The effects of a progressive scaffolding approach on middle school students'computational thinking skills and self-efficacy
Pages 107 - 112
Abstract
Computational thinking (CT) is considered a necessary skill for the 21st century. Researchers have increasingly focused on how to effectively enhance students’ CT in programming courses. This study proposes a progressive scaffolding approach with flowcharts and visual programming codes applied to a visual programming course based on an open-source hardware platform to improve CT skills and self-efficacy in middle school students. Forty-five middle school students in grades 7 and 8 participated in this study. Both quantitative and qualitative data were collected by using CT tests, scales, and semi-structured interviews. A repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) examined differences in CT skills and self-efficacy on the pre-test, mid-test, and post-test. The results indicated that the progressive scaffolding approach significantly improved middle school students’ CT skills and self-efficacy. These results reveal the effectiveness of the progressive scaffolding approach in improving the computational thinking of middle school students in a visual programming course with an open-source hardware platform, which helps to extend the design of progressive scaffolding.
References
[1]
Wing, J. M. (2006). Computational thinking. Communications of the ACM, 49(3), 33–35. https://doi.org/10.1145/1118178.1118215
[2]
Saidin, N. D., Khalid, F., Martin, R., Kuppusamy, Y., & Munusamy, N. A. (2021). Benefits and Challenges of Applying Computational Thinking in Education. International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 11(5), 248–254. https://doi.org/10.18178/ijiet.2021.11.5.1519
[3]
Hsu, T. C., Chang, S. C., & Hung, Y. T. (2018). How to learn and how to teach computational thinking: Suggestions based on a review of the literature. Computers & Education, 126, 296–310. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.07.004
[4]
Xu, E., Wang, W., & Wang, Q. (2022). A meta-analysis of the effectiveness of programming teaching in promoting K-12 students’ computational thinking. Education and Information Technologies, 28(6), 6619–6644. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11445-2
[5]
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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.09.012
[6]
Yang, K., Liu, X., & Chen, G. (2020). The Influence of Robots on Students’ Computational Thinking: A Literature Review. International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 10(8), 627-631. https://doi.org/10.18178/ijiet.2020.10.8.1435
[7]
Florez, F., Casallas, R., Hern ́ andez, M., Reyes, A., Restrepo, S., & Danies, G. (2017). Changing a generation's way of thinking: teaching computational thinking through programming. Review of Educational Research, 87(4), 834-860. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654317710096.
[8]
Chen, C. H., Liu, T. K., & Huang, K. (2021). Scaffolding vocational high school students’ computational thinking with cognitive and metacognitive prompts in learning about programmable logic controllers. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 55(3), 527–544. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2021.1983894
[9]
Andrzejewska, M., & Stolinska, A. (2022). Do Structured Flowcharts Outperform Pseudocode? Evidence From Eye Movements. IEEE Access, 10, 132965–132975. https://doi.org/10.1109/access.2022.3230981
[10]
Peng, J., Wang, M., Sampson, D., & Van Merriënboer, J. J. G. (2019). Using a visualisation-based and progressive learning environment as a cognitive tool for learning computer programming. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 35(2). https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.4676
[11]
Zhang, J. H., Meng, B., Zou, L. C., Zhu, Y., & Hwang, G. J. (2021). Progressive flowchart development scaffolding to improve university students’ computational thinking and programming self-efficacy. Interactive Learning Environments, 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2021.1943687
[12]
Román-González, M., Pérez-González, J., Moreno-León, J., & Robles, G. (2018). Extending the nomological network of computational thinking with non-cognitive factors. Computers in Human Behavior, 80, 441–459.
[13]
Brennan, K., & Resnick, M. (2012). New frameworks for studying and assessing the development of computational thinking. Proceedings of the 2012 Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association (pp. 1–25), Vancouver, Canada.
[14]
Merino-Armero, J. M., González-Calero, J. A., & Cózar-Gutiérrez, R. (2021). Computational thinking in K-12 education. An insight through meta-analysis. Journal of Research on Technology in Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2020.1870250
[15]
Ezeamuzie, N. O., & Leung, J. S. C. (2021, July 27). Computational Thinking Through an Empirical Lens: A Systematic Review of Literature. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 60(2), 481–511. https://doi.org/10.1177/07356331211033158
[16]
CSTA, & ISTE (2011). Operational Definition of Computational Thinking for K-12 Education. http://www.iste.org/docs/pdfs/Operational-Defnition-of-Computational-Thinking.pdf. Accessed 2 Aug 2019.
[17]
Kalelioglu, F., Gülbahar, Y., & Kukul, V. (2016). A framework for computational thinking based on a systematic research review. Baltic Journal of Modern Computing, 4(3), 583–596.
[18]
Spangsberg, T. H., & Brynskov, M. (2018). The Nature of Computational Thinking in Computing Education. International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 8(10), 742–747. https://doi.org/10.18178/ijiet.2018.8.10.1132
[19]
Wang, C., Shen, J., & Chao, J. (2022). Integrating Computational Thinking in STEM Education: A Literature Review. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 20(8), 1949–1972. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-021-10227-5
[20]
Yin, Y., Hadad, R., Tang, X., & Lin, Q. (2020). Improving and assessing computational thinking in maker activities: The integration with physics and engineering learning. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 29(2), 189–214.
[21]
Harrison, A., Hulse, T., Manzo, D., Micciolo, M., Ottmar, E., & Arroyo, I. (2018). Computational thinking through game creation in STEM classrooms. Paper presented at the 19th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education, 2018, London, UK.
[22]
Korkmaz, Z., Çakir, R., & Özden, M. Y. (2017). A validity and reliability study of the computational thinking scales (CTS). Computers in Human Behavior, 72, 558-569. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.01.005
[23]
Ma, H., Zhao, M., Wang, H. Promoting pupils’ computational thinking skills and self-efficacy: a problem-solving instructional approach. Education Tech Research Dev 69, 1599–1616 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-021-10016-5
[24]
Wood, D., Bruner, J. S., & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 17(2), 89–100. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.1976.tb00381.x
[25]
Sun, J. C. Y., & Hsu, K. Y. C. (2019). A smart eye-tracking feedback scaffolding approach to improving students’ learning self-efficacy and performance in a C programming course. Computers in Human Behavior, 95, 66–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.01.036
[26]
Tikva, C., & Tambouris, E. (2023). The effect of scaffolding programming games and attitudes towards programming on the development of Computational Thinking. Education and Information Technologies, 28(6), 6845-6867. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11465-y
[27]
Chen, C. H., Hwang, G. J., & Tsai, C. H. (2014). A Progressive Prompting Approach to Conducting Context-Aware Learning Activities for Natural Science Courses. Interacting With Computers, 26(4), 348–359. https://doi.org/10.1093/iwc/iwu004
[28]
Shuell T. J. (1990). Phases of meaningful learning. Review of Educational Research, 60(4), 531–547.
[29]
Zhong, B., & Si, Q. (2021). Troubleshooting to Learn via Scaffolds: Effect on Students’ Ability and Cognitive Load in a Robotics Course. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 59(1), 95–118. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633120951871
[30]
Korkmaz, Z., & Bai, X. (2019). Adapting Computational Thinking Scale (CTS) for Chinese High School Students and Their Thinking Scale Skills Level. Participatory Educational Research, 6(1), 10–26. https://doi.org/10.17275/per.19.2.6.1
[31]
Chong, S. L., & Choy, M. (2004). Towards a progressive learning environment for programming courses. In New Horizon in web-based learning, 200-205. https://doi.org/10.1142/9789812702494_0024
Index Terms
- The effects of a progressive scaffolding approach on middle school students'computational thinking skills and self-efficacy
Recommendations
Comments
Information & Contributors
Information
Published In
September 2023
532 pages
ISBN:9798400709111
DOI:10.1145/3629296
Copyright © 2023 ACM.
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].
Publisher
Association for Computing Machinery
New York, NY, United States
Publication History
Published: 15 January 2024
Check for updates
Author Tags
Qualifiers
- Research-article
- Research
- Refereed limited
Conference
ICETC 2023
ICETC 2023: The 15th International Conference on Education Technology and Computers
September 26 - 28, 2023
Barcelona, Spain
Contributors
Other Metrics
Bibliometrics & Citations
Bibliometrics
Article Metrics
- 0Total Citations
- 65Total Downloads
- Downloads (Last 12 months)59
- Downloads (Last 6 weeks)8
Reflects downloads up to 27 Feb 2025
Other Metrics
Citations
View Options
Login options
Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.
Sign inFull Access
View options
View or Download as a PDF file.
PDFeReader
View online with eReader.
eReaderHTML Format
View this article in HTML Format.
HTML Format