Skip to main content
Fachgebiete
Automobil + Motoren Bauwesen + Immobilien Business IT + Informatik Elektrotechnik + Elektronik Energie + Nachhaltigkeit Finance + Banking Management + Führung Marketing + Vertrieb Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe Versicherung + Risiko
DE
EN
Bücher
Zeitschriften
Themenseiten
Organisationspsychologie Projektmanagement Marketing Smart Manufacturing
Weitere Formate
Podcasts Webinare Technik Webinare Wirtschaft Kongresse Veranstaltungskalender Awards
Jetzt Einzelzugang starten
Zugang für Unternehmen
Referenzkunden
SLX-Digitalkonferenz: Zukunftswerkstatt 2024

Mehr Umsatz mit Top-Kontakten

Am 7. Mai erfahren Sie, wie Vertriebsteams Leadgenerierung, Leadnurturing und Leadstrategien effizient steuern können.
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
Technology, Knowledge and Learning
Erschienen in: Technology, Knowledge and Learning 2/2018

12.04.2018 | Original research

Computer Programming Effects in Elementary: Perceptions and Career Aspirations in STEM

verfasst von: Yune Tran

Erschienen in: Technology, Knowledge and Learning | Ausgabe 2/2018

Einloggen

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

search-config
loading …

Abstract

The development of elementary-aged students’ STEM and computer science (CS) literacy is critical in this evolving technological landscape, thus, promoting success for college, career, and STEM/CS professional paths. Research has suggested that elementary-aged students need developmentally appropriate STEM integrated opportunities in the classroom; however, little is known about the potential impact of CS programming and how these opportunities engender positive perceptions, foster confidence, and promote perseverance to nurture students’ early career aspirations related to STEM/CS. The main purpose of this mixed-method study was to examine elementary-aged students’ (N = 132) perceptions of STEM, career choices, and effects from pre- to post-test intervention of CS lessons (N = 183) over a three-month period. Findings included positive and significant changes from students’ pre- to post-tests as well as augmented themes from 52 student interviews to represent increased enjoyment of CS lessons, early exposure, and its benefits for learning to future careers.
Vorheriger Artikel Coding to Create: A Subtext of Decisions as Early Adolescents Design Digital Media
Nächster Artikel An Automatic Measure of Cross-Language Text Structures

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 "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
Anhänge
Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich
Literatur
Aldoplhe, F. S. G., Fraser, B. J., & Aldigre, J. M. (2003). A cross national study of learning environment and attitudes among junior secondary science students in Australia and Indonesia. Paper presented at the Third International Science, Mathematics, and Technology Education Conference, East London, South Africa.
Anderman, E. R., & Young, A. J. (1994). Motivation and strategy use in science: Individual differences and classroom effects. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31, 811–831.CrossRef
Andersen, M. (2005). Thinking about women: A quarter century’s view. Gender and Society, 19(4), 437–455.CrossRef
Archer, L., Osborne, J., DeWitt, J., Dillon, J., Wong, B., & Willis, B. (2013). ASPIRES Young peoples’ science and career aspirations, age 10–14. London: Department of Ducation and Professional Studies. King’s College.
Auger, R. W., & Blackhurst, A. E. (2005). The development of elementary-aged children’s aspirations and expectations. American School Counselor Association Journal, 8(4), 322–329.
Augustine, N. R. (2005). Rising above the gathering storm: Energizing and employing America for a brighter economic future. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
Ausubel, D. (1963). The psychology of meaningful verbal learning. New York: Grune & Stratton.
Bandura, A. (1993). Perceived self-efficacy in cognitive development and functioning. Educational Psychologist, 28, 117–148.CrossRef
Bandura, A., Barbarenelli, C., Caprara, G. V., & Pastorelli, C. (2001). Self-efficacy beliefs as shapers of children’s aspirations and career trajectories. Child Development, 72(9), 187–206.CrossRef
Barr, V., & Stephenson, C. (2011). Bringing computational thinking to K-12: What is involved and what is the role of the computer science community? ACM Inroads, 2(1), 48–54.CrossRef
Barshay, J. (2011). ‘Blended learning’ for the little ones. Education Week, 31(9), 1–14.
Bers, M., & Horn, M. (2010). Tangible programming in early childhood: Revisiting developmental assumptions through new technologies. In I. Berson & M. Berson (Eds.), High-tech tots: Childhood in a digital world (pp. 49–70). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
Boyles, S. R. (2011). Using technology in the classroom. Science Scope, 34(9), 39–43.
Campbell, G., Denes, R., & Morrison, C. (Eds.). (2000). Access denied. Race, ethnicity, and the scientific enterprise. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Cavallo, A. M. L. (1996). Meaningful learning reasoning ability and student’s understanding and problem of genetics topics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38, 625–656.CrossRef
Cavallo, A. M. L., Rozman, M., & Potter, W. H. (2004). Gender differences in learning Constructs, shifts in learning constructs, and their relationship to course achievement in a structured inquiry, yearlong collage physic course for life science majors. School Science and Mathematics, 104(6), 288–301.CrossRef
Chen, X. (2009). Students who study science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) in postsecondary education (NCES 2009-161). Washington DC: National Center for Educational Statistics.
Cinamon, R. G., & Dan, O. (2010). Parental attitudes toward preschoolers’ career education: A mixed-method study. Journal of Career Development, 37, 519–540.CrossRef
Clements, D. H. (1987). Longitudinal study of the effects of logo programming on cognitive abilities and achievement. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 3, 73–94.CrossRef
Clements, D. H., Battista, M. T., & Sarama, J. (2001). Logo and geometry. Journal of Research in Mathematics Education Monograph Series, 10.
Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy. (2007). Rising above the gathering storm: Energizing and employing America for a Brighter economic future. Washington DC: The National Academies Press.
Correll, S. J. (2001). Gender and the career choice process: The role of biased self-Assessments. The American Journal of Sociology, 106(6), 1691–1730.CrossRef
Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
DeJarnette, N. K. (2012). America’s children: Providing early exposure to STEM (science, technology, engineering and math) initiatives. Education, 133(1), 77–84.
DeWitt, J., Archer, L., & Osborne, J. (2014). Science-related aspirations across the primary-secondary divide: Evidence from two surveys in England. International Journal of Science Education, 36(10), 1609–1629.CrossRef
DiSessa, A. A. (2000). Changing minds: Computers, learning, and literacy. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Duschl, R. A., Schweinggruber, H. A., & Shouse, A. W. (2007). Taking science to school: Learning and teaching science in Grades K-8. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Eccles, J. S., Wigfield, A., & Schiefele, U. (1998). Motivation. In N. Eisenberg (Ed.), Handbook of child psychology (5th ed., Vol. 3, pp. 1017–1095). New York: Wiley.
Edmondson, K. M. (1989). The influence of students’ conceptions of scientific knowledge and their orientations to learning on their choices of learning strategy in a college introductory level biology course. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY.
Elkind, D. (1982). Piagetian psychology and the practice of child psychiatry. Journal of the American Academy of Child Psychiatry, 21, 435–445.CrossRef
Fessakis, G., Gouli, E., & Mavroudi, E. (2013). Problem solving by 5-6 years old kindergarten children in a computer programming environment: A case study. Computers & Education, 63, 87–97.CrossRef
Ginzberg, E. (1952). Toward a theory of occupational choice. Occupations, 30, 491–494.
Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. New York: Aldine.
Gottfredson, L. (1981). Circumscription and compromise: A developmental theory of occupational aspirations [Monograph]. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 28, 545–579.CrossRef
Gottfredson, L. S., & Lapan, R. T. (1997). Assessing gender-based circumscription of occupational aspirations. Journal of Career Assessment, 5(4), 419–441.CrossRef
Gottfried, A. E. (1990). Academic intrinsic motivation in young elementary school children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 525–538.CrossRef
Grover, S., & Pea, R. (2013). Computational thinking in K-12: A review of the state of the field. Educational Researcher, 42, 38–43.CrossRef
Harackiewiez, J. M., Rozek, C. S., Hulleman, C. S., & Hyde, J. (2012). Helping parents to motivate adolescents in mathematics and science: An experimental test of utility-value intervention. Psychological Science, 23, 899–906.CrossRef
Harris, C. J., & Rooks, D. L. (2010). Managing inquiry-based science: Challenges in enacting complex instruction in elementary and middle school classrooms. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 21, 227–240.CrossRef
Henderson, P. B., Cortina, T. J., Hazzan, O., & Wing, J. M. (2007). Computational thinking. In Proceedings of the 38th ACM SIGCSE technical symposium on computer science education (SIGCSE’07) (pp. 195–196). New York, NY: ACM Press.
Holland, J. L. (1985). Making vocational choices (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Hong, S. (2010). The reciprocal relationship between parental involvement and Mathematics achievement: Autoregressive cross-lagged modeling. Journal of Experimental Education, 78, 419–439.CrossRef
Horn, M. S., Crouser, R. J., & Bers, M. U. (2011). Tangible interaction and learning: The case for hybrid approach. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 16(4), 379–389.CrossRef
Ing, M. (2014). Can parents influence children’s mathematics achievement and persistence in STEM careers? Journal of Career Development, 41(2), 87–103.CrossRef
Israel, M., Pearson, J. N., Tapia, T., Wherfel, Q. M., & Reese, G. (2015). Supporting all learners in school wide computational thinking: A cross case qualitative analysis. Computers & Education, 82, 263–279.CrossRef
Jona, K., Wilensky, U., Trouille, L., Horn, M. S., Orton, K., Weintrop, D., & Beheshti, E. (2014). Embedding computational thinking in science, technology, engineering, and math (CT-STEM). Presented at the Future Directions in Computer Science Education Summit Meeting, Orlando, FL.
Kafai, Y. B., & Burke, Q. (2014). Connected code: Why children need to learn programming. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Kazakoff, E., Sullivan, A., & Bers, M. U. (2013). 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.CrossRef
Kuo, Y., Belland, B. R., Schroder, K. E., & Walker, A. E. (2014). K-12 teachers’ perceptions of and their satisfaction with interaction type in blended learning environments. Distance Education, 35(3), 360–381.CrossRef
Lawrenz, F. (1976). Student perception of the classroom learning environment in biology, chemistry and physics courses. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 13(4), 315–323.CrossRef
Lederman, N. G., & Lederman, J. S. (2013). Is it STEM or” S & M” that we truly love? Journal of Science Teacher Education, 24(8), 1237.CrossRef
Lee, I., Martin, F., Denner, J., Coulter, B., Allan, W., Erickson, J., et al. (2011). Computational thinking for youth in practice. ACM Inroads, 2, 32–37.CrossRef
Liao, Y.-K., & Bright, G. (1991). Effects of computer-assisted instruction and computer programming on cognitive outcomes: A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 7(3), 251–268.CrossRef
Lou, S., Chen, N., Tsai, H., Tseng, K., & Shih, R. (2012). Using blended creative teaching: Improving a teacher education course on designing materials for young children. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 28(5), 776–792.CrossRef
Ma, X. (1999). Dropping out of advanced mathematics: The effects of parental involvement. Teachers College Record, 101, 60–81.CrossRef
Ma, X. (2001). Participation in advanced mathematics: Do expectation and influence of students, peers, teachers and matter? Contemporary Educational Psychology, 26, 132–146.CrossRef
Magnuson, S. J., & Palincsar, A. S. (2005). Teaching to promote the development of scientific knowledge and reasoning about light at the elementary level. In M. S. Donovan & J. D. Bransford (Eds.), How students learn science in the classroom (pp. 53–106). Washington DC: National Academy Press.
Magnuson, C., & Starr, M. (2000). How early is too early to begin life career planning? The importance of the elementary school years. Journal of Career Development, 27(2), 89–101.
Middleton, E. B., & Loughead, T. A. (1993). Parental influence on career development: An integrative framework for adolescent career counseling. Journal of Career Development, 19, 161–173.
Mioduser, D., Levy, S., & Talis, V. (2009). Episodes to scripts to rules: Concrete abstractions in kindergarten children’s explanations of a robot’s behaviors. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 19(1), 15–36.CrossRef
Moomaw, S. (2012). STEM begins in the early years. School Science and Mathematics, 112(2), 57–58.CrossRef
Murphy, C., & Beggs, J. (2003). Children’s perceptions of school science. School Science Review, 84, 109–116.
Nagy, G., Trautwein, U., Baumert, J., Koller, O., & Garrett, J. (2006). Gender and course-selection in upper secondary education: Effects of academic self-concept and intrinsic value. Educational Research and Evaluation, 12(4), 323–345.CrossRef
National Academy of Sciences. (2007). Beyond bias and barriers: Fulfilling the potential of women in academic science and engineering. Washington DC: The National Academies Press.
National Academy of Sciences. (2010). Rising above the gathering storm, revisited: Rapidly approaching category (Vol. 5). Washington DC: The National Academies Press.
National Research Council (NRC). (2009). Engineering in K–12 education: Understanding the status and improving the prospects. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
National Research Council (NRC). (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
Newhouse, N. (1990). Implication of attitudes and behavior research for environmental Conservation. The Journal of Environmental Education, 22(1), 26–32.CrossRef
Oh, P. S., & Yager, R. E. (2004). Development of constructivist science classrooms and changes in student attitudes toward science learning. Science Education International, 15(2), 105–113.
Papanastasiou, C., & Papanastasiou, E. C. (2004). Major influences on attitudes toward science. Educational Research and Evaluation, 10(3), 239–257.CrossRef
Papanastasiou, E. C., & Zemblyas, M. (2002). The effects of attitudes on science achievement: A study conducted among high school students in Cyprus. International Review of Education, 48(6), 469–484.CrossRef
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Pintrinch, P., & Schunk, D. (2002). Motivation in education. Upper Saddle River: Merrill Prentice Hall.
Puacharearn, P., & Fisher, D. (2004). The effectiveness of cooperative learning integrated with constructivist teaching on improving learning environments in Thai secondary school science classrooms. Bentley: Curtin University of Technology.
Reigle-Crumb, C., Moore, C., & Ramos-Wada, A. (2010). Who wants to have a career in science or math? Exploring adolescents’ future aspirations by gender and race/ethnicity. Science Education, 95, 458–476.CrossRef
Resnick, M. (2006). Computer as paintbrush: Technology, play, and creative society. In D. Singer, R. Golikoff, & K. Hirsh-Pasek (Eds.), Play = learning: How play motivates and enhances children’s cognitive and social-emotional growth. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Reynard, R. (2003). Internet-based ESL for distance adult students—A framework for dynamic language learning. Canadian Modern Language Review, 60(2), 123–143.CrossRef
Riah, H. & Fraser, B. J. (1997). Chemistry learning environment in Brunei Darussalam’s secondary schools. In D.L. Fisher & T. Richards (Eds.), Science, Mathematics and Technology Education and National Development: Proceedings of the Vietnam Conference (pp. 108–120). Hanoi.
Roe, A. (1957). Early determinants of vocational choice. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 4, 212–217.CrossRef
Rosenshine, B. & Stevens, R. (1992). The use of scaffolds for teaching less structured academic tasks. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.
Sanders, M. (2009, December/January). STEM, STEM education, STEMmania. The Technology Teacher, 20–26.
Seligman, L., & Weinstock, L. (1991). The career development of 10 year olds. Elementary School Guidance and Counseling, 25(3), 172–182.
Simpson, R. & Oliver, J. (1990). A summary of major influences on attitude toward and achievement in science among adolescent students. Science Education, 74(1), 1–18.CrossRef
Splete, H., & Freeman-George, A. (1985). Family influences on the career development of young adults. Journal of Career Development, 12, 55–64.CrossRef
Strauss, C. (1992). What makes Tony run? Schemas as motive reconsideration. In R. D’Andrade & C. Strauss (Eds.), Human motives and cultural models (pp. 191–224). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Strauss, C., & Quinn, N. (1997). A cognitive theory of cultural meaning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Tai, R., Liu, C. Q., Maltese, A. V., & Fan, X. (2006). Planning early for careers in science. Science, 312, 1143–1144.CrossRef
Tran, Y. (2014). Addressing reciprocity between families and schools: Why these bridges are instrumental for students’ academic success. Improving Schools Journal, 17(1), 18–29.CrossRef
Trice, A. D., Hughes, M. A., Odom, C., Woods, K., & McClellan, N. C. (1995). The origins of children's career aspirations: IV. Testing hypotheses from four theories. Career Development Quarterly, 43, 307–322.CrossRef
Trice, A. D., & McClellan, N. (1993). Do children’s career aspirations predict adult occupations? An answer form a secondary analysis of longitudinal study. Psychological Reports, 72, 368–370.CrossRef
Trice, A. D., & Tillapaugh, P. (1991). Children’s estimates of their parents’ job satisfaction. Psychological Reports, 69, 63–66.CrossRef
Trusty, J. (1996). Relationship of parental involvement in teens’ career development to teens’ attitudes, perceptions, and behavior. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 30, 65–69.
Tziner, A., Loberman, G., Dekel, Z., & Sharoni, G. (2012). The influence of parent off spring relationship on young people’s career preferences. Psicologia del Trabajo y de las Organizaciones, 28(2), 99–105.CrossRef
Wahyudi, W., & David, F. T. (2004). The status of science classroom learning environments in Indonesian lower secondary schools. Learning Environment Research, 7, 43–63.CrossRef
Weintrop, D., Beheshti, E., Horn, M., Orton, K., Jona, K., Trouille, L., et al. (2016). Defining computational thinking for mathematics and science classrooms. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 25(1), 127–147.CrossRef
Westermann, E. B. (2014). A half-flipped classroom or an alternative approach?: Primary sources and blended learning. Educational Research Quarterly, 38(2), 43–57.
Wilensky, U., Brady, C., & Horn, M. (2014). Fostering computational literacy in science classrooms. Communications of the ACM, 57(8), 17–21.CrossRef
Wing, J. (2006). Computational thinking. Communications of the ACM, 49(3), 33–35.CrossRef
Wingfield, A., & Eccles, J. S. (2000). Expectancy-value theory of achievement motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 68–81.CrossRef
Wolfz, U., Stone, M., Pearson, K., Pulimood, S. M., & Switzer, M. (2011). Computational thinking and expository writing in the middle school. ACM Transactions on Computing Education, 11(2), 1–22.CrossRef
Wolters, C. A., Yu, S. L., & Pintrich, P. R. (1996). The relation between goal orientation and students’ motivational beliefs and self -regulated learning. Learning and Individual Differences, 8, 211–238.CrossRef
Young, R. A., Valach, L., Paseluikho, M. A., Dover, C., Matthes, G. E., Paproski, D. L., et al. (1997). The joint action of parents and adolescents in conversation about career. Career Development Quarterly, 46, 72–86.CrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
Computer Programming Effects in Elementary: Perceptions and Career Aspirations in STEM
verfasst von
Yune Tran
Publikationsdatum
12.04.2018
Verlag
Springer Netherlands
Erschienen in
Technology, Knowledge and Learning / Ausgabe 2/2018
Print ISSN: 2211-1662
Elektronische ISSN: 2211-1670
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-018-9358-z

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 2/2018

Technology, Knowledge and Learning 2/2018 Zur Ausgabe

Original research

Learning Math with Curious George and the Odd Squad: Transmedia in the Classroom

Original research

Media and Technology in Preschool Classrooms: Manifesting Prosocial Sharing Behaviours When Using iPads

Original research

Developing Mobile Teaching Practice: A Collaborative Exploration Process

Original research

Barriers to Using the Blackboard System in Teaching and Learning: Faculty Perceptions

Editorial

Integrating STEM Opportunities for Young Learners

Original research

Evaluation of an Extendable Context-Aware “Learning Java” App with Personalized User Profiling

Premium Partner

    Marktübersichten

    Die im Laufe eines Jahres in der „adhäsion“ veröffentlichten Marktübersichten helfen Anwendern verschiedenster Branchen, sich einen gezielten Überblick über Lieferantenangebote zu verschaffen. 

    Zur Marktübersicht
    Bildnachweise