An Evaluation of the Effect of Activity-Based Computational Thinking Education on Teachers: A Case Study

Year 2023, Volume: 10 Issue: 2, 1 - 25, 30.03.2023

Neslihan Durmuşoğlu Saltalı Emel Bayrak Özmutlu Saniye Nur Ergan Gökhan Özsoy Özgen Korkmaz

https://doi.org/10.17275/per.23.26.10.2

Cited By: 1

Abstract

This study aimed to conduct an in-depth evaluation of the activity-based computational thinking teaching practices performed to improve computational thinking and teaching skills of the basic education teachers. Based on the aim of the study, the case study design, one of the qualitative research methods, was selected. As a result of the collaborative work of five experts, a 20-hour education program built on two core competencies, four sub-competencies and eight thinking skills was implemented. The participants were 40 teachers, 20 of whom were classroom teachers and 20 of whom were pre-school teachers. Data were collected from three different sources using five data collection tools in order to conduct an in-depth analysis of the practices. Quantitative and qualitative data collection tools were used in a combined fashion in the research. The data were analyzed through content analysis and non-parametric analyses. Our findings revealed that thanks to the teaching practices performed, classroom teachers had significantly higher problem solving, diverse thinking, algorithmic thinking, and computational thinking total scores, while preschool teachers achieved significantly higher total scores in algorithmic thinking skills and computational thinking. It was observed that the participants defined computational thinking on the basis of 18 different thinking skills. The explanations of the participants about the functions of computational thinking skills were grouped under seven categories. When the principles that should be considered in the teaching of computational thinking skills were examined, it was seen that the need for utilizing scaffolds was stated the most.

Keywords

Computational thinking, activity-based teaching, teacher education

Project Number

121B282

References

• Akar, H. (2016). Case study. Qualitative research patterns in education. Ani Publishing.
• Angeli, C. (2021). The effects of scaffolded programming scripts on pre-service teachers’ computational thinking: Developing algorithmic thinking through programming robots. International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction, 100329. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcci.2021.100329
• Angeli, C., & Valanides, N. (2020). Developing young children's computational thinking with educational robotics: An interaction effect between gender and scaffolding strategy. Computers in Human Behavior, 105, 105954. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.03.018
• Angeli, C., Voogt, J., Fluck, A., Webb, M., Cox, M., Malyn-Smith, J., & Zagami, J. (2016). A K-6 computational thinking curriculum framework: Implications for teacher knowledge. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 19(3), 47-57. Available at: http://www.jstor.org/stable/jeductechsoci.19.3.47 Access date: 12.12.2021.
• Atmatzidou, S. & Demetriadis, S. (2016). Advancing students’ computational thinking skills through educational robotics: A study on age and gender relevant differences. Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 75, 661-670. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.robot.2015.10.008
• Aydoğdu, E. (2019). Examination of students' algorithmic thinking skills in the process of non-computer activities. [Unpublished Master thesis]. Trabzon University.
• Barr, D., Harrison, J., & Conery, L. (2011). Computational thinking: a digital age skill for everyone, Available at: http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ918910.pdf Access date: 1.12.2021.
• Barr, V., & Stephenson, C. (2011). Bringing computational thinking to K-12: What is Involved and what is the role of the computer science education community? Acm Inroads, 2(1), 48-54. https://doi.org/10.1145/1929887.1929905
• Bell, T., Alexander, J., Freeman, J. & Grimley, M. (2009). Computer science unplugged: school students doing real computing without computers. New Zealand Journal of Applied Computing and Information Technology, 13(1), 20-29. Available at: https://purehost.bath.ac.uk/ws/files/214932627/NZJACIT_Unplugged.pdf Access date: 20.11.2021.
• Blum, L., & Cortina, T. J. (2007). CS4HS: An outreach program for high school CS teachers. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 39(1), 19-23. https://doi.org/10.1145/1227504.1227320
• Bocconi, S., Chioccariello, A., Dettori, G., Ferrari, A., Engelhardt, K., Kampylis, P., & Punie, Y. (2016, June). Exploring the field of computational thinking as a 21st century skill. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Education and New Learning Technologies, 4-6 July 2016, Barcelona, Spain (pp. 4725-4733).
• Bonani, A., Gennari, R., & Mahlknecht, G. (2022). Scenarios for Graph Algorithmic Thinking Co-created with Teachers. In: De la Prieta F. et al. (eds) Methodologies and Intelligent Systems for Technology Enhanced Learning, 11th International Conference. MIS4TEL 2021. Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems, vol 326. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-86618-1_5
• Bower, M., Wood, L. N., Lai, J. W., Highfield, K., Veal, J., Howe, C., ... & Mason, R. (2017). Improving the computational thinking pedagogical capabilities of school teachers. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 42(3), 53-72. https://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2017v42n3.4
• 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
• Burton, B. A. (2010). Encouraging algorithmic thinking without a computer. Olympiads in Informatics, 4, 3-14. Available at: https://ioinformatics.org/journal/INFOL053.pdf Access date: 1.12.2021.
• Creswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative research methods: Qualitative research design according to five approaches (M. Tüm & S. B. Demir, Trans.). Ankara: Political Publication Distribution.
• Creswell, J. W., & Miller, D. L. (2000). Determining validity in qualitative inquiry. Theory into Practice, 39(3), 124-130. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip3903_2
• Csernoch, M., Biró, P., Máth, J. & Abari, K. (2015) Testing algorithmic skills in traditional and non-traditional programming environments. Informatics in Education, 14, 175-197. Available at: https://www.ceeol.com/search/article-detail?id=342794 Access date: 12.12.2021.
• Curzon, P. (2015). Computational Thinking: Searching to Speak. Available at: http://teachinglondoncomputing.org/free-workshops/computational-thinking-searching-to-speak/ Access date: 20.10.2020
• Denning, P. J., & Tedre, M. (2021). Computational thinking for professionals. Communications of the ACM, 64(12), 30-33. https://doi.org/10.1145/3491268
• Doğan, A. (2020). Algorithmic thinking in primary education. International Journal of Progressive Education, 16(4), 286-301. https://doi.org/10.29329/ijpe.2020.268.18
• Figueiredo, M., Gomes, C. A., Amante, S., Gomes, H., Alves, V., Duarte, R. P., & Rego, B. (2021a, September). Play, Algorithmic Thinking and Early Childhood Education: Challenges in the Portuguese Context. In 2021 International Symposium on Computers in Education (SIIE) (pp. 1-4). IEEE.
• Figueiredo, M., Amante, S., Gomes, H. M. D. S. V., Gomes, M. A., Rego, B., Alves, V., & Duarte, R. P. (2021b). Algorithmic thinking in early childhood education: Opportunities and supports in the Portuguese context. In EDULEARN21 Proceedings (pp. 9339-9348). IATED.
• Futschek, G., & Moschitz, J. (2010). Developing algorithmic thinking by inventing and playing algorithms. Proceedings of the 2010 Constructionist Approaches to Creative Learning, Thinking and Education: Lessons for the 21st Century (Constructionism 2010), 1-10.
• Glaser, B. G. (1965). The constant comparative method of qualitative analysis. Social Problems, 12(4), 436-445. https://doi.org/10.2307/798843
• Gomes, A. & Mendes, A. J. (2007, September). Learning to program-difficulties and solutions. In International Conference on Engineering Education–ICEE. Available at: https://www.ineer.org/Events/ICEE2007/papers/411.pdf Access date: 12.12.2021.
• Gretter, S., & Yadav, A. (2016). Computational thinking and media & information literacy: An integrated approach to teaching twenty-first century skills. TechTrends, 60(5), 510-516. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-016-0098-4
• 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
• Güler, Ç. (2021). Algorithmic Thinking Skills without Computers for Prospective Computer Science Teachers. Journal of Theoretical Educational Science, 14(4), 570-585. https://doi.org/10.30831/akukeg.892869
• Hemmendinger, D. (2010). A plea for modesty. Acm Inroads, 1(2), 4-7. https://doi.org/10.1145/1805724.1805725
• Hill, H. C., Schilling, S. G., & Ball, D. L. (2004). Developing measures of teachers’ mathematics knowledge for teaching. The Elementary School Journal, 105(1), 11-30. Available at: http://www.sii.soe.umich.edu/newsite_temp/documents/hill_schill_ball.db.r59E46.pdf Access date: 1.12.2021.
• Hodhod, R., Khan, S., Kurt-Peker, Y., & Ray, L. (2016, February). Education teachers to integrate computational thinking into K-12 teaching. In Proceedings of the 47th ACM Technical Symposium on Computing Science Education (pp. 156-157). https://doi.org/10.1145/2839509.2844675
• Hoić-Božić, N., Dlab, M. H., Prskalo, L. N., Rugelj, J., & Šerbec, I. N. (2018). Games for learning algorithmic thinking–GLAT Project. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, 4(2), 73-95. Available at: https://glat.uniri.hr/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/GLAT_ICEDL_2018_FINAL.pdf Access date: 3.12.2021.
• Hoyles, C., & Noss, R. (2015). A computational lens on design research. ZDM Mathematics Education 47, 1039–1045. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-015-0731-2
• Hsu, C. C., & Wang, T. I. (2018). Applying game mechanics and student-generated questions to an online puzzle-based game learning system to promote algorithmic thinking skills. Computers & Education, 121, 73-88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.02.002
• Ioannou, I., & Angeli, C. (2016). A framework and an instructional design model for the development of students' computational and algorithmic thinking. In MCIS (p. 19). Available at: https://aisel.aisnet.org/mcis2016/19 Access date: 1.12.2021.
• ISTE (2015). CT Leadership toolkit. Available at http://www.iste.org/docs/ct-documents/ct-leadershipt-toolkit.pdf?sfvrsn=4 Access date: 20.10.2020.
• Jaipal-Jamani, K., & Angeli, C. (2017). Effect of robotics on elementary preservice teachers’ self-efficacy, science learning, and computational thinking. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 26(2), 175-192. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-016-9663-z
• Karabak, D., & Güneş, A. (2013). Curriculum proposal for first class secondary school students in the field of software development. Journal of Research in Education and Teaching, 2(3), 175-181. Available at: http://jret.org/FileUpload/ks281142/File/21.karabak.pdf Access date: 13.12.2021.
• Korkmaz, Ö., Çakır, R., Özden, M.Y. (2017). A validity and reliability study of the Computational Thinking Scales (CTS). Computers in Human Behaviour, 72, 558-569. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.01.005
• Lahtinen, E., Ala-Mutka, K. & Järvinen, H. (2005). A study of the difficulties of novice programmers. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 37(3), 14-18. https://doi.org/10.1145/1151954.1067453
• Merriam, S. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. San Fransisco: John Willey & Sons Inc.
• Mezak, J., & Papak, P. P. (2018, May). Learning scenarios and encouraging algorithmic thinking. 41st International Convention on Information and Communication Technology, Electronics and Microelectronics (MIPRO), 2018, pp. 760-765. https://doi.org/10.23919/MIPRO.2018.8400141
• Mezak, J., Papak, P. P., & Vujičić, L. (2021, July). The integration of algorithmic thinking into preschool education. In Proceedings of EDULEARN21 Conference, 5-6 July 2021, (Vol. 5, p. 6).
• Milkova, E. (2015). Multimedia application for educational purposes: Development of algorithmic thinking. Applied Computing and Informatics, 11(1), 76-88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aci.2014.05.001
• Mouza, C., Yang, H., Pan, Y. C., Ozden, S. Y., & Pollock, L. (2017). Resetting educational technology coursework for pre-service teachers: A computational thinking approach to the development of technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK). Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 33(3). 61-76. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.3521
• Pala, F. K., & Mıhçı-Türker, P. (2020). The effects of different programming trainings on the computational thinking skills. Interactive Learning Environments, 29(7), 1090-1100. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2019.1635495
• Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms: Children, computers, and powerful ideas. New York: Basic Books. Park, H., Kim, H. S., & Park, H. W. (2020). A scientometric study of digital literacy, ICT literacy, information literacy, and media literacy. Journal of Data and Information Science, 6(2), 116-138. https://doi.org/10.2478/jdis-2021-0001
• Patton, M. Q. (2014). Qualitative research & evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practice. Sage publications.
• Perry, G. (2009). Programming guide for beginners (T. Aksoy, Trans. ed.). Istanbul: Sistem Publishing.
• Prieto-Rodriguez, E., & Berretta, R. (2014, October). Digital technology teachers' perceptions of computer science: It is not all about programming. In 2014 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE) Proceedings (pp. 1-5). https://doi.org/10.1109/FIE.2014.7044134
• Qian, Y., Hambrusch, S., Yadav, A., & Gretter, S. (2018). Who needs what: Recommendations for designing effective online professional development for computer science teachers? Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 50(2), 164-181. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2018.1433565
• Qualls, J. A., & Sherrell, L. B. (2010). Why computational thinking should be integrated into the curriculum. Journal of Computing Sciences in Colleges, 25(5), 66-71.
• Rabson, C. (2017). Scientific research methods: Real world research. Ankara: Ani Publishing.
• Rodríguez-Abitia, G., Ramírez-Montoya, M. S., López-Caudana, E. O., & Romero-Rodríguez, J. M. (2021). Factores para el desarrollo del pensamiento computacional en estudiantes de pregrado. Campus Virtuales, 10(2), 153-164. Available at: http://uajournals.com/ojs/index.php/campusvirtuales/article/view/893/490 Access date: 1.12.2021.
• 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
• Rosenshine, B., & Meister, C. (1992). The use of scaffolds for teaching higher-level cognitive strategies. Educational leadership, 49(7), 26-33. Available at: http://www.formapex.com/telechargementpublic/rosenshine1992a.pdf Access date: 15.12.2021.
• Sarı, U., Pektaş, H. M., Şen, Ö. F., & Çelik, H. (2022). Algorithmic thinking development through physical computing activities with Arduino in STEM education. Education and Information Technologies, 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-10893-0
• Shute, V. J., Sun, C., & Asbell-Clarke, J. (2017). Demystifying computational thinking. Educational Research Review, 22, 142-158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2017.09.003
• Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. M. (1997). Grounded theory in practice. Sage.
• Tang, X., Yin, Y., Lin, Q., Hadad, R., & Zhai, X. (2020). Assessing computational thinking: A systematic review of empirical studies. Computers & Education, 148, 103798. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103798
• Tsalapatas, H., Heidmann, O., Alimisi, R., & Houstis, E. (2012). Game-based programming towards developing algorithmic thinking skills in primary education. Scientific Bulletin of the Petru Maior University of Targu Mures, 9(1), 56-63.
• Usta, E. & Korkmaz. Ö., (2010). Difficulties experienced by students while creating algorithms according to different teaching practices. 4th International Computer and Instructional Technology Symposium (ICITS 2010), Konya 24-26 September. ISBN: 978-605-61434-2-7 pp. 1029-1034.
• Weintrop, D., Beheshti, E., Horn, M., Orton, K., Jona, K., Trouille, L., & Wilensky, U. (2016). Defining computational thinking for mathematics and science classrooms. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 25(1), 127-147. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-015-9581-5
• Wing, J. M. (2008). Computational thinking and thinking about computing. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 366(1881), 3717-3725. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2008.0118
• Wing, J. (2011). Research notebook: Computational thinking—What and why. The Link Magazine, 6, 20-23. Available at: https://people.cs.vt.edu/~kafura/CS6604/Papers/CT-What-And-Why.pdf Access date: 13.12.2021.
• Wohl, B., Porter, B. & Clinch, S. (2015). Teaching Computer Science to 5-7-year-olds: An initial study with Scratch, Cubelets and unplugged computing. WiPSCE '15: Proceedings of the Workshop in Primary and Secondary Computing Education, London, United Kingdom. https://doi.org/10.1145/2818314.2818340
• Yadav, A., Gretter, S., Good, J., & McLean, T. (2017). Computational thinking in teacher education. In: Rich P., Hodges C. (eds) Emerging Research, Practice, and Policy on Computational Thinking. Educational Communications and Technology: Issues and Innovations. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-52691-1_13
• Yadav, A., Mayfield, C., Zhou, N., Hambrusch, S., & Korb, J. T. (2014). Computational thinking in elementary and secondary teacher education. ACM Transactions on Computing Education (TOCE), 14(1), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1145/2576872
• Yağcı, M. (2018). A study on computational thinking and high school students’ computational thinking skill levels. International Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 10(2), 81-96. https://doi.org/10.15345/iojes.2018.02.006
• Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2011). Qualitative research methods in the social sciences. Ankara: Seçkin Publishing.
• Yin, R.K. (2014). Case Study Research Design and Methods (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.