Yeni Piagetçi Kurama Göre Bilişim Teknolojileri Öğretmen Adaylarının Soyutlama Düzeylerinin ve Programlama Davranışlarının Belirlenmesi

Yıl 2018, , 1 - 26, 01.04.2018

Hüseyin Özçınar

https://doi.org/10.30964/auebfd.404978

Öz

Bu araştırmanın amacı bilişim teknolojileri öğretmen
adaylarının yeni Piagetçi kurama göre soyutlama becerilerinin belirlenmesidir.
Soyutlama düzeylerine göre katılımcıların programlama davranışlarının
belirlenmesi bu araştırmanın bir diğer amacıdır. Araştırma nitel araştırma
olarak desenlenmiştir. Araştırmanın katılımcıları Eğitim Fakültesi Bilgisayar
ve Öğretim Teknolojileri Eğitimi Bölümünde İnternet Tabanlı Programlama dersini
alan ve araştırmaya katılmayı kabul eden 15 bilişim teknolojileri öğretmen
adayından oluşmuştur. Öğretmen adaylarına iki tane kod okuma bir tane kod yazma
sorusundan oluşan toplam üç soru yöneltilmiş, sesli düşünerek soruları
yanıtlamaları istenmiştir. Kod okuma soruları kağıt üzerinde, kod yazma sorusu
ise bilgisayar ortamında yanıtlanmıştır. Temel veri kaynağı olarak öğrencilerin
sesli düşünme kayıtları, yardımcı veri kaynakları olarak da öğrencilerin kod
yazma süreçlerine ilişkin video kayıtları ve kod okuma sorularına verdikleri
yazılı yanıtlar kullanılmıştır. Araştırmaya katılan öğrencilerden ikisinin yeni
Piagetçi kurama göre duyusal-motor düzeyde, altısının işlem öncesi, beşinin ise
somut işlemler döneminde olduğu görülmüştür.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Yeni Piagetçi kuram, bilgisayar programlama, soyutlama, programlama davranışları

Kaynakça

• Aleven, V., Roll, I., McLaren, B. M., and Koedinger, K. R. (2016). Help helps, but only so much: Research on help seeking with intelligent tutoring systems. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 26(1), 205–223. Bennedsen, J., and Caspersen, M. E. (2006). Abstraction ability as an indicator of success for learning object-oriented programming? ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 38(2), 39-43.
• Blikstein, P., Worsley, M., Piech, C., Sahami, M., Cooper, S., and Koller, D. (2014). Programming pluralism: Using learning analytics to detect patterns in the learning of computer programming. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 23(4), 561-599.
• Clancy, M. J. and Linn, M. C. (1999). Patterns and pedagogy. SIGCSE '99. New Orleans, LA, USA, ACM.
• Clear, T., Edwards, J., Lister, R., Simon, B., Thompson, E., and Whalley, J. (2008, January). The teaching of novice computer programmers: bringing the scholarly-research approach to Australia. In Proceedings of the tenth conference on Australasian computing education-Volume 78 (pp. 63-68). Australian Computer Society, Inc.
• Corney, M., Teague, D., Ahadi, A., and Lister, R. (2012, January). Some empirical results for neo-Piagetian reasoning in novice programmers and the relationship to code explanation questions. In Proceedings of the Fourteenth Australasian Computing Education Conference-Volume 123 (pp. 77-86). Australian Computer Society, Inc.
• Creswell, J. W. (2013). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage publications. de Raadt, M., Toleman, M., and Watson, R. (2004). Training strategic problem solvers. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 36(2), 48-51.
• Deek, F.P., Kimmel, H., and McHugh, J.A. (1998). Pedagogical changes in the delivery of the first-course in computer science: Problem solving, then programming. Journal of Engineering Education, 87, 313–320.
• Demetriou, A. (Ed.). (1988). The neo-piagetian theories of cognitive development: Toward an integration. Amsterdam: North Holland.
• Ericsson, K. A. and Simon, H. A. 1993, Protocol analysis: Verbal Reports as Data Rev. edn (Cambridge, Massachu- setts: MIT Press). Fincher, S. (1999). What are we doing when we teach programming? 29th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, 12a4-1–12a4-5.
• Gelman, R. (1978). Cognitive development. Annual Review of Psychology, 29, 297-332.
• Gluga, R., Kay, J., Lister, R., and Teague, D. (2012, September). On the reliability of classifying programming tasks using a neo-piagetian theory of cognitive development. In Proceedings of the ninth annual international conference on International computing education research (pp. 31-38). ACM.
• Hanks, B. (2008). Problems encountered by novice pair programmers. Journal on Educational Resources in Computing (JERIC), 7(4), 2.
• Hughes, J., and Parkes, S. (2003). Trends in the use of verbal protocol analysis in software engineering research. Behaviour & Information Technology, 22(2), 127-140.
• Kay, J., Barg, M., Fekete, A., Greening, T., Hollands, O., Kingston, J., and Crawford, K. (2000). Problem-based learning for foundation computer science courses. Computer Science Education, 10, 109–128.
• Linn, M.C., and Dalbey, J. (1989). Cognitive consequences of programming instruction. In E. Soloway & J.C. Spohrer (Eds.), Studying the novice programmer (pp. 57–81). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
• Lister, R. (2011, January). Concrete and other neo-Piagetian forms of reasoning in the novice programmer. In Proceedings of the Thirteenth Australasian Computing Education Conference-Volume 114 (pp. 9-18). Australian Computer Society, Inc.
• Lister, R. F. (2007). The neglected middle novice programmer: Reading and writing without abstracting. National Advisory Committee on Computing Qualifications.
• Lu, Y., and Hsiao, I. H. (2017). Personalized Information Seeking Assistant (PISA): from programming information seeking to learning. Information Retrieval Journal, 1-23.
• McCracken, M., Almstrum, V., Diaz, D., Guzdial, M., Hagan, D., Kolikant, Y. B. D., ... and Wilusz, T. (2001). A multi-national, multi-institutional study of assessment of programming skills of first-year CS students. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 33(4), 125-180.
• Morra, S., Gobbo, C., Marini, Z., and Sheese, R. (2012). Cognitive development: neo-Piagetian perspectives. Psychology Press. Mow, I. C. (2008). Issues and difficulties in teaching novice computer programming. Innovative techniques in instruction technology, e-learning, e-assessment, and education, 199-204.
• Murphy, L., Fitzgerald, S., Lister, R., and McCauley, R. (2012, September). Ability to'explain in plain english'linked to proficiency in computer-based programming. In Proceedings of the ninth annual international conference on International computing education research (pp. 111-118). ACM.
• Özdinç, F., ve Altun, A. (2014). Bilişim teknolojileri öğretmeni adaylarının programlama sürecini etkileyen faktörler. İlköğretim Online, 13(4).
• Özer Şanal, S. ve Erdem, M. (2017, Mayıs). Kodlama ve Robotik Çalışmalarını Problem Çözme Süreçlerine Etkisi: Sesli Düşünme Protokol Analizi.
• Perkins, D. N., Hancock, C., Hobbs, R., Martin, F., and Simmons, R. (1986). Conditions of learning in novice programmers. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 2(1), 37-55.
• Perkins, D. N. and Martin, F. (1986). Fragile Knowledge and Neglected Strategies in Novice Programmers. Chapter 15 of Empirical Studies of Programmers. E. Soloway and S. Iyengar. Norwoo, New Jersey, Ablex Publishing Corporation.
• Robins, A., Haden, P., and Garner, S. (2006, January). Problem distributions in a CS1 course. In Proceedings of the 8th Australasian Conference on Computing Education-Volume 52 (pp. 165-173). Australian Computer Society, Inc..
• Robins, A., Rountree, J., and Rountree, N. (2003). Learning and teaching programming: A review and discussion. Computer Science Education, 13(2), 137-172.
• Roll, I., Baker, R. S. D., Aleven, V., and Koedinger, K. R. (2014). On the benefits of seeking (and avoiding) help in online problem-solving environments. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 23(4), 537-560.
• Soloway, E. (1986). Learning to program= learning to construct mechanisms and explanations. Communications of the ACM, 29(9), 850-858.
• Teague, D. (2015). Neo-Piagetian Theory and the novice programmer (Doctoral dissertation, Queensland University of Technology).
• Teague, D. M., Corney, M. W., Fidge, C. J., Roggenkamp, M. G., Ahadi, A., and Lister, R. (2012, December). Using neo-Piagetian theory, formative in-Class tests and think alouds to better understand student thinking: a preliminary report on computer programming. In Proceedings of 2012 Australasian Association for Engineering Education (AAEE) Annual Conference.
• Teague, D., and Lister, R. (2014, January). Manifestations of preoperational reasoning on similar programming tasks. In Proceedings of the Sixteenth Australasian Computing Education Conference-Volume 148 (pp. 65-74). Australian Computer Society, Inc.
• Teague, D., Corney, M., Ahadi, A., and Lister, R. (2013, January). A qualitative think aloud study of the early neo-piagetian stages of reasoning in novice programmers. In Proceedings of the Fifteenth Australasian Computing Education Conference-Volume 136 (pp. 87-95). Australian Computer Society, Inc.
• Teague, D., Corney, M., Ahadi, A., and Lister, R. (2013, January). A qualitative think aloud study of the early neo-piagetian stages of reasoning in novice programmers. In Proceedings of the Fifteenth Australasian Computing Education Conference-Volume 136 (pp. 87-95). Australian Computer Society, Inc..
• Winslow, L. E. (1996). Programming pedagogy—a psychological overview. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 28(3), 17-22.