Examining computer science education of Asia-Pacific countries successful in the PISA

Abstract

In this study, the Computer Science (CS) education in K-12 of the countries in the “Asia-Pacific region”, which are among the top 10 in PISA, and CS education of Türkiye were investigated. PISA is conducted to assess science, mathematics, and reading skills. PISA, which is carried out every 3 years by the OECD, evaluates 15-year-old students. When the countries that have been successful in PISA are examined, it has been observed that the number of countries in the “Asia-Pacific region” in the top 10 has increased in recent years. In this study, data analysis was done with document analysis, which included PISA results and reports, OECD reports, computer science curriculum of countries, and academic studies on PISA and computer science education. As a result of the data obtained, the countries’ CS education was compared to identify successful practices. Also, the countries’ practices in computer science education were compared to Türkiye, and implications were made about the effects of such works on PISA results.

Keywords

• Asia-Pacific countries
• PISA
• Computer Science Education
• K-12
• Computer science curriculum

References

1. Anil, D., & Ozer, Y. (2012). The effect of the aim and frequency of computer usage on student achievement according to PISA 2006. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 46, 5484-5488. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.06.462
2. Armoni, M., & Gal-Ezer, J. (2014). Early computing education: why? what? when? who? ACM Inroads, 5(4), 54-59. https://doi.org/10.1145/2684721.2684734
3. Barut, E., & Kuzu, A. (2017). Türkiye ve İngiltere bilişim teknolojileri öğretim programlarının amaç, kazanım, etkinlik, ölçme ve değerlendirme süreçleri açısından karşılaştırılması. Trakya Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 7(2), 721-745. https://doi.org/10.24315/trkefd.303156
4. Batur, Z., Ulutaş, M., & Beyret, T. N. (2019). 2018 Lgs Türkçe sorularının Pisa okuma becerileri hedefleri açisindan incelenmesi. Milli Eğitim Dergisi, 48(1), 595-615.
5. Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative Research Journal, 9(2), 27-40. https://doi.org/10.3316/QRJ0902027
6. Chauhan, S. (2017). A meta-analysis of the impact of technology on learning effectiveness of elementary students. Computers & Education, 105, 14-30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.11.005
7. Cheema, J., & Zhang, B. (2013). Quantity and quality of computer use and academic achievement: Evidence from a large-scale international test program. International Journal of Education and Development using ICT, 9(2).
8. Choi, J., An, S., & Lee, Y. (2015). Computing education in Korea-current issues and endeavors. ACM Transactions on Computing Education (TOCE), 15(2), 1-22. https://doi.org/10.1145/2716311

9. Corbin, J. & Strauss, A. (2008). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
10. Demirer, V., & Sak, N. (2015). Türkiye'de Bilişim Teknolojileri (BT) Eğitimi ve BT Öğretmenlerin Değişen Rolleri. Uluslararası Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 5, 434-448.
11. Döş, İ., & Atalmış, E. H. (2016). OECD Verilerine Göre Pisa Sınav Sonuçlarının Değerlendirilmesi. Abant İzzet Baysal Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 16(2), 432-450. https://doi.org/10.17240/aibuefd.2016.16.2-5000194936
12. Education Bureau (2017, n.d.). Technology Education Key Learning Area Curriculum Guide (Primary 1 - Secondary 6). https://www.edb.gov.hk/attachment/en/curriculum-development/kla/technology-edu/curriculum-doc/TE_KLACG_Eng_5_Dec_2017_r2.pdf
13. Falkner, K., Sentance, S., Vivian, R., Barksdale, S., Busuttil, L., Cole, E., ... & Quille, K. (2019, November). An international comparison of k-12 computer science education intended and enacted curricula. In Proceedings of the 19th Koli Calling International Conference on Computing Education Research (pp. 1-10). http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/3364510.3364517
14. Fiş Erümit, S., & Keleş, E. (2021). Lessons from K-12 Education in Asia-Pacific Countries Successful in the PISA: ICT Integration Dimension. Sakarya University Journal of Education, 11(3), 452-481. https://doi.org/10.19126/suje.940080
15. Florez, F. B., Casallas, R., Hernandez, M., Reyes, A., Restrepo, S., & Danies, G. (2017). Changing a generation’s way of thinking: Teaching computational thinking through programming. Review of Educational Research, 87(4), 834–860. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654317710096.
16. Fluck, A., Webb, M., Cox, M., Angeli, C., Malyn-Smith, J., Voogt, J., & Zagami, J. (2016). Arguing for Computer Science in the School Curriculum. Educational Technology & Society, 19 (3), 38–46.
17. Fukuda, K. (2020). Science, technology and innovation ecosystem transformation toward society 5.0. International Journal of Production Economics, 220, 107460. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2019.07.033
18. Gal-Ezer, J., & Stephenson, C. (2014). A tale of two countries: Successes and challenges in K-12 computer science education in Israel and the United States. ACM Transactions on Computing Education (TOCE), 14(2), 1-18. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2602483
19. Garneli, V., Giannakos, M. N., & Chorianopoulos, K. (2015, March). Computing education in K-12 schools: A review of the literature. In 2015 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON) (pp. 543-551).
20. 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.
21. Grzybowski, M. (2013). Educational technologies in South Korea. General and Professional Education, 2013(1), 3-9.
22. Guan, Q., & Meng, W. (2007). China’s new national curriculum reform: Innovation, challenges and strategies. Frontiers of Education in China, 2(4), 579-604. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11516-007-0043-6
23. Gülcü, A., Aydın, S., & Aydın, Ş. (2013). İlköğretim okullarında bilişim teknolojileri dersi yeni öğretim programının öğretmen görüşlerine göre değerlendirilmesi. Karadeniz Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 5(8), 73-92.
24. Hagiya, M. (2015). Defining Informatics across Bun-kei and Ri-kei. Journal of Information Processing, 23(4), 525-530. https://doi.org/10.2197/ipsjjip.23.525
25. Heintz, F., Mannila, L., & Färnqvist, T. (2016, October). A review of models for introducing computational thinking, computer science and computing in K-12 education. 2016 IEEE Frontiers in Education conference (FIE) (pp. 1-9).
26. Hu, C. F., Lin, Y. T., Chuang, H. C., & Wu, C. C. (2014, April 11-13). A recommended ICT curriculum for K-12 education. 2014 International Conference on Teaching and Learning in Computing and Engineering (pp. 33-36). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/LaTiCE.2014.14
27. Hubwieser, P., Armoni, M., Brinda, T., Dagiene, V., Diethelm, I., Giannakos, M. N., ... & Schubert, S. (2011, June 27–29). Computer science/informatics in secondary education. Proceedings of the 16th annual conference reports on Innovation and technology in computer science education-working group reports (pp. 19-38).
28. Hubwieser, P., Armoni, M., Giannakos, M. N., & Mittermeir, R. T. (2014). Perspectives and visions of computer science education in primary and secondary (K-12) schools. ACM Transactions on Computing Education (TOCE), 14(2), 1-9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2602482
29. Jayaprakash, P., & Pillai, R. R. (2021). The role of ICT and effect of national culture on human development. Journal of Global Information Technology Management, 24(3), 183-207. https://doi.org/10.1080/1097198X.2021.1953319
30. Kabakçı, F. (2018, November). Çin'de yapay zeka okul müfredatına giriyor. https://www.aa.com.tr/tr/bilim-teknoloji/cinde-yapay-zeka-okul-mufredatina-giriyor/1317388
31. Kanemune, S., Shirai, S., & Tani, S. (2017). Informatics and programming education at primary and secondary schools in Japan. Olympiads in Informatics, 11(2017), 143-150. https://doi.org/10.15388/ioi.2017.11
32. Karsak, H. G. O. (2018). Japon eğitim sistemine genel bir bakış. Turkish Studies, 13(4), 965-997. http://dx.doi.org/10.7827/TurkishStudies.12974
33. Kay, K., & Greenhill, V. (2011). Twenty-first century students need 21st century skills. G. Wan and D. M. Gut (Eds.), Bringing schools into the 21st century (pp. 41-65). Springer.
34. Keser, H. (2011). Türkiye’de Bilgisayar Eğitiminde İlk Adım: Orta Öğretimde Bilgisayar Eğitimi İhtisas Komisyonu Raporu. Eğitim Teknolojisi Kuram ve Uygulama, 1(2), 83-94.
35. Kong, S. C., Looi, C. K., Chan, T. W., & Huang, R. (2017). Teacher development in Singapore, Hong Kong, Taiwan, and Beijing for e-Learning in school education. Journal of Computers in Education, 4(1), 5-25. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40692-016-0062-5
36. Kuno, Y., Wada, B. T., Nakayama, Y., Tatsumi, T., & Uematsu, E. (2015, October). K12 IT Education in Japan: Current Status and Future Directions. In The 23rd IFIP World Computer Congress, IT Education Forum (K-12) (pp. 37-44).
37. Lei, H., Chiu, M. M., Li, F., Wang, X., & Geng, Y. J. (2020). Computational thinking and academic achievement: A meta-analysis among students. Children and Youth Services Review, 118, 105439. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.105439
38. Leidner, D. E. (2010). Globalization, culture, and information: Towards global knowledge transparency. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 19(2), 69-77. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jsis.2010.02.006
39. Li, F., Wang, X., He, X., Cheng, L., & Wang, Y. (2022). The effectiveness of unplugged activities and programming exercises in computational thinking education: A Meta-analysis. Education and Information Technologies, 27, 7993–8013. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-10915-x
40. Lindberg, R. S., Laine, T. H., & Haaranen, L. (2019). Gamifying programming education in K‐12: A review of programming curricula in seven countries and programming games. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(4), 1979-1995. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12685
41. Merino-Armero, J. M., González-Calero, J. A., & Cozar-Gutierrez, R. (2022). Computational thinking in K-12 education. An insight through meta-analysis. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 54(3), 410-437. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2020.1870250
42. MEXT (1997). Ministry of Education of Japan, Toward Implementing Systematic Information Education. https://www.mext.go.jp/en/index.htm
43. MoNE (1998). İlköğretim okulları seçmeli bilgisayar dersi 1-2-3-4-5 öğretim programı. Tebliğler Dergisi, 2492 (2), 1030-1046.
44. MoNE (2009). PISA 2009 Ulusal Ön Rapor. http://bitlisodm.meb.gov.tr/meb_iys_dosyalar/2019_02/20144632_PISA-2009-Ulusal-On-Rapor.pdf
45. MoNE (2011). PISA TÜRKİYE, Yenilik ve Eğitim Teknolojileri Genel Müdürlüğü. http://pisa.meb.gov.tr/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/PISA-kitab%C4%B1.pdf.
46. MoNE (2018a). Bilişim Teknolojileri ve Yazılım Dersi Öğretim Programı (İlkokul 1, 2, 3 ve 4. Sınıflar). http://mufredat.meb.gov.tr/Dosyalar/2018813171732131-4-2018-91%20Bili%C5%9Fim%20Teknolojileri%20ve%20Yaz%C4%B1l%C4%B1m%20(1-4.%20S%C4%B1n%C4%B1flar).pdf
47. MoNE (2018b). Ortaokul ve İmam Hatip Ortaokulu Bilişim Teknolojileri ve Yazılım Dersi (5. ve 6. sınıflar) Öğretim Programı. http://mufredat.meb.gov.tr/ProgramDetay.aspx?PID=374
48. MoNE (2018c). Ortaokul ve İmam Hatip Ortaokulu Bilişim Teknolojileri ve Yazılım Dersi (7. Ve 8. Sınıflar) öğretim programı. http://mufredat.meb.gov.tr/ProgramDetay.aspx?PID=405
49. MoNE (2018d). Bilgisayar Bilimi Dersi öğretim programı (Kur 1-2). http://mufredat.meb.gov.tr/ProgramDetay.aspx?PID=335
50. MoNE (2018e). PISA 2018 Türkiye Ön Raporu. http://www.meb.gov.tr/meb_iys_dosyalar/2019_12/03105347_PISA_2018_Turkiye_On_Raporu.pdf
51. MoNE (2020). PISA Nedir? https://pisa.meb.gov.tr/www/pisa-nedir/icerik/4
52. Ndibalema, P. (2020). Unlocking the Potential of ICT for Transformative Learning among Youth: A Path to 21st Century Competencies. Journal of Educational Technology & Online Learning, 3(3), 245-271. https://doi.org/10.31681/jetol.777647
53. OECD (2018). Education at a Glance 2018: OECD Indicators, Paris: OECD Publishing. https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/education/education-at-a-glance-2018_eag-2018-en#:~:text=Education%20at%20a%20Glance%3A%20OECD,a%20number%20of%20partner%20countries.
54. OECD (2022). PISA for Schools. https://www.oecd.org/pisa/aboutpisa/pisa-based-test-for-schools-faq.htm#:~:text=PISA%20is%20an%20international%20study,reading%2C%20mathematics%2C%20and%20science.
55. Öztürk, H. T., & Yılmaz, B. (2011). Bilişim Teknolojileri ve Yazılım Dersi’nin seçmeli statüsünün dersin pedagojik değerine yansımasının öğretmen bakış açısı ile değerlendirilmesi. Ege Eğitim Dergisi, 12(2), 63-82.
56. Sargın, A., & Göçen, A. (2020). Çocuklar için yapay zeka. https://www.cocuklarayapayzeka.com/kitaplarimiz/
57. Scime, A. (2008) Globalized computing education: Europe and the United States, Computer Science Education, 18(1), 43-64, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08993400701869491
58. Singapore Ministry of Education (2019). Computer Applications Syllabus Secondary One to Four https://www.moe.gov.sg/-/media/files/secondary/syllabuses-nt/science/2019-computer-applications-syllabus.ashx?la=en&hash=3CBFD6442FEACBA4131E164AC3598D383B62F66E
59. Singmaster, H. (2019). Shanghai: The World's Best School System. https://asiasociety.org/global-cities-education-network/shanghai-worlds-best-school-system
60. Spiezia, V. (2011). Does computer use increase educational achievements? Student-level evidence from PISA. OECD Journal: Economic Studies, 2010(1), 1-22.
61. Tian, Y., Xiao, J., Jiang, J., Wang, H., & Yuan, Y. (2017). The research on programming education in elementary schools from five countries. International Journal of Social Media and Interactive Learning Environments, 5(3), 181-190. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJSMILE.2017.087946
62. Tondeur, J., Sinnaeve, I., Van Houtte, M., & Van Braak, J. (2011). ICT as cultural capital: The relationship between socioeconomic status and the computer-use profile of young people. New media & society, 13(1), 151-168. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444810369245
63. Usa, C. H. T., & Twu, H. L. (2002). Educational technology in Taiwan. Educational Media International, 39(2), 153-164. https://doi.org/10.1080/09523980210153444
64. Webb, M., Davis, N., Bell, T., Katz, Y. J., Reynolds, N., Chambers, D. P., & Sysło, M. M. (2017). Computer science in K-12 school curricula of the 2lst century: Why, what and when? Education and Information Technologies, 22(2), 445-468. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-016-9493-x
65. Webb, M. E., Cox, M. J., Fluck, A., Angeli-Valanides, C., Malyn-Smith, J., & Voogt, J. (2015). Thematic Working Group 9: Curriculum - Advancing Understanding of the Roles of Computer Science/Informatics in the Curriculum. Summary Report: Technology Advance Quality Learning for All (pp. 60-69) http://www.curtin.edu.au/edusummit/edusummit-2015-final-report.pdf
66. Wong, G. K. W. & Cheung, H.Y. (2020). Exploring children’s perceptions of developing twenty-first century skills through computational thinking and programming, Interactive Learning Environments, 28(4), 438-450. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2018.1534245
67. Yang, X. & Zhang, J. (2020, December). Preliminary Comparison of K-12 Computing Education in China and the United States. 2020 IEEE International Conference on Teaching, Assessment, and Learning for Engineering (TALE) (pp. 965-967).
68. Yıldırım, A. & Şimşek, H. (2006). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri. (6. baskı). Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.
69. Zhang, D., & Liu, L. (2016). How does ICT use influence students’ achievements in math and science over time? Evidence from PISA 2000 to 2012. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 12(9), 2431-2449. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2016.1297a
70. Zualkernan, I. A., Allert, J., & Qadah, G. Z. (2006). Learning styles of computer programming students: a Middle Eastern and American comparison. IEEE Transactions on Education, 49(4), 443-450.