G., & Kim, J. (2015). The utilization time of effective programming in the programming education utilizing the robot. International Journal of Imaging and Robotics, 15(3), 106–115.

Yukselturk, E., & Altiok, S. (2016). An investigation of the effects of programming with scratch on the preservice IT teachers’ self-efficacy perceptions and attitudes towards computer programming. British Journal of Educational Technology, 48(3), 789–801. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12453.CrossRef

Yünkül, E., Durak, G., Çankaya, S., & Mısırlı, Z. (2017). The effects of scratch software on students’ computational thinking skills. Necatibey Faculty of Education Journal of Electronic Science and Mathematics Education, 11(2), 502–517. https://doi.org/10.17522/balikesirnef.373424.CrossRef

Titel: Attitudes of IT teacher candidates towards computer programming and their self-efficacy and opinions regarding to block-based programming
verfasst von: Emre Çoban
Özgen Korkmaz
Recep Çakır
Feray Uğur Erdoğmuş
Publikationsdatum: 25.03.2020
Verlag: Springer US
Erschienen in: Education and Information Technologies / Ausgabe 5/2020
Print ISSN: 1360-2357
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-7608
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10164-w

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Springer Professional "Technik"

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 5/2020

Critical success factors influencing the adoption of digitalisation for teaching and learning by business schools

Self-regulated learning strategies and non-academic outcomes in higher education blended learning environments: A one decade review

Decision support model to help language teachers grouping adult learners in a classroom

Machine learning algorithm for grading open-ended physics questions in Turkish

Virtual tutor and pupil interaction: A study of empathic feedback as extrinsic motivation for learning

Teachers’ digital literacy and digital activity as digital divide components among basic schools in Ghana