A Comparative Case Study to Experiences of High School Students Using Text-Based versus Hybrid-Based Environments in Programming Education

Year 2022, , 492 - 512, 30.08.2022

Alper Unal , Fatma Burcu Topu

https://doi.org/10.30900/kafkasegt.1053820

Abstract

This study aimed to comparatively determine the experiences of high school students in programming language education via text-based or hybrid-based programming environments. A comparative case study was conducted in this study. The participants consisted of a total of 19 high school students with no previous experience in any programming language, nine of them in the text-based programming group and ten of them in the hybrid-based programming group. The qualitative data were obtained
with a semi-structured interview at the end of the 10-week programming education process and analyzed by content analysis. The findings were presented in dimensions of difficulties and conveniences in a programming language course, anxiety about the programming process, course outcomes, and their preferences for future programming courses. In each dimension, even if common codes were obtained for both groups in some themes, the effects of these codes on students differed in each group. According to the findings, in the programming process, students faced some difficulties and conveniences in terms of mental effort. While “trying to figure out where they made a mistake” created a difficulty, “using comprehensible visual elements in the hybrid-based environment” as a convenience had the highest frequency among the codes. Some situations caused learning anxiety in
students such as worry about failing, while others did not. The students achieved positive and negative course outcomes. “Understanding the logic of coding and acquiring programming skills” which was one of the positive outcomes had the highest frequency. In addition, students' preferences regarding whether or not to attend the future programming courses changed for various reasons. “Unwilling to programming language education” was one of these findings. Considering the scarcity of programming education studies via text-based and hybrid-based programming environments, the results and implications of this study are to strengthen future research by providing rich data.

Keywords

programming language education, high school students, Text-based programming, hybrid-based programming, programming language education, high school students

Project Number

yok

References

• Adi, P. D. P., & Kitagawa, A. (2019, November). A review of the Blockly programming on M5Stack board and MQTT based for programming education. In 2019 IEEE 11th International Conference on Engineering Education (ICEED) (pp. 102-107). IEEE. doi:10.1109/ICEED47294.2019.8994922
• Asai, S., Phuong, D. T. D., Harada, F., & Shimakawa, H. (2019). Predicting cognitive load in acquisition of programming abilities. International Journal of Electrical & Computer Engineering, 9(4), 2088-8708. doi:10.11591/ijece.v9i4.pp3262-3271
• Bak, N., Chang, B. M., & Choi, K. (2020). Smart Block: A visual block language and its programming environment for IoT. Journal of Computer Languages, 60, 100999. doi:10.1016/j.cola.2020.100999
• Bartlett, L., & Vavrus, F. (2017). Comparative case studies: An innovative approach. Nordic Journal of Comparative and International Education (NJCIE), 1(1), 5-17. doi:10.7577/njcie.1929 Baxter, P., & Jack, S. (2008). Qualitative case study methodology: Study design and implementation for novice researchers. The Qualitative Report, 13(4), 544-559. Retrieved August, 10, 2021. http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR13-4/baxter.pdf
• Bosch, N., & D’Mello, S. (2017). The affective experience of novice computer programmers. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 27(1), 181-206. doi:10.1007/s40593-015-0069-5
• Bubnó, K., & Takács, V. L. (2017, September). The mathability of word problems as initial computer programming exercises. In 2017 8th IEEE International Conference on Cognitive Infocommunications (CogInfoCom) (pp. 39-44). IEEE. doi:10.1109/coginfocom.2017.8268213
• Chang, S. E. (2005). Computer anxiety and perception of task complexity in learning programming-related skills. Computers in Human Behavior, 21(5), 713-728. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2004.02.021
• Chen, T. L., Chen, Y. R., Yu, M. S., & Lee, J. K. (2021). NNBlocks: A Blockly framework for AI computing. The Journal of Supercomputing, 1-31. doi:10.1007/s11227-021-03631-9
• Çakıroğlu, Ü., Çevik, İ., Köşeli, E., & Karaman, M. (2021). Understanding Students’ Abstractions in Block-Based Programming Environments: A Performance based Evaluation. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 41(2021), 100888. doi:10.1016/j.tsc.2021.100888
• Çakiroğlu, Ü., Suiçmez, S. S., Kurtoğlu, Y. B., Sari, A., Yildiz, S., & Öztürk, M. (2018). Exploring perceived cognitive load in learning programming via Scratch. Research in Learning Technology, 26. 1-20. doi: 10.25304/rlt.v26.1888
• Debue, N., & Van De Leemput, C. (2014). What does germane load mean? An empirical contribution to the cognitive load theory. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 1099. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01099
• Demirer, V., & Sak, N. (2016). Programming education and new approaches around the world and in Turkey. Journal of Theory and Practice in Education, 12(3), 521-546. Retrieved December, 16, 2019. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/262355
• Fraser, N. (2015). Ten things we've learned from Blockly. In 2015 IEEE Blocks and Beyond Workshop (Blocks and Beyond) (pp. 49-50). IEEE. doi:10.1109/blocks.2015.7369000
• Garner, S. (2002). Reducing the cognitive load on novice programmers. In Proceedings of ED-MEDIA World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia & Telecommunications (pp. 578-583). AACE. Retrieved December, 06, 2019. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED477013.pdf
• GitHub (2019). Retrieved November, 15, 2019. https://octoverse.github.com/
• Gomes, A., & Mendes, A. J. (2007, June). Learning to program-difficulties and solutions. In International Conference on Engineering Education (ICEE). Retrieved November, 20, 2018. http://icee2007.dei.uc.pt/proceedings/papers/411.pdf
• Gomez, M. J., Moresi, M., & Benotti, L. (2019). Text-based programming in elementary school: A comparative study of programming abilities in children with and without block-based experience. In Proceedings of the Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education (pp. 402-408). ACM. doi:10.1145/3304221.3319734
• Goodrick, D. (2014). Comparative case studies. Methodological briefs-impact evaluation no. 9 (No. innpub754). Retrieved August, 10, 2021. https://www.unicef-irc.org/publications/pdf/brief_9_comparativecasestudies_eng.pdf
• Gorson, J., & O'Rourke, E. (2020, August). Why do CS1 students think they're bad at programming? Investigating self-efficacy and self-assessments at three universities. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research (pp. 170-181). ACM. doi:10.1145/3372782.3406273
• Grover, S., & Pea, R. (2013). Computational thinking in K–12: A review of the state of the field. Educational Researcher, 42(1), 38-43. doi:10.3102/0013189X12463051
• Gülbahar, Y., & Kalelioğlu, F. (2018). Bilişim teknolojileri ve bilgisayar bilimi: Öğretim programı güncelleme süreci. Millî Eğitim Dergisi, 47(217), 5-23. Retrieved July, 27, 2021. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/539818
• Hsu, T. C., & Hwang, G. J. (2021). Interaction of visual interface and academic levels with young students’ anxiety, playfulness, and enjoyment in programming for robot control. Universal Access in the Information Society, 1-13. doi:10.1007/s10209-021-00821-3
• Ionescu, T. B. (2021). Leveraging graphical user interface automation for generic robot programming. Robotics, 10(1), 3. doi:10.3390/robotics10010003
• Jancheski, M. (2017). Improving teaching and learning computer programming in schools through educational software. Olympiads in Informatics, 11, 55-75. doi:10.15388/ioi.2017.05
• Jung, K., Nguyen, V. T., & Lee, J. (2021). BlocklyXR: An interactive extended reality toolkit for digital storytelling. Applied Sciences, 11(3), 1073. doi:10.3390/app11031073
• Kelleher, C., & Pausch, R. (2005). Lowering the barriers to programming: A taxonomy of programming environments and languages for novice programmers. ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR), 37(2), 83-137. doi:10.21236/ada457911
• Li, X. (2016). Application of cognitive load theory in programming teaching. Journal of Higher Education Theory and Practice, 16(6), 57-65. Retrieved December, 01, 2017. http://www.m.www.na-businesspress.com/JHETP/LiX_Web16_6_.pdf
• López, J. M. S., Otero, R. B., & García-Cervigón, S. D. L. (2021). Introducing robotics and block programming in elementary education. Revista Iberoamericana de Educación a Distancia (RIED), 24(1), 95-113. doi:10.5944/ried.24.1.27649
• Lutz, M. (2013). Learning Python: Powerful object-oriented programming. 5th ed. O'Reilly Media, Inc. Lye, S. Y., & Koh, J. H. L. (2014). Review on teaching and learning of computational thinking through programming: What is next for K-12? Computers in Human Behavior, 41, 51-61. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2014.09.012
• Mavilidi, M. F., & Zhong, L. (2019). Exploring the development and research focus of cognitive load theory, as described by its founders: Interviewing John Sweller, Fred Paas, and Jeroen van Merriënboer. Educational Psychology Review, 1-10. doi:10.1007/s10648-019-09463-7
• Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2015). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. John Wiley & Sons.
• MoNE (2017). Bilgisayar bilimi dersi öğretim programı. Retrieved November, 30. 2017. http://mufredat.meb.gov.tr/ProgramDetay.aspx?PID=374
• MoNE (2018). Bilgisayar bilimi dersi (kur 1-2) öğretim programı. Retrieved Jenuary, 10, 2018. http://mufredat.meb.gov.tr/ProgramDetay.aspx?PID=335
• Moons, J., & De Backer, C. (2013). The design and pilot evaluation of an interactive learning environment for introductory programming influenced by cognitive load theory and constructivism. Computers & Education, 60(1), 368-384. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2012.08.009
• Moreno, R. (2010). Cognitive load theory: More food for thought. Instructional Science, 38(2), 135-141. doi:10.1007/s11251-009-9122-9
• Mumcu, H. Y., Mumcu, S., & Çakıroğlu, Ü. (2020). Use of Arithmetic Operation Skills in Block Based Programming Environments: A Comparative Case Study. Journal of Computer and Education Research, 8(16), 404-427. doi:10.18009/jcer.705822
• Owolabi, J., Olanipekun, P., & Iwerima, J. (2014). Mathematics ability and anxiety, computer and programming anxieties, age and gender as determinants of achievement in basic programming. GSTF Journal on Computing (JoC), 3(4), 109-114. doi:10.7603/s40601-013-0047-4
• Rahaman, M. M., Mahfuj, E., Haque, M. M., Shekdar, R. S., & Islam, K. Z. (2020). Educational robot for learning programming through Blockly based mobile application. Journal of Technological Science & Engineering (JTSE), 1(2), 21-25. Retrieved August, 09. 2021. https://rsepress.com/index.php/jtse/article/view/15/45
• Rodríguez-Gil, L., García-Zubia, J., Orduña, P., Villar-Martinez, A., & López-De-Ipiña, D. (2019). New approach for conversational agent definition by non-programmers: A visual domain-specific language. IEEE Access, 7, 5262-5276. doi:10.1109/access.2018.2883500
• Rogerson, C., & Scott, E. (2010). The fear factor: How it affects students learning to program in a tertiary environment. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 9, 147-171. Retrieved December, 01, 2017. https://www.learntechlib.org/p/111361/.
• Salleh, S. M., Shukur, Z., & Judi, H. M. (2018). Scaffolding model for efficient programming learning based on cognitive load theory. International Journal of Pure and Applied Mathematics, 118(7 Special Issue), 77-82. Retrieved February, 21, 2019. https://acadpubl.eu/jsi/2018-118-7-9/articles/7/10.pdf
• Sanner, M. F. (1999). Python: A programming language for software integration and development. J Mol Graph Model, 17(1), 57-61. Retrieved November, 18, 2019. https://www.academia.edu/1831560/Python_a_programming_language_for_software_integration_and_development?from=cover_page
• Sano, Y., & Kagawa, K. (2019). Design of a programming environment for non-procedural programming languages using Blockly. The International Journal of E-Learning and Educational Technologies in the Digital Media (IJEETDM), 5(3), 93-101. doi:10.17781/p002614
• Seraj, M., Katterfeldt, E. S., Bub, K., Autexier, S., & Drechsler, R. (2019, November). Scratch and Google Blockly: How girls’ programming skills and attitudes are influenced. In Proceedings of the 19th Koli Calling International Conference on Computing Education Research (pp. 1-10). ACM. doi:10.1145/3364510.3364515
• Shih, W. C. (2017, June). Mining learners' behavioral sequential patterns in a Blockly visual programming educational game. In 2017 International Conference on Industrial Engineering, Management Science and Application (ICIMSA) (pp. 1-2). IEEE. doi:10.1109/ICIMSA.2017.7985594
• Shin, S., Park, P., & Bae, Y. (2013). The effects of an information-technology gifted program on friendship using scratch programming language and clutter. International Journal of Computer and Communication Engineering, 2(3), 246. Retrieved November, 18, 2019. http://www.ijcce.org/papers/181-J028.pdf
• Stachel, J., Marghitu, D., Brahim, T. B., Sims, R., Reynolds, L., & Czelusniak, V. (2013). Managing cognitive load in introductory programming courses: A cognitive aware scaffolding tool. Journal of Integrated Design and Process Science, 17(1), 37-54. doi:10.3233/jid-2013-0004 Stake, R. E. (2006). Multiple case study analysis. New York, NY: The Guilford Press
• Su, J. M., & Hsu, F. Y. (2017, July). Building a visualized learning tool to facilitate the concept learning of object-oriented programming. In 2017 6th IIAI International Congress on Advanced Applied Informatics (IIAI-AAI) (pp. 516-520). IEEE. doi:10.1109/IIAI-AAI.2017.180
• Sweller, J. (2010). Element interactivity and intrinsic, extraneous, and germane cognitive load. Educational Psychology Review, 22(2), 123-138. doi:10.1007/s10648-010-9128-5
• Topalli, D., & Cagiltay, N. E. (2018). Improving programming skills in engineering education through problem-based game projects with Scratch. Computers & Education, 120, 64-74. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2018.01.011
• Tsai, C. Y. (2019). Improving students' understanding of basic programming concepts through visual programming language: The role of self-efficacy. Computers in Human Behavior. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2018.11.038
• Tuomi, P., Multisilta, J., Saarikoski, P., & Suominen, J. (2018). Coding skills as a success factor for a society. Education and Information Technologies, 23(1), 419-434. doi:10.1007/s10639-017-9611-4
• Vaidyanathan, S. (2013, December). Opinion: We need coding in schools, but where are the teachers? Retrieved December, 01, 2017. https://www.edsurge.com/n/2013-12-09- opinion-we-need-coding-in-schools-but-where-are-the-teachers
• Valsamakis, Y., Savidis, A., Agapakis, E., & Katsarakis, A. (2020, August). Collaborative Visual Programming Workspace for Blockly. In 2020 IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages and Human-Centric Computing (VL/HCC) (pp. 1-6). IEEE. doi:10.1109/VL/HCC50065.2020.9127253
• Weintrop, D., Shepherd, D. C., Francis, P., & Franklin, D. (2017, October). Blockly goes to work: Block-based programming for industrial robots. In 2017 IEEE Blocks and Beyond Workshop (B&B) (pp. 29-36). IEEE. doi:10.1109/BLOCKS.2017.8120406
• Weintrop, D., & Wilensky, U. (2017). Comparing block-based and text-based programming in high school computer science classrooms. ACM Transactions on Computing Education (TOCE), 18(1), 29-36. doi:10.1145/3089799
• Weintrop, D., & Wilensky, U. (2018). How block-based, text-based, and hybrid block/text modalities shape novice programming practices. International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction, 17, 83-92. doi:10.1016/j.ijcci.2018.04.005
• Weintrop, D., & Wilensky, U. (2019). Transitioning from introductory block-based and text-based environments to professional programming languages in high school computer science classrooms. Computers & Education, 142(103646), 1-17. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103646
• Winterer, M., Salomon, C., Köberle, J., Ramler, R., & Schittengruber, M. (2020, September). An Expert Review on the Applicability of Blockly for Industrial Robot Programming. In 2020 25th IEEE International Conference on Emerging Technologies and Factory Automation (ETFA) (Vol. 1, pp. 1231-1234). IEEE. doi:10.1109/ETFA46521.2020.9212036
• Yiğit, M.F. (2016). Investigating the effect of instruction through visual programming environment on students' learning computer programming and attitudes toward programming (Master's Thesis). Retrieved April, 15, 2019 from Council of Higher Education database in Turkey. (Thesis No. 442990). https://tez.yok.gov.tr/UlusalTezMerkezi/tezSorguSonucYeni.jsp
• Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
• Yukselturk, E., & Altiok, S. (2017). An investigation of the effects of programming with Scratch on the preservice IT teachers’ self‐efficacy perceptions and attitudes towards computer programming. British Journal of Educational Technology, 48(3), 789-801. doi:10.1111/bjet.12453