Research Article

The effects of programming education planned with TPACK framework on learning outcomes

Volume: 6 Number: 2 December 1, 2019
Handan Atun *, Ertuğrul Usta
EN

The effects of programming education planned with TPACK framework on learning outcomes

Abstract

This study aims at investigating the effects of Programming Education Planned with TPACK (Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge) Framework on middle school students’ learning outputs within the ITS (Informational Technology and Software) course. Although TPACK is known as a teacher training program, this study demonstrates it can be used in K12 education. The sample of the research consists of 41 6th grade level students from a Turkish middle school. This study used a quasi-experimental research design which compares pre-test and post-test results for experimental and control groups. Data were collected through quantitative scales. The effects of programming education planned with TPACK framework on students’ academic achievement, perception of problem-solving skills and computational thinking skills are investigated. According to the results, the means of academic achievement, problem solving inventory and computational thinking skill scale scores of the experimental group are significantly higher, which means TPACK framed lesson has a positive impact on learning outcomes. As a result of this study it can be concluded that matching technology that is suitable for the relevant content is crucial for learning, using appropriate technology is a good strategy for learning technology, higher order skills are improved by technology supported learning and academic achievement can be enhanced by using enriched activities in a technological environment.

Keywords

Tpack,primary education,programming

References

  1. Aisyah, A. R. (2013). The Development of Working Design through Characterized Technology Pedagogy and Content Knowledge in the Elementary Schools’ Instructional. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 103, 1016-1024.
  2. Angeli, C., and Valanides, N. (2005). Preservice elementary teachers as information and communication technology designers: An instructional system design model based on an expanded view of pedagogical content knowledge. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 21(4), 292-302.
  3. Angeli, C., & Valanides, N. (2009). Epistemological and methodological issues for the conceptualization, development, and assessment of ICT–TPCK: Advances in technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK). Computers & Education, 52(1), 154-168.
  4. Bers, M. U., Flannery, L., Kazakoff, E. R., and Sullivan, A. (2014). Computational thinking and tinkering: Exploration of an early childhood robotics curriculum. Computers & Education, 72, 145-157.
  5. Brill, A. S., Listman, J. B. and Kapila, V. (2015). Using robotics as the technological foundation for the TPACK framework in K-12 classrooms. In 2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition (pp. 26-1679).
  6. Brown, C. A., Neal, R. E. & Fine, B. (2011). Using 21st Century Thinking Skills Applied to the TPACK Instructional Model. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the AECT International Convention, Hyatt Regency Jacksonville Riverfront, Jacksonville, FL, Nov 08, 2011
  7. Carton, R. (2017). TPACK learning activity types for secondary computer science courses. Graduate Research Papers. 139.
  8. Chao, P. Y. (2016). Exploring students' computational practice, design and performance of problem-solving through a visual programming environment. Computers & Education, 95, 202-215.
  9. Chen, G., Shen, J., Barth-Cohen, L., Jiang, S., Huang, X., & Eltoukhy, M. (2017). Assessing elementary students’ computational thinking in everyday reasoning and robotics programming. Computers & Education, 109, 162-175.
  10. Cox, S., and Graham, C. R. (2009). Using an elaborated model of the TPACK framework to analyze and depict teacher knowledge. TechTrends, 53(5), 60-69.
APA
Atun, H., & Usta, E. (2019). The effects of programming education planned with TPACK framework on learning outcomes. Participatory Educational Research, 6(2), 26-36. https://doi.org/10.17275/per.19.10.6.2

Cited By