nach oben

Education and Information Technologies

Erschienen in:

13.09.2019

Effects of different teaching approaches on programming skills

verfasst von: Ali Kürşat Erümit

Erschienen in: Education and Information Technologies | Ausgabe 2/2020

Einloggen

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

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

Purpose of this study is determined effects of different teaching approaches on programming skills. Therefore, the effect of three different types of activities prepared with Scratch on 423 sixth grade students’ attitudes towards computer technologies, algorithmic thinking skills and reflective thinking skills on problem solving were investigated. Three IT teachers at the three schools, were asked to prepare and teach one of the three activities in their computer classes so that a different type of activity was provided at each school. The practical phase was carried out twice a week for seven weeks. A mixed method design was used with quantitative and qualitative components. Results showed that although the same programming tool and similar code blocks were used in the three applications, selected activities resulted in different effects on students. It was found that animation activities of the three types of activities had a positive effect on students’ attitudes towards computer technologies. The mathematical and game preparation activities had positive effects on algorithmic thinking and reflective thinking skills for problem solving. The present study reveals the importance of “activity type,” which is often neglected as a variable in studies investigating the different effects of block-based visual programming tools.

Vorheriger Artikel Electronic portfolio development and narrative reflections in higher education: Part and parcel of the culture?

Nächster Artikel Pupils’ ways of understanding programmed technological solutions when analysing structure and function

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

Arnau, D., Arevalillo-Herraez, M., Puig, L., & Gonzalez-Calero, J. A. (2013). Fundamentals of the design and the operation of an intelligent tutoring system for the learning of the arithmetical and algebraic way of solving word problems. Computers & Education, 63, 119–130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.11.020.CrossRef

Aydoğan, D. (2013). The investigation of levels of realization attainments related to 'environmental awareness' and 'information technology' in primary education curriculum. Malatya: Unpublished Doctorate Dissertation. İnönü University Education Sciences Institute.

Baylor, A. L., & Ritchie, D. (2002). What factors facilitate teacher skill, teacher morale, and perceived student learning in technology-using classrooms? Computers & Education., 39(4), 395–414. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0360-1315(02)00075-1.CrossRef

Bayrak, F., & Koçak Usluel, Y. (2011). The effect of blogging on reflective thinking skill. Hacettepe Universtiy Journal of Education, 40, 93–104.

Brown, Q., Mongan, W., Kusic, D., Garbarine, E., Fromm, E., & Fontecchio A. (2013). Computer Aided Instruction as a Vehicle for Problem Solving: Scratch Programming Environment in the Middle Years Classroom. from http://www.pages.drexel.edu/~dmk25/ASEE_08.pdf. Accessed 15 June 2018.

Burke, Q., & Kafai, Y. B. (2012). The writers’ workshop for youth programmers. In Proceedings of the 43^rdSIGCSE technical symposium on computer science education, (Raleigh, NC February 29–march 03) (pp. 433–438). New York, NY: ACM.

Burton, B. A. (2010). Encouraging algorithmic thinking without a computer. Olympiads in Informatics, 4, 3–14.

Calao, L. A., Moreno-Leon, J., Correa, H. E., & Robles, G. (2015). Developing Mathematical Thinking with Scratch. In Developing mathematical thinking with scratch an experiment with 6th grade students. Design for Teaching and Learning in a Networked World (17–27). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-24258-3_2.CrossRef

Calder, N. (2010). Using scratch: An integrated problem solving approach to mathematical thinking. Australian Primary Mathematics Classroom, 15(4), 9–14.

Chang, C. (2014). Effects of using Alice and Scratch in an introductory programming course for corrective instruction. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 51(2), 185–204. https://doi.org/10.2190/EC.51.2.c.CrossRef

Chang, C. K., & Biswas, G. (2011, June). Design engaging environment to foster computational thinking. In Proceedings of the world conference on educational multimedia, hypermedia and telecommunications (Vol. 1, pp. 2898–2902).

Chen, T., Mdyunus, A., Ali, W. Z. W., & Bakar, A. (2008). Utilization of intelligent tutoring system in mathematics learning. International Journal of Education and Development using Information and Communication Technology, 4(4), 50–63.

Choi, H. (2013). Pre-service teachers’ conceptions and reflections of computer programming using scratch: Technological and pedagogical perspectives. International Journal for Educational Media and Technology, 7(1), 15–25.

Claypool, M. (2013). Dragonfly: Strengthening programming skills by building a game engine from scratch. Computer Science Education, 23(2), 112–137. https://doi.org/10.1080/08993408.2013.781840.CrossRef

Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: L. Erlbaum Associates.MATH

Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Çetin, İ., & Dubinsky, E. (2017). Reflective abstraction in computational thinking. Journal of Mathematical Behavior., 47(2017, 70–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2017.06.004.CrossRef

De Corte, E., & Masui, C. (2004). The CLIA-model: A framework for designing powerful leaming environments for thinking and problem solving. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 19(4), 365–384. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03173216.CrossRef

De Oliveria, M. G., Ciarelli, P. M., & Oliveira, E. (2013). Recommendation of programming activities by multi-label classification for a formative assessment of students. Expert Systems with Applications, 40, 6641–6651. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2013.06.011.CrossRef

Demo, G. B., & Williams, L. (2014). The many facets of scratch. In Y. Gülbahar & E. Karataş (Eds.), Informatics in Schools. Teaching and Learning Perspectives. ISSEP 2014. Lecture notes in computer science (Vol. 8730). Cham: Springer.

Dewey, J. (1933). How We Think. A restatement of the relation of reflective thinking to the educative process. Boston: D. C. Heath.

Doğan, U., & Kert, S. B. (2016). Bilgisayar Oyunu Geliştirme Sürecinin, Ortaokul Öğrencilerinin Eleştirel Düşünme Becerilerine ve Algoritma Başarılarına Etkisi. Boğaziçi Üniversitesi Eğitim Dergisi, 33(2), 21–42. ISSN 1300-9567.

Doleck, T., Bazelais, P., Lemay, D. J., Saxena, A., & Basnet, R. B. (2017). Algorithmic thinking, cooperativity, creativity, critical thinking, and problem solving: Exploring the relationship between computational thinking skills and academic performance. J. Comput. Educ., 4(4), 355–369. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-017-0090-9.CrossRef

Epstein, A. S. (2009). “How planning and reflection develop young children’s thinking skills.” from http://www.journal.naeyc.org/btj/200309/Planning&Reflection.pdf. Accessed 26 Aug 2009.

Erümit, A. K., Karal, H., Şahin, G., Aksoy, D. A., Gencan, A. A., & Benzer, A. İ. (2019). A model suggested for programming teaching: Programming in seven steps. Education and Science, 44(197), 155–183. https://doi.org/10.15390/EB.2018.7678.CrossRef

Fessakis, G., & Serafeim, K. (2009). Influence of the familiarization with scratch on future teachers’ opinions and attitudes about programming and ICT in education. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 41(3), 258–262. https://doi.org/10.1145/1595496.1562957.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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.11.016.CrossRef

Futschek, G. (2006). Algorithmic thinking: The key for understanding computer science. In Mittermeir, R.T.(Ed.), ISSEP 2006, LNCS (Vol. 4226, pp. 159–168).

Hayes, J., & Stewart, I. (2016). Comparing the effects of derived relational training and computer coding on intellectual potential in school-age children. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 86(3), 397–411. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjep.12114.CrossRef

Hernandez, C. C., Silva, L., Segura, R. A., Schimiguel, J., Ledon, M. F. P., Bezerra, L. N. M., & Silveria, I. F. (2010). Teaching programming principles through a game engine. CLEI Electronic Journal, 13(2), 3–11.CrossRef

Hershkovitz, A., & Karni, O. (2018). Borders of chance: A holistic exploration of teaching in one-to-one computing programs. Computers & Education, 125, 429–443. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.06.026.CrossRef

Hoffman, B., & Spatariu, A. (2008). The influence of self-efficacy and metacognitive prompting on math problem solving efficiency. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33, 875–893. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2007.07.002.CrossRef

Hromkovic, J., Kohn, T., Komm, D., & Serafini, G. (2016). Examples of algorithmic thinking in programming education. Olympiads in Informatics, 10, 111–124. https://doi.org/10.15388/ioi.2016.08.CrossRef

Huang, T. H., Liu, Y. C., & Chang, H. C. (2012). Learning achievement in solving word-based mathematical questions through a computer-assisted learning system. Educational Technology & Society, 15(1), 248–259.

Hwang, G. J., Chen, C. Y., Tsai, P. S., & Tsai, C. C. (2011). An expert system for improving web-based problem solving ability of students. Expert Systems with Applications, 38, 8664–8672. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2011.01.072.CrossRef

Israel, M., Pearson, J. N., Tapia, T., Wherfel, Q. M., & Reese, G. (2015). Supporting all learners in schoole-wide computatitonal thinking: A cross-case qualitative analysis. Computers & Education, 82(2015, 263–279. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.11.022.CrossRef

Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33(7), 14–26. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X033007014.CrossRef

Kafai, Y. B., & Burke, Q. (2015). Constructionist gaming: Understanding the benefits of making games for learning. Educational Psychologist, 50(4), 313–334. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2015.1124022.CrossRef

Kalelioğlu, F. (2015). A new way of teaching programming skills to K-12 students: Code.org. Computers in Human Behavior, 52, 200–210. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.%202015.05.047.CrossRef

Kalelioğlu, F., & Gülbahar, Y. (2014). The effects of teaching programming via scratch on problem solving skills: A discussion from learners’ perspective. Informatics in Education, 13(1), 33–50.

Kızılkaya, G., & Aşkar, P. (2009). The development of a reflective thinking skill scale towards problem solving. Education and Science., 34(154), 82–92.

Kobsiripat, W. (2015). Effects of the media to promote scratch programming capabilities creativity of elementary school students. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 174, 227–232. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.01.651.CrossRef

Kuhn, D. (1990). Developmental perspectives on teaching and learning thinking skills. New York: Jossey-Bass.

Lai, A., & Yang, S. (2011). The learning effect of visualized programming learning on 6th graders’ problem solving and logical reasoning abilities. International Conference on Electrical and Control Engineering (ICECE), 16–18 Sept. 2011, Yichang, 6940–6944.

Lee, Y. J. (2011). Scratch: Multimedia programming environment for young gifted learners. Gifted Child Today, 34(2), 26–31. https://doi.org/10.1177/107621751103400208.CrossRef

Loughran, J. (1996). Developing reflective practice: Learning about teaching learning through modelling. London: Falmer Press.

Lye, S. Y., & Koh, J. H. L. (2014). Review on teaching and learning of computational thinking through programming: What is next for K-12? Computers in Human Behavior, 41, 51–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.09.012.CrossRef

Maloney, J., Resnick, M., Rusk, N., Silverman, B., & Eastmond, E. (2010). Scratch programming language and environment. ACM Transactions on Computing Education, 10(4), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1145/1868358.1868363.CrossRef

Meerbaum-Salant, O., Armoni, M., & Ben-Ari, M. (2013). Learning computer science concepts with scratch. Computer Science Education, 23(3), 239–264. https://doi.org/10.1080/08993408.2013.832022.CrossRef

Milkova, E., & Hulkova, A. (2013). Algorithmic and logical thinking development: Base of programming skills. WSEAS Transactions on Computers., 2(12), 41–51.

Mladenović, M., Rosić, M., & Mladenović, S. (2016). Comparing elementary students’ programming success based on programming environment. I.J. Modern Education and Computer Science, 8, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.5815/ijmecs.2016.08.01.CrossRef

Mohamedi, H., Bensebaa, T., & Trigano, P. (2012). Developing adaptive intelligent tutoring system based on item response theory and metrics. International Journal of Advanced Science and Technology, 43, 1–14.

Navarrete, C. C. (2013). Creative thinking in digital game design and development: A case study. Computers & Education, 69, 320–331. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.07.025.CrossRef

Papavlasopoulou, S., Sharma, K., & Giannakos, M. N. (2018). How do you feel about learning to code? Investigating the effect of children’s attitudes towards coding using eye-tracking. International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction, 17, 50–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcci.2018.01.004.CrossRef

Polya, G. (1957). How to solve it? (2nd ed.). Princeton, N.J: Princeton University Press.

Popat, S., & Starkey, L. (2019). Learning to code or coding to learn? A systematic review. Computers & Education, 128, 365–376. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.10.005.CrossRef

Quahbi, 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

Sáez-López, J. M., Román-González, M., & Vázquez-Cano, E. (2016). Visual programming languages integrated across the curriculum in elementary school: A two year case study using “scratch” in five schools. Computer & Education, 97, 129–141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.03.003.CrossRef

Scaffidi, C., & Chambers, C. (2012). Skill progression demonstrated by users in scratch animation environment. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 28(6), 383–398. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2011.595621.CrossRef

Stanovich, K. E. (2009). Distinguishing the reflective, algorithmic, and autonomous minds: Is it time for a tri-process theory? In J. S. B. T. Evans & K. Frankish (Eds.), In two minds: Dual processes and beyond (pp. 55–88). New York, NY, US: Oxford University Press.CrossRef

Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (1998). Mixed methodology: Combining qualitative and quantitative approaches. Applied social research methods series (Vol.46). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Theodoraki, A., & Xinogalos, S. (2014). Studying students’ attitudes on using examples of game source code for learning programming. Informatics in Education, 13(2), 265–277. https://doi.org/10.15388/infedu.2014.07.CrossRef

Turkey Ministry of National Education. (2017). Bilişim teknolojileri ve yazılım dersi öğretim programı, 2016–2017. Ankara: Milli Eğitim Basımevi.

Van Merriënboer, J. J. G. (2013). Perspectives on problem solving and instruction. Computers & Education., 64, 153–160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.11.025.CrossRef

Vicente, S., Orrantia, J., & Verschaffel, L. (2007). Influence of situational and conceptual rewording on word problem solving. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 77(4), 829–848. https://doi.org/10.1348/000709907X178200.CrossRef

Wagner, T. (2008). The global achievement gap: Why even our best schools don't teach the new survival skills our children need and what we can do about it. Basic Books.

Wilson, A., & Moffatt, D. C. (2010). Evaluating scratch to introduce younger schoolchildren to programming. Paper presented at 22nd annual workshop of the psychology of programming interest group. Leganes: Spain.

Wilson, A., Hainey, T., & Connolly, T. M. (2013). Using scratch with primary school children: An evaluation of games constructed to gauge understanding of programming concepts. International Journal of Game-Based Learning, 3(1), 93–109. https://doi.org/10.4018/ijgbl.2013010107.CrossRef

Yang, Y.T.C., Chuang Y.C., Li, L.Y., Tseng, S.S. (2013). A blended learning environment for individualized English listening and speaking integrating critical thinking. Computers & Education, 63, 285–305. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.12.012.CrossRef

Year, R., & Martinez, L. (2017). A recommendation approach for programming online judges supported by data preprocessing techniques. Applied Intelligence, 47(2), 277–290. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10489-016-0892-x.CrossRef

Yen, J. C., & Chen, M. P. (2008). Patterns of reflection for problem solving in a mobile learning environment. International Journal of Education and Information Technologies, 2(2), 121–124.

Yildiz Durak, H. (2018). The effects of using different tools in programming teaching of secondary school students on engagement, computational thinking and reflective thinking skills for problem solving. Technology Knowledge and Learning., 2018, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-018-9391-y.CrossRef

Yükseltürk, E., & Altıok, S. (2015). Pre-service information technologies teachers’ view on computer programming teaching. Amasya Education Journal, 4(1), 50–65.

Zavala, L. A., Gallardo, S. C., & García-Ruíz, M. Á. (2013). Designing interactive activities within scratch 2.0 for improving abilities to identify numerical sequences. New York: IDC.CrossRef

Ziatdinov, R., & Musa, S. (2012). Rapid MentalСomputation system as a tool for algorithmic thinking of elementary school students development. European Researcher, 25(7), 1105–1110.

Zsako, L., & Szlavi, P. (2012). ICT competences: Algorithmic thinking. Acta Didactica Napocensia, 5(2), 49–58 ISSN: 2065-1430.

Titel: Effects of different teaching approaches on programming skills
verfasst von: Ali Kürşat Erümit
Publikationsdatum: 13.09.2019
Verlag: Springer US
Erschienen in: Education and Information Technologies / Ausgabe 2/2020
Print ISSN: 1360-2357
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-7608
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-019-10010-8

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 2/2020

Acknowledgement to reviewers

Disengagement, engagement and digital skills in technology-enhanced learning

Using computer-assisted pronunciation teaching (CAPT) in English pronunciation instruction: A study on the impact and the Teacher’s role

Examining the self-efficacy of teacher candidates’ lifelong learning key competences and educational technology standards

Providing online exams for online learners: Does it really matter for them?

Grade prediction of weekly assignments in MOOCS: mining video-viewing behavior

Premium Partner