Teacher Views on Programming Teaching

Year 2020, , 70 - 86, 31.12.2020

Funda Dağ , Levent Durdu

https://doi.org/10.17984/adyuebd.629428

Abstract

The aim of this study is to evaluate the processes of
programming teaching in the context of Information Technologies and Software
course. In the study where qualitative research method was adopted, teachers'
answers to open-ended questions were subjected to content analysis and common
themes were created. Within this scope, nine Information Technology Teachers
graduated from different programs, working in different regions and different
school types have answered open-ended questions. Teachers defined their
knowledge as intermediate and above-sufficient in terms of block-based
programming tools, and expressed themselves as beginner or not competent,
especially for physical programming environments. There was no positive or
negative trend in teaching computer science at an early age according to
teachers. There are both positive and negative views on Information Network in
Education Activity Books and Coding Guide. The number of students per computer
is the most important problem raised regarding the instructional process. On
the students’ side, students are uninterested to the course and students do
not have computers at home for practicing. The teachers stated that there is a
need for teaching material for a more effective teaching process and
laboratory conditions need to be improved.

Keywords

Teaching Programming, Opinions of Teachers, Information Technologies and Software

References

• Balanskat, K. E. A., & Engelhardt, K. (2015). Computing our future: Computer programming and coding. Erişim adresi: http://fcl.eun.org/documents/10180/14689/Computing+our+future_final.pdf/746e36b1-e1a6-4bf1-8105-ea27c0d2bbe0
• Bell, T., Alexander, J., Freeman, I., & Grimley, M. (2009). Computer science unplugged: School students doing real computing without computers. The New Zealand Journal of Applied Computing and Information Technology, 13(1), 20-29.
• Bell, T., Rosamond, F., & Casey, N. (2012). Computer science unplugged and related projects in math and computer science popularization. In H. L. Bodlaender, R. Downey, F. V. Fomin, & D. Marx (Eds.), The multivariate algorithmic revolution and beyond (pp. 398-456). (Lecture Notes in Computer Science; Vol. 7370). Online: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-30891-8_18.
• Cevahir, H., & Özdemir, M. (2017). Programlama öğretiminde karşılaşılan zorluklara yönelik öğretmen görüşleri ve çözüm önerileri. Uluslararası Bilgisayar ve Öğretim Teknolojileri Sempozyumu içinde, 320-335.
• Dağ, F. (2019). Prepare pre-service teachers to teach computer programming skills at K-12 level: experiences in a course. Journal of Computers in Education, 6(2), 277-313. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-019-00137-5
• Diethelm, I., Hubwieser, P., & Klaus, R. (2012). Students, teachers, and phenomena: Educational reconstruction for computer science education. Proceedings of the 12th Koli Calling International Conference on Computing Education Research (pp. 164-173). Koli, Finland: ACM.
• EBA. (2019). Eğitimde Bilişim Ağı: Açıklama. Erişim adresi: http://www.eba.gov.tr
• Heintz, F., Mannila, L., & Färnqvist, T. (2016, October). A review of models for introducing computational thinking, computer science and computing in K-12 education. In 2016 IEEE Frontiers in Education conference (FIE) (pp. 1-9). IEEE.
• Grover, S., & Pea, R. (2013). Computational thinking in K–12: A review of the state of the field. Educational Researcher, 42(1), 38-43. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X12463051
• Guzdial, M. (2008). Education paving the way for computational thinking. Communications of the ACM, 51(8), 25-27. https://doi.org/10.1145/1378704.1378713
• Hiltunen, T. (2016). Learning and teaching programming skills in Finnish primary schools – the potential of games (Unpublished Master Thesis). Oulu: University of Oulu.
• 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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.11.022
• ISTE. (2011). Computational thinking in K–12 education leadership toolkit. Erişim adresi: http://www.iste.org/docs/ct-documents/ct-leadershipt-toolkit.pdf?sfvrsn=4
• Kale, U., Akcaoglu, M., Cullen, T., Goh, D., Devine, L., Calvert, N., & Grise, K. (2018). Computational what? Relating computational thinking to teaching. TechTrends, 62(6), 574–584. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-018-0290-9
• Larke, L. R. (2019). Agentic neglect: Teachers as gatekeepers of England’s national computing curriculum. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(3), 1137–1150. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12744
• Lamagna, E. A. (2015). Algorithmic thinking unplugged. Journal of Computing Sciences in Colleges, 30(6), 45-52.
• Lockwood, J., & Mooney, A. (2017). Computational thinking in education: Where does it fit? A systematic literary review. Erişim adresi: https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1703/1703.07659.pdf
• MEB. (2018). Bilişim teknolojileri ve yazılım dersi öğretim programı (1-8.sınıf). Ankara: Turkey Ministry of National Education Basic Education General Directorate.
• Román-González, M., Pérez-González, J. C., & Jiménez-Fernández, C. (2017). Which cognitive abilities underlie computational thinking? Criterion validity of the computational thinking test. Computers in Human Behavior, 72, 678-691. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.08.047
• Saeli, M., Perrenet, J., Jochems, W. M., & Zwaneveld, B. (2011). Teaching programming in secondary school: A pedagogical content knowledge perspective. Informatics in Education, 10(1), 73-88.
• Sentance, S., & Csizmadia, A. (2017). Computing in the curriculum: Challenges and strategies from a teacher’s perspective. Education and Information Technologies, 22(2), 469-495. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-016-9482-0
• Shailaja, J., & Sridaran, R. (2015). Computational thinking the intellectual thinking for the 21st century. International Journal of Advanced Networking & Applications, May 2015 Special Issue, 39-46.
• Sırakaya, M. (2018). Kodlama eğitimine yönelik öğrenci görüşleri. OMU Journal of Education Faculty, 37(2), 79-90. https://doi.org/10.7822/omuefd.394649.
• Tairab A., Huang R., Chang TW., Zheng L. (2016) A framework to promote ICT in K-12 education in developing countries: A case study in Sudan. In: Cheung S., Kwok L., Shang J., Wang A., Kwan R. (eds), Blended learning: Aligning theory with practices. ICBL 2016.
• Wing, J. M. (2006). Computational thinking. Communications of the ACM, 49(3), 33-35.
• Yecan, E., Özçınar, H., & Tanyeri, T. (2017). Bilişim Teknolojileri Öğretmenlerinin görsel programlama öğretimi deneyimleri. İlköğretim Online, 16(1). 377-393. http://doi.org/10.17051/io.2017.80833
• Yükseltürk, E., & Altıok, S. (2015). Bilişim Teknolojileri Öğretmen adaylarının bilgisayar programlama öğretimin e yönelik görüşleri. Amasya Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 4(1), 50-65.
• Yükseltürk, E., & Altıok, S. (2016). BT Öğretmen Adayları K-12 Seviyesinde Bilgisayar Programlama Eğitimi Hakkındaki Seminere Neden Katılmak İster? In Proceedings of 10th International Computer and Instructional Technologies Symposium (ICITS) (pp. 216 - 222). Rize, Turkey.