Senaryo Temelli Öğretim Programının Bilgi İşlemsel Düşünme Becerisine ve Akademik Başarıya Etkisi

Abstract

Araştırmada 6. sınıf bilişim teknolojiler dersi programlama ve yazılım geliştirme ünitesi Hedef Temelli Senaryo Öğrenme modeli kullanılarak yeniden geliştirilmiş ve bu öğretim programının öğrencilerin akademik başarılarına ve bilgi işlemssl düşünme becerilerine olan etkisi incelenmmiştir. Araştırmada yöntem olarak nicel yaklaşımlardan 2X3 (deney ve kontrol grubu X ön test, son test ve kalıcılık testi) yarı-deneysel modeli tercih edilmiştir. Araştırmacı tarafından geliştirilen Bilgi İşlemsel Düşünme Öz Değerlendirme Ölçeği ve Akademik Başarı Testi veri toplama araçları olarak kullanılmıştır. Veri analizinde çok değişkenli kovaryans analizi, parametrik olmayan Friedmann testi ve takip testleri kullanılmıştır. Araştırma bulgularında akademik başarı son test ve kalıcılık testi puanlarına göre deney grubu öğrencilerinin lehine anlamlı farklılık bulunmuştur. BİD öz değerlendirme ölçeği son test ve kalıcılık testi ortalama puanlarına göre gruplar arasında anlamlı fark bulunmazken, alt boyut puanlarında gruplar arasında yalnızca soyutlama boyutu puanlarına göre deney grubu lehine anlamlı farklılığın olduğu tespit edilmiştir.

Keywords

• Bilgi işlemsel düşünme
• hedef temelli senaryo öğrenme
• akademik başarı

The Effect of Goal-Based Scenario Curriculum on Computational Thinking Skills and Academic Achievement

Abstract

The research aims to examine the effect of the Scratch curriculum developed with Goal-Based Scenario Learning (GBSL) design on 6th-grade students' Computational Thinking (CT) skills and academic achievement according to different variables. The research model was a 2X3 quasi-experimental. The CT Self-Assessment Scale and Academic Achievement Test were used as data collection tools in the study. In data analysis, both parametric and parametric tests were used. The experimental group students performed better on academic achievement post-test and retention-test scores. The post-test and retention-test mean scores of the CT self-assessment scale did not differ between groups, but the abstraction dimension scores in the sub-dimension scores did differ in favor of the experimental group. While the post-test and retention-test mean scores of both group students in CT skills were similar, the experimental group's scores differed between test scores, and there was a significant difference between the groups only in abstraction sub-dimension scores.

Keywords

• Academic achievement
• computational thinking skill
• goal-based scenario learning

References

1. Aharoni, D. (2000, March 7-March 12). Cognitive processes of students dealing with data structures. In: Proceedings of the thirty–first SIGCSE Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, Austin, Texas, USA. https://doi.org/10.1145/331795.331804
2. Aho, A. (2012) Computation and computational thinking. The Computer Journal, 55(7),832- 835. https://doi.org/10.1093/comjnl/bxs074
3. Alp, Y. (2019). The effects of block-based programming on the problem solving ability and attitude towards computer for secondary school students. (Thesis No. 556354) [Master thesis, İnönü University, Malatya]. Council of Higher Education Thesis Center
4. Arabacıoğlu, T., Bülbül, H., & Filiz, A. (2007, January 31-December 2). A new approach to computer programming teaching [Day 1- Session IV]. 9. Conference of Academic Computing . Dumlupınar University, Kütahya. Türkiye.
5. Arabacıoğlu, T. (2012). The effect of scenario based teaching programme through different communication media on the achievement of students in information technology class. (Thesis No. 319818) [Doctorate thesis. Aydın Adnan Menderes University-Aydın]. Council of Higher Education Thesis Center
6. Atiker, B. (2019). Effects of computational thinking skills to the success of secondary school students in programming instruction (Thesis No. 561543) [Doctorate thesis. İstanbul University, -İstanbul]. Council of Higher Education Thesis Center
7. Balcı, A. (1995). Sosyal bilimlerde araştırma: yöntem, teknik ve ilkeler. (11. Press) Pegem Akademi.
8. Bell, B. (1994, April 4-8). The effects of task, database, and guidance on interaction in a goal-based scenario. American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University

9. Bell, B., Bareiss, R., & Beckwith, R. (1993, April 12-16). The role of anchored instruction in the design of a hypermedia science museum exhibit. Conference of the American Education Research Association, Atlanta, GA.
10. Joint Research Center [JRC] (2016). Developing computational thinking in compulsory education-implications for policy and practice. Joint Research Center (European Commission). http://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/bitstream/JRC104188/jrc104188_computhinkreport.pdf.
11. Bond, M., & Bedenlier, S. (2019). Facilitating student engagement through educational technology: Towards a conceptual framework. Journal of Interactive Media in Education, 2019(1). https://doi.org/10.5334/jime.528
12. Bransford, J. D., Sherwood, R. D., Hasselbring, T. S., Kinzer, C.K., & Williams, S. M. (1990). Anchored instruction: Why we need it and how technology can help. R. Spiro & D. Nix (Eds.), Cognition, Education, and Multimedia: Exploring Ideas in High Technology (pp.115-141). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Computer Science Teachers Association Task Force.
13. Brennan, K., & Resnick, M. (2012, April 13-17). New frameworks for studying and assessing the development of computational thinking. In Annual Meeting American Educational Research Association. British Columbia: Vancouver.
14. Berry, M. (2013). Computing in the national curriculum: A guide for primary teachers. British Computer Society. Retrieved June 11, 2022, from https://pure.roehampton.ac.uk/portal/en/publications/computing-in-the-national-curriculum-a-guide-for-primary-teachers
15. Brown, J.S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1).32-42. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X018001032
16. Calao, L. A., Moreno-Le ́on, J., Correa, H. E., & Robles, G. (2015, September 15-18). Developing Mathematical Thinking with Scratch. The 10th European Conference on Technology Enhanced Learning, Toledo, Spain. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-24258-3_2
17. Cevahir, H., & Özdemir, M. (2017, May 24-26). Teachers' opinions on the difficulties encountered in programming teaching and suggestions for solutions. XI. International Computer&Instructional Technologies Syposium. Malatya, Türkiye Ceylan, V. K., & Akar Vural, R. (2023). Self-assessment of computational thinking skill: A scale development study. Rumeli Journal of Education Studies (4), 1-22. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8217317
18. Ciraj, A.M., Vinod, P., & Ramnarayan, K. (2010). Enhancing active learning in microbiology through case-based learning: experiences from an Indian medical school. Indian Journal of Pathology and Microbiology, 53(4), 729-733. https://doi.org/10.4103/0377-4929.72058
19. Colley, A., & Comber, C. (2003). Age and gender differences in computer use and attitudes among secondary school students: What has changed? Educational Research, 45(2), 155–166. https://doi.org/10.1080/0013188032000103235
20. Csizmadia, A., Curzon, P., Dorling, M., Humphreys, S., Ng, T., Selby, C., & Woollard, J. (2015). Computational thinking. A guide for teachers. Computing at School. Charlote BCS. The Chartered Institute for IT. Çatlak, Ş., Tekdal, M., & Baz, F. Ç. (2015). The status of teaching programming with scratch: a document review work. Journal of Instructional Technologies & Teacher Education, 4(3).
21. Çetin, İ., & Toluk Uçar, Z. (2017). Bilgi işlemsel düşünme tanımı ve kapsamı. Y. Gülbahar. (Ed.). Bilgi İşlemsel Düşünmeden Programlamaya. 341-356. Pegem Akademi. https://doi.org/10.14527/9786052411117
22. Dinçer, A. (2018). The comparison of 6th grade students' in terms of attitudes ,self-efficacy and academic achievement on teaching of scratch and kodu game lab 'programming languages. (Thesis No. 512965) [Master Thesis. Dokuz Eylül University-İzmir]. Council of Higher Education Thesis Center
23. Errington, R. (2010). What's in a relationship? Exploring cultural assumptions from an international perspective. E.P. Errington (Ed.), Preparing graduates for the professions using scenario-based learning. Post Pressed.
24. Foster, D., & Bariess, R.A. (1995, April 18-22). Administering the business school case method with a goal-based Scenario. Annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.
25. The International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA). (2014). Preparing for life in a digital age: The IEA International Computer and Information Literacy Study International Report. https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-319- 14222-7.
26. Gossman, P., Stewart, T., Jaspers, M., & Chapman, B. (2007). Integrating web-delivered problem-based learning scenarios into the curriculum. Active Learning in Higher Education, 8(2), pp. 139-153. https://doi.org/10.1177/1469787407077986
27. Green, J., Caracelli, V., J., & Graham, W.F. (1989). Toward a conceptual framework mixed-method evaluation design. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 11(3). https://doi.org/10.2307/1163620
28. Guzdial, M., Kay A. Norris, C., & Soloway, E. (2019). Computational thinking should be good thinking. Communications of the ACM, 62(1), 28-30. https://doi.org/10.1145/3363181
29. Gültekin, K. (2006). The effects of multimedia on computer programming achievement. (Thesis No: 182319) [Master Thesis, Hacettepe University-Ankara]. Council of Higher Education Thesis Center
30. Hoppe, U., & Manske, S. (2022). Developing computational thinking skills with multiple models and representations. S. Kong , H. Abelson & W. Kwok (Eds.), Computational thinking education in K-12. MIT Press.
31. Hsu, H. J. (2014, February 27-28). Gender differences in Scratch game design. The 3rd International Conference on Information, Business and Education Technology (ICIBET), Beijing, China.
32. Hursen, C., & Fasli, F. G. (2017). Investigating the efficiency of scenario-based learning and reflective learning approaches in teacher education. European Journal of Contemporary Education. 6(2), 264-279.
33. ISTE, (2016). Computational thinking (Learner). Computational Thinking Competencies. International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE). https://iste.org/standards/computational-thinking Kaasbøll, J.J. (1998). Exploring didactic models for programming. Proceedings of NIK'98, (Norwegian Computer Science Conference). pp. 195-203
34. Kalelioğlu, F., & Gülbahar, Y. (2015, September 9 – 11). What is computational thinking and how to teach it?. 3rd International Instructional Technology and Teacher Education Symposium. Trabzon, Türkiye,
35. Kalelioğlu, F., Gülbahar, Y., Akçay, S., & Doğan, D. (2014, September 22-25). Curriculum integration ideas for improving the computational thinking skills of learners through programming via Scratch. The 7th International Conference on Informatics in Schools: Situation, Evolution and Perspectives. Istanbul, Turkey.
36. Karabak, D., & Güneş, A. (2013). Curriculum proposal for first class secondary school students in the field of software development. Journal of Research in Educaiton and Teaching, 2(3), pp. 173-181.
37. Karasar, N. (2013). Bilimsel Araştırma Yöntemi.Nobel Yayin.
38. Karcı, M. (2018). Examining the effect of using scenario based teaching method based on STEM activities on students' achievement, career choice and their motivation (Thesis No. 509021) [Master Thesis, Çukurova University-Adana]. Council of Higher Education Thesis Center
39. Kelleher, C., Pausch, R., & Kiesler, S. (2007). Storytelling Alice motivates middle school girls to learn computer programming. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '07). ACM, New York, USA, 1455-1464. https://doi.org/10.1145/1240624.1240844
40. Kemiksiz, C. (2016). Effects of using scenario-based learning method in 6th grade science classes on academic achievement, attitudes and permanence. (Thesis No. 429924) [Master thesis, Abant İzzet Baysal University-Bolu]. Council of Higher Education Thesis Center
41. Kukul, V. (2018). The effect of different structured processes on students' computational thinking skills, self-efficacy levels and programming achievements in programming teaching (Thesis No.527581) [Doctorate thesis, Gazi University-Ankara]. Council of Higher Education Thesis Center
42. Malan, D. J., & Leitner, H. H. (2007). Scratch for budding computer scientists. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 39(1): 223-227.
43. Olabe, J. C., Olabe, M. A., Basogain, X., Maiz, I., & Castaño, C. (2011). Programming and robotics with scratch in primary education. A. Méndez-Vilas (Ed.) Education in a technological world: communicating current and emerging research and technological efforts in (pp. 356–363). Formatex Research Center.
44. Orton, K., Weintrop, D., Beheshti, E., Horn, M., Jona, K., & Wilensky, U. (2016, June 20-24). Bringing computational thinking into high school mathematics and science classrooms. The International Conference of The Learning Sciences (ICLS): Transforming Learning, Empowering Learners, Singapore.
45. Özmen, B., & Altun, A. (2014). Undergraduate students’ experiences in programming difficulties and obstacles. Turkish Online Journal of Qualitative Inquiry, 5(3). https://doi.org/10.17569/tojqi.20328
46. Özsevgeç, C., & Kocadağ, H. (2013). The effects of scenario based learning approach to overcome the students’ misconceptions about inheritance. Hacettepe University Journal of Education 28(3), 83-96.
47. Resnick, M., Maloney, J., Hernández, A. M., Rusk, N., Eastmond, E., Brennan, K., Millner, A. D., Rosenbaum, E., Silver, J., Silverman, B., & Kafai, Y.B. (2009). Scratch: Programming for everyone. Communications of the ACM, 52(11), 60–67.
48. Saeli, M., Perrenet, J., Jochems, W. M. G., & Zwaneveld, B. (2011). Teaching programming in secondary school: A pedagogical content knowledge perspective. Informatics in Education, 10(1), 73-88.
49. Samsa, S., Akyüz, H. G., Keser, H., & Numanoğlu, G. (2009, November 17-19). The effect of scenario-based blended learning environments on information technologies and pre-service teachers' attitudes towards teaching profession. 3rd International Computer and Instructional Technologies Symposium, Trabzon.
50. Sivasakthi, M. & Rajendran, R. (2011). Learning difficulties of object-oriented programming paradigm using Java: students’ perspective. Indian Journal of Science and Technology, 8(4). 983-985.
51. Stolee, K. T., & Fristoe, T. (2011). Expressing computer science concepts through the Kodu game lab. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, USA, 99–104. https://doi.org/10.1145/1953163.1953197.
52. Swanson, H. (2017, July 13-15). Computational thinking in the science classroom. First International Conference on Computational Thinking Education. Hong Kong.
53. Papert, S. (1980). Computers For Children. Mindstorms: Children, Computers, and Powerful Ideas. Basic Books, Inc. Publishers.
54. Schank, R.C. (1994). Goal-based scenarios: A radical look at education. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 3, 429-453.
55. Schoenfeld-Tacher, R., Persichitte, K.A., & Jones, L.L. (2001). Relation of student characteristics to learning of basic biochemistry concepts from a multimedia goal-based scenario. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 10(4). 305-317.
56. Selby, C., & Woollard, J. (2014, March 5-8). Computational thinking: the developing definition. The First Conference of Special Interest Group on Computer Science Education (SIGCSE), Atlanta, GA.
57. Top, O., & Arabacıoğlu, T. (2024). Integrating computational thinking into mathematics education: its effects on achievement, motivation, and learning strategies. Bayburt Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 19(42), 2034-2066. https://doi.org/10.35675/befdergi.1385749
58. Voskoglou, M., G. & Buckley, S. (2012). Problem-solving and computers in a learning environment. Egyptian Computer Science Journal, 36(4). 28-46. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1212.0750
59. Wing, J. M. (2006). Computational thinking. Communications of the ACM, 49, 33–36.
60. Yaman, B. (2005). The effect of drama method in education based on scenario-based learning approach on reading comprehension achievement of fifth grade primary school students. Journal of Cukurova University Institute of Social Sciences, 14(2), 465-482.
61. Yıldız Durak, H. (2018). Digital story design activities used for teaching programming effect on learning of programming concepts, programming self-efficacy, and participation and analysis of student experiences. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 34(6), 740–752. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12281
62. Yünkül, E., Durak, G., Çankaya, S., & Mısırlı, Z. (2017). The effects of scratch software on students’ computational thinking skills. Necatibey Faculty of Education Electronic Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 11(2), 502-517. https://doi.org/10.17522/balikesirnef.373424
63. Zumbach, J., & Reimann, P. (2002) Enhancing learning from hypertext by inducing a goal orientation: comparing different approaches. Instructional Science 30, 243–267. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016009926452