Türkiye’de Bilgi İşlemsel Düşünme Becerisi ile İlgili Yapılmış Lisansüstü Tezlerin Tematik ve Yöntemsel Eğilimleri

Abstract

Bu araştırmanın amacı, Türkiye’de bilgi işlemsel düşünme becerisi ile ilgili yapılmış lisansüstü tezlerin tematik ve yöntemsel açıdan analizlerini yapmaktır. Bu amaç kapsamında YÖK (Yükseköğretim Kurulu) Ulusal Tez Merkezi veri tabanında yer alan Nisan 2020’e kadar yayınlanmış 30 yüksek lisans ve 8 doktora olmak üzere toplam 38 eser nitel araştırma yöntemlerinden doküman incelemesi modeli kullanılarak incelenmiştir. Lisansüstü tezlerin incelenmesinde betimsel içerik analizi tekniği kullanılmıştır. Araştırma sonuçlarına göre lisansüstü tezlerde daha çok programlama öğretimi, robotik ve blok tabanlı görsel programlamanın bilgi işlemsel düşünme becerisi üzerindeki etkilerinin incelendiği sonucuna ulaşılmıştır. Oldukça sınırlı sayıda bilgi işlemsel düşünme becerisinin geliştirilmesine yönelik tasarım ve geliştirme çalışmasının yapıldığı tespit edilmiştir. Lisansüstü tezlerin büyük çoğunluğunun Bilgisayar ve Öğretim Teknolojileri Eğitimi alanında yapıldığı ve en fazla tezin 2019 yılında yayınlandığı görülmüştür. Lisansüstü tezlerin daha çok nicel araştırma yöntemi ve yarı deneysel desen kullanılarak tasarlandığı, çalışmalarda çoğunlukla ortaokul örneklem profilinin tercih edildiği sonucuna ulaşılmıştır. Bununla birlikte ağırlıklı olarak ölçek, görüşme ve gözlem veri toplama araçları kullanılarak toplanan verilerin kestirimsel analiz teknikleri doğrultusunda analiz edildiği görülmüştür. Araştırma sonucunda, nitel veya karma araştırma yöntemlerinin kullanıldığı, özellikle okul öncesi örneklem profilinin tercih edildiği tasarım çalışmalarının yapılması önerilmiştir.

Keywords

• Bilgi işlemsel düşünme
• içerik analizi
• lisansüstü tezler

Thematic and Methodological Trends of Computational Thinking Skills-Related Graduate Theses in Turkey

Abstract

The purpose of this research is to analyse the thematic and methodological trends of computational thinking skills-related graduate theses in Turkey. Within the scope of this purpose, a total of 38 works, including 30 Master's and 8 doctoral studies, published in the National Thesis Centre database of YÖK (Council of Higher Education), were analysed using a document analysis model, one of the qualitative research methods. A descriptive content analysis technique was used to examine graduate theses. According to the results of the research, it has been concluded that the effects of programming teaching, robotics, and block-based visual programming on computational thinking skills are examined in graduate theses. It has been determined that a very limited number of design and development studies have been carried out to develop computational thinking skills. It has been observed that the majority of graduate theses were made in the field of Computer Education and Instructional Technology and most theses were published in 2019. It has been concluded that graduate theses are mostly designed by using the quantitative research method and quasi-experimental design, and secondary school sample profile is mostly preferred in the studies. However, it has been seen that the data collected by using a scale, interview, and observation data collection tools are analysed in accordance with predictive analysis techniques. As a result of the research, it has been recommended that design studies should be carried out in which qualitative or mixed research methods are used and especially pre-school sample profiles are preferred.

Keywords

• Computational thinking
• content analysis
• graduate thesis

References

1. Atmatzidou, S., Demetriadis, S., & Nika, P. (2018). How does the degree of guidance support students’ metacognitive and problem solving skills in educational robotics. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 27(1), 70-85.
2. Bers, M. U. (2010). The TangibleK Robotics program: Applied computational thinking for young children. Early Childhood Research & Practice, 12(2), 1-20.
3. Bers, M. U., Flannery, L., Kazakoff, E. R., & Sullivan, A. (2014). Computational thinking and tinkering: Exploration of an early childhood robotics curriculum. Computers & Education, 72, 145-157.
4. Büyüköztürk, Ş., Çakmak, E. K., Akgün, Ö. E., Karadeniz, Ş. ve Demirel, F. (2008). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri. Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
5. Caldwell, H., & Smith, N. (Eds.). (2016). Teaching Computing Unplugged in Primary Schools: Exploring Primary Computing Through Practical Activities Away from the Computer. London: Sage Publication.
6. Care, E., Scoular, C., & Griffin, P. (2016). Assessment of collaborative problem solving in education environments. Applied Measurement in Education, 29(4), 250-264.
7. Center for Computational Thinking Carnegie Mellon (2019). What is Computational Thinking?. Mart 21, 2020 tarihinde https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~CompThink/ adresinden erişilmiştir.
8. Çalık, M., & Sözbilir, M. (2014). İçerik analizinin parametreleri. Eğitim ve Bilim, 39(174).

9. De Araujo, A. L. S. O., Andrade, W. L., & Guerrero, D. D. S. (2016). A systematic mapping study on assessing computational thinking abilities. Proceedings of Frontiers in Education Conference, 1-9.
10. De Araujo, A. L. S. O., Andrade, W. L., & Guerrero, D. D. S. (2016). A systematic mapping study on assessing computational thinking abilities. Proceedings of Frontiers in Education Conference, 1-9.
11. Djambong, T., & Freiman, V. (2016). Task-Based Assessment of Students' Computational Thinking Skills Developed through Visual Programming or Tangible Coding Environments. International Association for Development of the Information Society.
12. Exploration of an early childhood robotics curriculum. Computers & Education, 72, 145-157. Gonzalez, M. R. (2015). Computational thinking test: Design guidelines and content validation. Proceedings of Edulearn15 Conference, (s. 2436-2444). Barcelona, Spain.
13. 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.
14. Griffin, P. (2017). Assessing and teaching 21st century skills: Collaborative problem solving as a case study. In Innovative assessment of collaboration (pp. 113-134). Springer, Cham
15. Grover, S., & Pea , R. (2013). Computational thinking in K-12: A review of the state of the field. Educational Researcher, 42, 38-43.
16. Haseski, H. İ., Ilic, U., & Tugtekin, U. (2018). Defining a new 21st century skill-computational thinking: concepts and trends. International Education Studies, 11(4), 29-42.
17. Ilic, U., Haseski, H. İ., & Tugtekin, U. (2018). Publication trends over 10 years of computational thinking research. Contemporary Educational Technology, 9(2), 131-153.
18. 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.
19. ISTE & CSTA (2011). Operational definition of computational thinking for K–12 education. Nisan 12, 2020 tarihinde from https://id.iste.org/docs/ct-documents/computational-thinking-operational-definition-flyer.pdf?sfvrsn=2 adresinden erişilmiştir.
20. ISTE (2015). 21st century skills: What has been accomplished, why should we care?. Nisan 12, 2020 tarihinde https://www.iste.org/explore/entrsekt/21st-century-skills%3A-What-has-been-accomplished%2C-why-should-we-care%3F adresinden erişilmiştir.
21. İlic, U., & Haseski, Ö. Ü. H. İ. (2019). Bilgi işlemsel düşünmeyi ölçmeye yönelik geliştirilen veri toplama araçlarının incelenmesi. Tam Metin Bildiri Kitabı, 82.
22. Kaan, B. A. T. I., Çalışkan, İ., & Yetişir, M. İ. (2017). Fen eğitiminde bilgi işlemsel düşünme ve bütünleştirilmiş alanlar yaklaşımı (STEAM). Pamukkale Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 41(41), 91-103.
23. Kalelioğlu, F. (2018). Characteristics of studies conducted on computational thinking: A content analysis. In Computational thinking in the STEM disciplines (pp. 11-29). Springer, Cham.
24. Kalelioğlu, F., Gülbahar, Y., & Kukul, V. (2016). A framework for computational thinking based on a systematic research review. Baltic J. Modern Computing, Vol. 4 , No. 3, 583-596.
25. Karasar, N. (2016). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemi. Ankara: Nobel Akademik Yayıncılık.
26. Lee, I., Martin, F., Denner, J., Coulter, B., Allan, W., Erickson, J., & Werner, L. (2011). Computational thinking for youth in practice. Acm Inroads, 2(1), 32-37.
27. Magana, A. J., & Silva Coutinho, G. (2017). Modeling and simulation practices for a computational thinking‐enabled engineering workforce. Computer Applications in Engineering Education, 25(1), 62-78.
28. Mannila, L., Dagiene, V., Demo, B., Grgurina, N., Mirolo, C., Rolandsson, L. & Settle, A. (2014). Computational thinking in K-9 education. In A. Clear and R. Lister (Eds.),Proceedings of the working group reports of the 2014 on innovation & technology incomputer science education conference (pp. 1-29). ACM.
29. Nouri, J., Zhang, L., Mannila, L., & Norén, E. (2020). Development of computational thinking, digital competence and 21st century skills when learning programming in K-9. Education Inquiry, 11(1), 1-17.
30. Oluk, A., Korkmaz, Ö., & Oluk, H. A. (2018). Scratch'ın 5. Sınıf Öğrencilerinin Algoritma Geliştirme ve Bilgi-İşlemsel Düşünme Becerilerine Etkisi. Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education, 9(1), 54-71.
31. Pérez-Marín, D., Hijón-Neira, R., Bacelo, A., & Pizarro, C. (2018). Can computational thinking be improved by using a methodology based on metaphors and scratch to teach computer programming to children?. Computers in Human Behavior, 105849.
32. Portelance, D. J., & Bers, M. U. (2015, June). Code and Tell: Assessing young children's learning of computational thinking using peer video interviews with ScratchJr. In Proceedings of the 14th international conference on interaction design and children (pp. 271-274).
33. Riley, D. D., & Hunt, K. A. (2014). Computational thinking for the modern problem solver. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
34. Snalune, P. (2015). The benefits of computational thinking. ITNOW, 57(4), 58-59.
35. Tang, K. Y., Chou, T. L., & Tsai, C. C. (2020). A content analysis of computational thinking research: An international publication trends and research typology. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 29(1), 9-19.
36. Tosik-Gün, E., & Güyer, T. (2019). Bilgi İşlemsel Düşünme Becerisinin Değerlendirilmesine İlişkin Sistematik Alanyazın Taraması. Ahmet Keleşoğlu Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 1(2), 99-120.
37. Üzümcü, Ö., & Erdal, B. A. Y. (2018). Eğitimde yeni 21. yüzyıl becerisi: Bilgi işlemsel düşünme. Uluslararası Türk Kültür Coğrafyasında Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 3(2), 1-16.
38. Weinberg, A. E. (2013). Computational thinking: An investigation of the existing scholarship and research. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Colorado State University, Colorado, USA.
39. 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.
40. Wong, K. W. G., Chıng, C. C., Mark, K. P., Tang, J. K., Lei, C. U., Cheung, H. Y. & Chuı, H. L. (2015). Impact of computational thinking through coding in K-12 education: A pilot study in Hong Kong. General Studies, 85(88.01), 2-08.