Araştırma Makalesi
BibTex RIS Kaynak Göster

Eşli programlamanın problem çözme becerisi ve motivasyona etkisi

Yıl 2025, Cilt: 15 Sayı: 3, 1145 - 1170, 27.09.2025

Ömer Demir , Murat Çınar , Süleyman Sadi Seferoğlu

https://doi.org/10.18039/ajesi.1570205

Öz

This study primarily investigates the effects of solo and pair programming on students’ problem-solving skills and motivation. Additionally, it aims to identify key factors and tensions associated with pair programming based on students’ reflections. An embedded mixed-methods research design was employed. The sample consisted of 42 undergraduate students. Participants in the control group, comprising 19 students, worked individually on computational tasks, while those in the experimental group engaged in the same tasks in pairs. All participants took part in computational thinking activities over seven weeks, structured around game development projects. Data were collected through questionnaires and in-depth interviews. The results indicated no statistically significant differences between the two groups in terms of overall motivation and problem-solving scores. However, the experimental group scored higher in the sub-dimension related to conceptualizing problems through modeling. Student motivation was found to be high across both groups following the intervention, regardless of the programming mode. After analyzing the qualitative data obtained from five students, a total of 122 codes were identified and categorized under six themes: 'team dynamics', 'task and platform characteristics', 'affective domain', 'cognitive strategies and problem-solving', 'pedagogical framework', and 'roles'. The qualitative findings suggest that the pedagogical benefits of pair programming can only be fully realized through the effective management of pairing strategies, peer communication, task difficulty, and collaborative processes

Anahtar Kelimeler

Eşli programlama Motivasyon Öğrenci yansımaları Problem-çözme becerisi Tekli programlama.

Kaynakça

  • Alammary, A. (2019). Blended learning models for introductory programming courses: A systematic review. PLOS ONE, 14(9), e0221765. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0221765
  • Alturki, R. A. (2016). Measuring and improving student performance in an introductory programming course. Informatics in Education, 15(2), 183-204. https://doi.org/10.15388/infedu.2016.10
  • Baheti, P., Gehringer, E., & Stotts, D. (2002). Exploring the efficacy of distributed pair programming. In D. Wells & L. Williams (Eds.), Extreme programming and agile methods–XP/agile universe 2002 (pp. 208-220). Springer Press. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45672-4_20
  • Balijepally, V., Mahapatra, R., Nerur, S., & Price, K. H. (2009). Are two heads better than one for software development? The productivity paradox of pair programming. MIS Quarterly, 33(1), 91-118. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/20650280
  • Bishop-Clark, C., Courte, J., & Howard, E. V. (2006). Programming in pairs with Alice to improve confidence, enjoyment, and achievement. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 34(2), 213-228.
  • Bodaker, L., & Rosenberg-Kima, R. B. (2023). Online pair-programming: elementary school children learning scratch together online. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 55(5), 799-816. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2022.2036653
  • Bowman, N. A., Jarratt, L., Culver, K. C., & Segre, A. M. (2020). Pair programming in perspective: Effects on persistence, achievement, and equity in computer science. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 13(4), 731-758. https://doi.org/10.1080/19345747.2020.1799464
  • Chorfi, A., Hedjazi, D., Aouag, S., & Boubiche, D. (2020). Problem-based collaborative learning groupware to improve computer programming skills. Behaviour & Information Technology, 41(1), 139–158. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2020.1795263
  • Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Erlbaum Press.
  • Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2011). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Sage Press.
  • Çal, H., & Can, G. (2020). The influence of pair programming on secondary school students’ confidence and achievement in computer programming. Trakya Journal of Education, 10(1), 221-237. https://doi.org/10.24315/tred.575098
  • Çınar, M., & Tüzün, H. (2021). Comparison of object-oriented and robot programming activities: The effects of programming modality on student achievement, abstraction, problem solving, and motivation. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 37(2), 370-386. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12495
  • Çiftci, S., & Bildiren, A. (2020). The effect of coding courses on the cognitive abilities and problem-solving skills of preschool children. Computer Science Education, 30(1), 3-21. https://doi.org/10.1080/08993408.2019.1696169
  • Demir, Ö., & Seferoğlu, S. S. (2017, October 11-13). Examination of pair programming as a reflection of cooperative problem solving on teaching programming [Paper presentation]. ITTES 2017, İzmir, Türkiye.
  • Demir, Ö., & Seferoğlu, S. S. (2021a). A comparison of solo and pair programming in terms of flow experience, coding quality, and coding achievement. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 58(8), 1448-1466. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633120949788
  • Demir, Ö., & Seferoglu, S. S. (2021b). The effect of determining pair programming groups according to various individual difference variables on group compatibility, flow, and coding performance. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 59(1), 41-70. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633120949787
  • Demirkıran, M. C., & Hocanin, F. T. (2021). An investigation on primary school students’ dispositions towards programming with game-based learning. Education and Information Technologies, 26(4), 3871-3892. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10430-5
  • Denner, J., Green, E., & Campe, S. (2021). Learning to program in middle school: How pair programming helps and hinders intrepid exploration. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 30(4-5), 611-645. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2021.1939028
  • Denner, J., Werner, L., Campe, S., & Ortiz, E. (2014). Pair programming: Under what conditions is it advantageous for middle school students? Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 46(3), 277-296. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2014.888272
  • Dybå, T., Arisholm, E., Sjoberg, D. I. K., Hannay, J. E., & Shull, F. (2007). Are two heads better than one? On the effectiveness of pair programming. IEEE Software, 24(6), 12-15. https://doi.org/10.1109/MS.2007.158
  • Fanchamps, N., Slangen, L., Hennissen, P., & Specht, M. (2021). The influence of SRA programming on algorithmic thinking and self-efficacy using Lego robotics in two types of instruction. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 31(2), 203-222. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-019-09559-9
  • Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (2012). How to design and evaluate research in education (8th ed.). The McGraw-Hill Press.
  • Groothuijsen, S., van den Beemt, A., Remmers, J. C., & van Meeuwen, L. W. (2024). AI chatbots in programming education: Students’ use in a scientific computing course and consequences for learning. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 7, Article e100290. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100290
  • Hahn, J. H., Mentz, E., & Meyer, L. (2009). Assessment strategies for pair programming. Journal of Information Technology Education-Research, 8, 273-284.
  • Hanks, B., Fitzgerald, S., McCauley, R., Murphy, L., & Zander, C. (2011). Pair programming in education: A literature review. Computer Science Education, 21(2), 135-173. https://doi.org/10.1080/08993408.2011.579808
  • Harsley, R., Fossati, D., Di Eugenio, B., Green, N. (2017, March 8). Interactions of individual and pair programmers with an intelligent tutoring system for computer science [Paper presentation]. 2017 ACM SIGCSE Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, Seattle, Washington, USA. https://doi.org/10.1145/3017680.3017786
  • Hawlitschek, A., Berndt, S., & Schulz, S. (2023). Empirical research on pair programming in higher education: A literature review. Computer Science Education, 33(3), 400-428. https://doi.org/10.1080/08993408.2022.2039504
  • Jonassen, D. H. (2000). Toward a design theory of problem solving. Educational Technology Research and Development, 48(4), 63-85. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02300500
  • Kalelioglu, F., & Gülbahar, Y. (2014). The effects of teaching programming via Scratch on problem solving skills: A discussion from learners' perspective. Informatics in Education, 13(1), 33-50.
  • Kazimoglu, C., Kiernan, M., Bacon, L., & Mackinnon, L. (2012). A serious game for developing computational thinking and learning introductory computer programming. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 47, 1991-1999. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.06.938
  • Keller, J. M. (1987). IMMS: Instructional materials motivation survey. Florida State University Press.
  • Krizsan, T., & Lambic, D. (2024). Examining the impact of pair programming on efficiency, motivation, and stress among students of different skills and abilities in lower grades in elementary schools. Education and Information Technologies. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-12859-w
  • Kutu, H., & Sözbilir, M. (2011). Adaptation of instructional materials motivation survey to Turkish: A validity and reliability study. Necatibey Faculty of Education Electronic Journal of Science & Mathematics Education, 5(1), 292-312
  • Lai, X. Y., & Wong, G. K. W. (2022). Collaborative versus individual problem solving in computational thinking through programming: A meta-analysis. British Journal of Educational Technology, 53(1), 150-170. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13157
  • Liu, J., & Li, S. (2024). Toward artificial intelligence-human paired programming: A review of the educational applications and research on artificial intelligence code-generation tools. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 62(5), 1385-1415. https://doi.org/10.1177/07356331241240460
  • Lubarda, M. V., Phan, A. M., Schurgers, C., Delson, N., Ghazinejad, M., Baghdadchi, S., . . . Qi, H. (2024). Virtual pair programming and online oral exams: effects on social interaction, performance, and academic integrity in a remote computer programming course. Computer Science Education, 1-41. https://doi.org/10.1080/08993408.2024.2344401
  • Lussier, R. N. (1996). Human relations in organizations: A skill-building approach. Irwin Press.
  • Mazman, S. G. (2013). Modeling the influence of cognitive based individual differences on programming performance (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Hacettepe University, Institute of Educational Sciences, Ankara, Türkiye.
  • Mehta, K., & Sood, V. M. (2023). Agile software development in the digital world – Trends and challenges. In S. Hooda, V. M. Sood, Y. Singh, S. Dalal, & M. Sood (Eds.), Agile software development (pp. 1-22). Scrivener Publishing-Wiley Press.
  • Navarro-Cota, C., Molina, A. I., Redondo, M. A., & Lacave, C. (2025). Individual differences in computer programming: a systematic review. Behaviour & Information Technology, 44(2), 357-375. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2024.2317377
  • Noone, M., & Mooney, A. (2018). Visual and textual programming languages: a systematic review of the literature. Journal of Computers in Education, 5(2), 149-174. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-018-0101-5
  • Pilkington, C. (2018). A playful approach to fostering motivation in a distance education computer programming course: Behaviour change and student perceptions. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 19(3), 282-298. http://dx.doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v19i3.3664
  • Plonka, L., Sharp, H., & van der Linden, J. (2012). Disengagement in pair programming: Does it matter? In M. Glinz, G. Murphy, & M. Pezze (Eds.), 34th International Conference on Software Engineering (pp. 496-506). IEEE Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ICSE.2012.6227166
  • Psycharis, S., & Kallia, M. (2017). The effects of computer programming on high school students' reasoning skills and mathematical self-efficacy and problem solving. Instructional Science, 45(5), 583-602. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-017-9421-5
  • Ramalingam, V., & Wiedenbeck, S. (1998). Development and validation of scores on a computer programming self-efficacy scale and group analyses of novice programmer self-efficacy. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 19(4) 365-379. https://doi.org/10.2190%2FC670-Y3C8-LTJ1-CT3P
  • Razzouk, R., & Shute, V. (2012). What is design thinking and why is it important? Review of Educational Research, 82(3), 330-348. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654312457429
  • Smith, M. O., Giugliano, A., & DeOrio, A. (2018). Long term effects of pair programming. IEEE Transactions on Education, 61(3), 187-194. https://doi.org/10.1109/TE.2017.2773024
  • Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research. Sage Press.
  • Tan, J. B., Wu, L., & Ma, S. S. (2024). Collaborative dialogue patterns of pair programming and their impact on programming self-efficacy and coding performance. British Journal of Educational Technology, 55(3). https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13412
  • Tsai, C. Y. (2019). Improving students' understanding of basic programming concepts through visual programming language: The role of self-efficacy. Computers in Human Behavior, 95, 224-232. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.11.038
  • Tsompanoudi, D., Satratzemi, M., & Xinogalos, S. (2015). Distributed pair programming using collaboration scripts: An educational system and initial results. Informatics in Education, 14(2), 291-314. https://doi.org/10.15388/infedu.2015.17
  • Wing, J. M. (2006). Computational thinking. Communications of the ACM, 49(3), 33-35. https://doi.org/10.1145/1118178.1118215
  • Xu, F., & Correia, A. -P. (2024). Adopting distributed pair programming as an effective team learning activity: a systematic review. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 36(2), 320-349. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-023-09356-3
  • Xu, W., Wu, Y., & Ouyang, F. (2023). Multimodal learning analytics of collaborative patterns during pair programming in higher education. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 20(1), 8. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-022-00377-z
  • Yaman, S., & Dede, Y. (2008). A scale for adults’ problem solving skills. Journal of Educational Sciences & Practices, 7(14), 251-269
  • Yang, Y. F., Lee, C. I., & Chang, C. K. (2016). Learning motivation and retention effects of pair programming in data structures courses. Education for Information, 32(3), 249-267. https://doi.org/10.3233/efi-160976
  • Zarb, M., & Hughes, J. (2015). Breaking the communication barrier: Guidelines to aid communication within pair programming. Computer Science Education, 25(2), 120-151. https://doi.org/10.1080/08993408.2015.1033125
  • Zhong, B., & Wang, J. (2021). Exploring the non-significant difference on students’ cognitive load imposed by robotics tasks in pair learning. International Journal of Social Robotics, 14, 3-13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-021-00764-y
  • Zhong, B. C., & Li, T. T. (2020). Can pair learning improve students' troubleshooting performance in robotics education? Journal of Educational Computing Research, 58(1), 220-248. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633119829191

The Impact of Solo and Pair Programming Modes on Problem-solving Skills and Motivation: Students' Reflections on Pair Programming

Yıl 2025, Cilt: 15 Sayı: 3, 1145 - 1170, 27.09.2025

Ömer Demir , Murat Çınar , Süleyman Sadi Seferoğlu

https://doi.org/10.18039/ajesi.1570205

Öz

This study primarily investigates the effects of solo and pair programming on students’ problem-solving skills and motivation. Additionally, it aims to identify key factors and tensions associated with pair programming based on students’ reflections. An embedded mixed-methods research design was employed. The sample consisted of 42 undergraduate students. Participants in the control group, comprising 19 students, worked individually on computational tasks, while those in the experimental group engaged in the same tasks in pairs. All participants took part in computational thinking activities over seven weeks, structured around game development projects. Data were collected through questionnaires and in-depth interviews. The results indicated no statistically significant differences between the two groups in terms of overall motivation and problem-solving scores. However, the experimental group scored higher in the sub-dimension related to conceptualizing problems through modeling. Student motivation was found to be high across both groups following the intervention, regardless of the programming mode. After analyzing the qualitative data obtained from five students, a total of 122 codes were identified and categorized under six themes: 'team dynamics', 'task and platform characteristics', 'affective domain', 'cognitive strategies and problem-solving', 'pedagogical framework', and 'roles'. The qualitative findings suggest that the pedagogical benefits of pair programming can only be fully realized through the effective management of pairing strategies, peer communication, task difficulty, and collaborative processes

Anahtar Kelimeler

Motivation Pair programming Problem-solving skill Solo programming Student reflections

Kaynakça

  • Alammary, A. (2019). Blended learning models for introductory programming courses: A systematic review. PLOS ONE, 14(9), e0221765. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0221765
  • Alturki, R. A. (2016). Measuring and improving student performance in an introductory programming course. Informatics in Education, 15(2), 183-204. https://doi.org/10.15388/infedu.2016.10
  • Baheti, P., Gehringer, E., & Stotts, D. (2002). Exploring the efficacy of distributed pair programming. In D. Wells & L. Williams (Eds.), Extreme programming and agile methods–XP/agile universe 2002 (pp. 208-220). Springer Press. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45672-4_20
  • Balijepally, V., Mahapatra, R., Nerur, S., & Price, K. H. (2009). Are two heads better than one for software development? The productivity paradox of pair programming. MIS Quarterly, 33(1), 91-118. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/20650280
  • Bishop-Clark, C., Courte, J., & Howard, E. V. (2006). Programming in pairs with Alice to improve confidence, enjoyment, and achievement. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 34(2), 213-228.
  • Bodaker, L., & Rosenberg-Kima, R. B. (2023). Online pair-programming: elementary school children learning scratch together online. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 55(5), 799-816. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2022.2036653
  • Bowman, N. A., Jarratt, L., Culver, K. C., & Segre, A. M. (2020). Pair programming in perspective: Effects on persistence, achievement, and equity in computer science. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 13(4), 731-758. https://doi.org/10.1080/19345747.2020.1799464
  • Chorfi, A., Hedjazi, D., Aouag, S., & Boubiche, D. (2020). Problem-based collaborative learning groupware to improve computer programming skills. Behaviour & Information Technology, 41(1), 139–158. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2020.1795263
  • Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Erlbaum Press.
  • Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2011). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Sage Press.
  • Çal, H., & Can, G. (2020). The influence of pair programming on secondary school students’ confidence and achievement in computer programming. Trakya Journal of Education, 10(1), 221-237. https://doi.org/10.24315/tred.575098
  • Çınar, M., & Tüzün, H. (2021). Comparison of object-oriented and robot programming activities: The effects of programming modality on student achievement, abstraction, problem solving, and motivation. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 37(2), 370-386. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12495
  • Çiftci, S., & Bildiren, A. (2020). The effect of coding courses on the cognitive abilities and problem-solving skills of preschool children. Computer Science Education, 30(1), 3-21. https://doi.org/10.1080/08993408.2019.1696169
  • Demir, Ö., & Seferoğlu, S. S. (2017, October 11-13). Examination of pair programming as a reflection of cooperative problem solving on teaching programming [Paper presentation]. ITTES 2017, İzmir, Türkiye.
  • Demir, Ö., & Seferoğlu, S. S. (2021a). A comparison of solo and pair programming in terms of flow experience, coding quality, and coding achievement. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 58(8), 1448-1466. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633120949788
  • Demir, Ö., & Seferoglu, S. S. (2021b). The effect of determining pair programming groups according to various individual difference variables on group compatibility, flow, and coding performance. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 59(1), 41-70. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633120949787
  • Demirkıran, M. C., & Hocanin, F. T. (2021). An investigation on primary school students’ dispositions towards programming with game-based learning. Education and Information Technologies, 26(4), 3871-3892. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10430-5
  • Denner, J., Green, E., & Campe, S. (2021). Learning to program in middle school: How pair programming helps and hinders intrepid exploration. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 30(4-5), 611-645. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2021.1939028
  • Denner, J., Werner, L., Campe, S., & Ortiz, E. (2014). Pair programming: Under what conditions is it advantageous for middle school students? Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 46(3), 277-296. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2014.888272
  • Dybå, T., Arisholm, E., Sjoberg, D. I. K., Hannay, J. E., & Shull, F. (2007). Are two heads better than one? On the effectiveness of pair programming. IEEE Software, 24(6), 12-15. https://doi.org/10.1109/MS.2007.158
  • Fanchamps, N., Slangen, L., Hennissen, P., & Specht, M. (2021). The influence of SRA programming on algorithmic thinking and self-efficacy using Lego robotics in two types of instruction. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 31(2), 203-222. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-019-09559-9
  • Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (2012). How to design and evaluate research in education (8th ed.). The McGraw-Hill Press.
  • Groothuijsen, S., van den Beemt, A., Remmers, J. C., & van Meeuwen, L. W. (2024). AI chatbots in programming education: Students’ use in a scientific computing course and consequences for learning. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 7, Article e100290. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100290
  • Hahn, J. H., Mentz, E., & Meyer, L. (2009). Assessment strategies for pair programming. Journal of Information Technology Education-Research, 8, 273-284.
  • Hanks, B., Fitzgerald, S., McCauley, R., Murphy, L., & Zander, C. (2011). Pair programming in education: A literature review. Computer Science Education, 21(2), 135-173. https://doi.org/10.1080/08993408.2011.579808
  • Harsley, R., Fossati, D., Di Eugenio, B., Green, N. (2017, March 8). Interactions of individual and pair programmers with an intelligent tutoring system for computer science [Paper presentation]. 2017 ACM SIGCSE Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, Seattle, Washington, USA. https://doi.org/10.1145/3017680.3017786
  • Hawlitschek, A., Berndt, S., & Schulz, S. (2023). Empirical research on pair programming in higher education: A literature review. Computer Science Education, 33(3), 400-428. https://doi.org/10.1080/08993408.2022.2039504
  • Jonassen, D. H. (2000). Toward a design theory of problem solving. Educational Technology Research and Development, 48(4), 63-85. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02300500
  • Kalelioglu, F., & Gülbahar, Y. (2014). The effects of teaching programming via Scratch on problem solving skills: A discussion from learners' perspective. Informatics in Education, 13(1), 33-50.
  • Kazimoglu, C., Kiernan, M., Bacon, L., & Mackinnon, L. (2012). A serious game for developing computational thinking and learning introductory computer programming. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 47, 1991-1999. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.06.938
  • Keller, J. M. (1987). IMMS: Instructional materials motivation survey. Florida State University Press.
  • Krizsan, T., & Lambic, D. (2024). Examining the impact of pair programming on efficiency, motivation, and stress among students of different skills and abilities in lower grades in elementary schools. Education and Information Technologies. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-12859-w
  • Kutu, H., & Sözbilir, M. (2011). Adaptation of instructional materials motivation survey to Turkish: A validity and reliability study. Necatibey Faculty of Education Electronic Journal of Science & Mathematics Education, 5(1), 292-312
  • Lai, X. Y., & Wong, G. K. W. (2022). Collaborative versus individual problem solving in computational thinking through programming: A meta-analysis. British Journal of Educational Technology, 53(1), 150-170. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13157
  • Liu, J., & Li, S. (2024). Toward artificial intelligence-human paired programming: A review of the educational applications and research on artificial intelligence code-generation tools. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 62(5), 1385-1415. https://doi.org/10.1177/07356331241240460
  • Lubarda, M. V., Phan, A. M., Schurgers, C., Delson, N., Ghazinejad, M., Baghdadchi, S., . . . Qi, H. (2024). Virtual pair programming and online oral exams: effects on social interaction, performance, and academic integrity in a remote computer programming course. Computer Science Education, 1-41. https://doi.org/10.1080/08993408.2024.2344401
  • Lussier, R. N. (1996). Human relations in organizations: A skill-building approach. Irwin Press.
  • Mazman, S. G. (2013). Modeling the influence of cognitive based individual differences on programming performance (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Hacettepe University, Institute of Educational Sciences, Ankara, Türkiye.
  • Mehta, K., & Sood, V. M. (2023). Agile software development in the digital world – Trends and challenges. In S. Hooda, V. M. Sood, Y. Singh, S. Dalal, & M. Sood (Eds.), Agile software development (pp. 1-22). Scrivener Publishing-Wiley Press.
  • Navarro-Cota, C., Molina, A. I., Redondo, M. A., & Lacave, C. (2025). Individual differences in computer programming: a systematic review. Behaviour & Information Technology, 44(2), 357-375. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2024.2317377
  • Noone, M., & Mooney, A. (2018). Visual and textual programming languages: a systematic review of the literature. Journal of Computers in Education, 5(2), 149-174. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-018-0101-5
  • Pilkington, C. (2018). A playful approach to fostering motivation in a distance education computer programming course: Behaviour change and student perceptions. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 19(3), 282-298. http://dx.doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v19i3.3664
  • Plonka, L., Sharp, H., & van der Linden, J. (2012). Disengagement in pair programming: Does it matter? In M. Glinz, G. Murphy, & M. Pezze (Eds.), 34th International Conference on Software Engineering (pp. 496-506). IEEE Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ICSE.2012.6227166
  • Psycharis, S., & Kallia, M. (2017). The effects of computer programming on high school students' reasoning skills and mathematical self-efficacy and problem solving. Instructional Science, 45(5), 583-602. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-017-9421-5
  • Ramalingam, V., & Wiedenbeck, S. (1998). Development and validation of scores on a computer programming self-efficacy scale and group analyses of novice programmer self-efficacy. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 19(4) 365-379. https://doi.org/10.2190%2FC670-Y3C8-LTJ1-CT3P
  • Razzouk, R., & Shute, V. (2012). What is design thinking and why is it important? Review of Educational Research, 82(3), 330-348. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654312457429
  • Smith, M. O., Giugliano, A., & DeOrio, A. (2018). Long term effects of pair programming. IEEE Transactions on Education, 61(3), 187-194. https://doi.org/10.1109/TE.2017.2773024
  • Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research. Sage Press.
  • Tan, J. B., Wu, L., & Ma, S. S. (2024). Collaborative dialogue patterns of pair programming and their impact on programming self-efficacy and coding performance. British Journal of Educational Technology, 55(3). https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13412
  • Tsai, C. Y. (2019). Improving students' understanding of basic programming concepts through visual programming language: The role of self-efficacy. Computers in Human Behavior, 95, 224-232. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.11.038
  • Tsompanoudi, D., Satratzemi, M., & Xinogalos, S. (2015). Distributed pair programming using collaboration scripts: An educational system and initial results. Informatics in Education, 14(2), 291-314. https://doi.org/10.15388/infedu.2015.17
  • Wing, J. M. (2006). Computational thinking. Communications of the ACM, 49(3), 33-35. https://doi.org/10.1145/1118178.1118215
  • Xu, F., & Correia, A. -P. (2024). Adopting distributed pair programming as an effective team learning activity: a systematic review. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 36(2), 320-349. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-023-09356-3
  • Xu, W., Wu, Y., & Ouyang, F. (2023). Multimodal learning analytics of collaborative patterns during pair programming in higher education. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 20(1), 8. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-022-00377-z
  • Yaman, S., & Dede, Y. (2008). A scale for adults’ problem solving skills. Journal of Educational Sciences & Practices, 7(14), 251-269
  • Yang, Y. F., Lee, C. I., & Chang, C. K. (2016). Learning motivation and retention effects of pair programming in data structures courses. Education for Information, 32(3), 249-267. https://doi.org/10.3233/efi-160976
  • Zarb, M., & Hughes, J. (2015). Breaking the communication barrier: Guidelines to aid communication within pair programming. Computer Science Education, 25(2), 120-151. https://doi.org/10.1080/08993408.2015.1033125
  • Zhong, B., & Wang, J. (2021). Exploring the non-significant difference on students’ cognitive load imposed by robotics tasks in pair learning. International Journal of Social Robotics, 14, 3-13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-021-00764-y
  • Zhong, B. C., & Li, T. T. (2020). Can pair learning improve students' troubleshooting performance in robotics education? Journal of Educational Computing Research, 58(1), 220-248. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633119829191
Toplam 59 adet kaynakça vardır.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil İngilizce
Konular Öğretim Tasarımı, Yükseköğretim Çalışmaları (Diğer)
Bölüm Araştırma Makalesi
Yazarlar

Ömer Demir 0000-0002-4178-0221

Murat Çınar 0000-0003-4012-4174

Süleyman Sadi Seferoğlu 0000-0002-5010-484X

Yayımlanma Tarihi 27 Eylül 2025
Gönderilme Tarihi 22 Ekim 2024
Kabul Tarihi 17 Temmuz 2025
Yayımlandığı Sayı Yıl 2025 Cilt: 15 Sayı: 3

Kaynak Göster

APA Demir, Ö., Çınar, M., & Seferoğlu, S. S. (2025). The Impact of Solo and Pair Programming Modes on Problem-solving Skills and Motivation: Students’ Reflections on Pair Programming. Anadolu Journal of Educational Sciences International, 15(3), 1145-1170. https://doi.org/10.18039/ajesi.1570205
AMA Demir Ö, Çınar M, Seferoğlu SS. The Impact of Solo and Pair Programming Modes on Problem-solving Skills and Motivation: Students’ Reflections on Pair Programming. AJESI. Eylül 2025;15(3):1145-1170. doi:10.18039/ajesi.1570205
Chicago Demir, Ömer, Murat Çınar, ve Süleyman Sadi Seferoğlu. “The Impact of Solo and Pair Programming Modes on Problem-solving Skills and Motivation: Students’ Reflections on Pair Programming”. Anadolu Journal of Educational Sciences International 15, sy. 3 (Eylül 2025): 1145-70. https://doi.org/10.18039/ajesi.1570205.
EndNote Demir Ö, Çınar M, Seferoğlu SS (01 Eylül 2025) The Impact of Solo and Pair Programming Modes on Problem-solving Skills and Motivation: Students’ Reflections on Pair Programming. Anadolu Journal of Educational Sciences International 15 3 1145–1170.
IEEE Ö. Demir, M. Çınar, ve S. S. Seferoğlu, “The Impact of Solo and Pair Programming Modes on Problem-solving Skills and Motivation: Students’ Reflections on Pair Programming”, AJESI, c. 15, sy. 3, ss. 1145–1170, 2025, doi: 10.18039/ajesi.1570205.
ISNAD Demir, Ömer vd. “The Impact of Solo and Pair Programming Modes on Problem-solving Skills and Motivation: Students’ Reflections on Pair Programming”. Anadolu Journal of Educational Sciences International 15/3 (Eylül2025), 1145-1170. https://doi.org/10.18039/ajesi.1570205.
JAMA Demir Ö, Çınar M, Seferoğlu SS. The Impact of Solo and Pair Programming Modes on Problem-solving Skills and Motivation: Students’ Reflections on Pair Programming. AJESI. 2025;15:1145–1170.
MLA Demir, Ömer vd. “The Impact of Solo and Pair Programming Modes on Problem-solving Skills and Motivation: Students’ Reflections on Pair Programming”. Anadolu Journal of Educational Sciences International, c. 15, sy. 3, 2025, ss. 1145-70, doi:10.18039/ajesi.1570205.
Vancouver Demir Ö, Çınar M, Seferoğlu SS. The Impact of Solo and Pair Programming Modes on Problem-solving Skills and Motivation: Students’ Reflections on Pair Programming. AJESI. 2025;15(3):1145-70.
 Kapak Resmi İndir

Creative Commons License
AJESI’de yayınlanan makalelerde bu lisans kullanılmaktadır.

Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Sherpa Romeo kayıtlıdır.