The Effect of Coding Teaching on Students’ Self-Efficacy Perceptions of Technology and Design Courses †
Abstract
:1. Introduction
1.1. Aim of the Research
In Technology and Design Courses
- Is there a significant difference between the pre- and post-test self-efficacy scores by the experimental and control groups?
- Is there a significant difference between the post- and permanency-test self-efficacy scores by the experimental and control groups?
- How do students, upon receiving coding teaching, feel about the effectiveness of technology and design courses?
1.2. Limitations
- This research was conducted among seventh grade students at Şehit Hüseyin Ruso Secondary school, North Cyprus, in the 2016–2017 academic year.
- This study was limited to “technology and design, architectural design, mechanical design, renewable energy technologies, technologies facilitating life for the handicapped, advertisement and free-designing”.
- Personal computers and electronic boards were used in teaching activities in experimental research.
2. Materials and Methods
- A needs analysis in technology and design course was done among 613 students, picked through a stratified sampling method from State schools in North Cyprus. The result of the analysis (Cronbach’s Alpha 0.91) showed that 68.9% of the seventh grade students expressed the need for a revised technology and design teaching program (Table A1). In a study, Büyüköztürk [58] stated that a 10% sampling size would be sufficient to raise the level of representation and minimize errors. In this needs analysis, the targeted sampling rate for students was 20%. The participants in this research were 3116 seventh grade students. This number was specified in the light of the current information obtained from the Office of Secondary Education.
- The targeted outcomes of the program were determined according to the items in the needs analysis. The outcomes were classified on the basis of cognitive levels (Table A2).
- With the help of university experts, Technology and Design course plans consisting of coding, were made and administered to the experimental group to reach the aims (Table A3).
- Student-centered lesson plans were written and put into practice and the students were kept active, mostly doing group-work activities. The lessons were prepared in an ASSURE teaching design, in which paper, pencils, electronic boards, and laptops were used as teaching tools. Examples of students’ projects can be seen in Supplementary Materials.
2.1. The Participants
2.2. Data Collection Tools
3. Results
P26 explained, “We play games by giving codes, create our own games, prepare advertisements and animate cartoons. We did a lot of things”.
“Coding in Technology and Design courses made it different from other subjects, because we do not do any applications with other subject teachers” said P17.
“I now know that we can do many things by trying, but not in one try” added P6.
P20 explained, “I couldn’t come up with ideas of my own in other subjects as I could do in technology and design course. I would only try to find answers. Now I can think and produce. I have developed my skill in this respect”.
“While design coding, we thought creatively and came up with new ideas” added P13.
“Using coding in technology and design courses helped me produce new and different designs....” admitted P16.
“We can think and fix something broken or out of order. We can think of quicker solutions to problems after receiving coding courses” remarked P11.
“It is fun to learn by coding. For example, I can reason differently in Maths lessons when I try to solve a problem” admitted P21.
“I can do self-evaluation. I can evaluate a study of my own. I can find out my strengths and weaknesses” said P2.
“...I have a different way of criticizing myself and others” explained P26.
P17 stressed saying, “I can criticize a project in terms of its aims”.
“We now know how to explain procedures step by step...” stated P9,
“I can tell the width-height-depth of objects.” explained P15.
“Coding applied technology and design courses are different from other subjects with regard to remembering, because we become more aware of everything around us and we start thinking about new changes” explained P24.
P15 admitted saying, “I could remember the topics in technology and design courses better than the topics in Maths and Turkish”.
“We shared ideas and produced common projects. I can meet at a common idea with my class-mates” explained P7.
P13 said, “We shared tasks as we did group work. We had responsibilities. We finalized and presented our task”.
“Each of us did our part of the project in group work” added P14.
“This was the subject I could express myself without any worries. I had never experienced this before. Now, I can express my thoughts. In the past I was rather unsociable, but not anymore” admitted P10.
“Since I’ve started using coding in technology and design courses, I can express myself better. I was a bit shy, but I feel more comfortable now” P16.
“We get on well as friends and help each other” P1.
“Communication is not only necessary for the group, but for the whole class. I feel more confident when I talk to my friends and this adds to my life” explained P27.
“I wouldn’t be able to draw three-dimensional pictures if I hadn’t taken this course” P20.
“Drawing helps us develop our manual skills” P1.
P1 expressed views saying, “The new system, coding, made me enjoy the course more. It’s really interesting”.
“I’d feel missing a lot of things without this course” admitted P12.
“I love to be doing something on my own. Coding is fun” P18.
“Everybody should learn coding. Technology and Design courses would be boring without it” P10.
P18 stated, “We presented our project through animation and I loved this. It was our first experience”.
“I enjoy learning by coding” admitted P21.
“Coding added a lot to technology and design courses. A boring activity turns into fun and is easier by coding” explained P30.
P5 explained, “I can fulfill what I imagine by coding in technology and design courses. I couldn’t express my thoughts freely and do what I wanted before”.
“This should be a must course. Without it, I wouldn’t be able to fulfill my imaginations, but I can do it now by coding” said P30.
“... I can use coding in Maths, Geometry, or Drawing lessons. I can apply it as word-game in English classes ...” explained P7.
“...for example, we can apply these codings on robots and make them move...” said P13.
“Coding can be used in other subjects as well, for example in friction force (Physics). We could clean rough surfaces and do animations by coding.” added P18.
“…I prepared games for my brother. He can learn letters and colors” said P27.
“...it is for our good to receive coding teaching if we decide to study computer engineering” P13.
“I can surf the internet faster after taking this course.” P18.
“We can publish our outcomes...” P2.
“…I prefer coding when I work on a project. It’s easier and isn’t costly. I don’t pay anything for the material. I can correct my mistakes in my project by coding. Mistakes on paper cannot be corrected...” P16.
“…it would take a month to do a model in the past, but now we can do it on the computer by coding and t takes less time, about two weeks...” P1.
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions and Suggestions
Supplementary Materials
Author Contributions
Funding
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A
I Need It Too Much | I Really Need It | I Need It But Not Much | I Don’t Need It Much | I Can Do Without It | ||
NEEDS IN GENERAL | ||||||
Technology and Design Course | ||||||
1 | Sampling the link between technology and design | |||||
2 | Explaining basic design processes | |||||
3 | Relating cause–effect in a design project | |||||
4 | Expressing ideas on a project | |||||
5 | Coming up with creative ideas for project writing | |||||
6 | Joining in group work when writing projects | |||||
7 | Planning stages in project writing | |||||
8 | Using the Internet to write projects | |||||
9 | Technical drawing for projects | |||||
10 | Providing necessary material for design | |||||
11 | Writing a project | |||||
12 | Avoiding waste of sources in project writing | |||||
NEEDS IN DESIGN | ||||||
Technology and Design Course | ||||||
13 | Designing new findings to meet the needs | |||||
14 | Producing parts to fit a newly designed findings | |||||
15 | Producing moving mechanical designs | |||||
16 | Producing designs on the computer | |||||
17 | Utilizing width––depth in figures | |||||
18 | Utilizing the connection between shape and ground among objects | |||||
19 | Placing an object on the ground according to the length of distance | |||||
20 | Envisaging three dimensions of an object | |||||
21 | Drawing an expanded geometric object with depth | |||||
22 | Thinking of the vision of geometric figures from different angles | |||||
23 | Drawing geometric figures in different angles | |||||
24 | Placing the object on coordinated grounds | |||||
25 | Presenting animations of designed projects on the computer | |||||
NEEDS IN PROGRAM CODING | ||||||
Technology and Design Course | ||||||
26 | Writing algorithms | |||||
27 | Telling the similarity between the algorithmic and mathematical order | |||||
28 | Drawing figures with width–height–depth coding by programming | |||||
29 | Making design matching in shape and ground | |||||
30 | Placing an object by coding on coordinated ground | |||||
31 | Drawing an object through different angles by coding | |||||
32 | Expanding geometrical objects in mind by coding programs | |||||
33 | Drawing expanded geometrical objects with depth by coding | |||||
34 | Changing the angle of depth image of figures by coding | |||||
35 | Drawing a figure according to its distance by coding a program | |||||
36 | Making a picture move by coding | |||||
37 | Drawing a three-dimensional animation of imaginary objects by coding a program | |||||
38 | Sharing a program designed by coding on the Internet |
Target Steps | |||||||
Targets | Knowledge | Comprehension | Application | Analysis | Evaluation | Synthesis | |
1 | Explains the perceptions of Technology and Design | X | X | ||||
2 | Explains the principles of design | X | X | ||||
3 | Explains the process of basic design | X | X | ||||
4 | Explains the importance of line element in design | X | X | ||||
5 | Provides samples in using computer in technology and design | X | X | ||||
6 | Recognizes computer programs to be used in class | X | X | ||||
7 | Explains simple algorithms | X | X | ||||
8 | Writes simple algorithms | X | |||||
9 | Masters the order of codes in algorithms | X | X | ||||
10 | Knows that a single instruction will affect the whole program | X | X | ||||
11 | Draws two-dimensional geometric figures using algorithm and lines | X | |||||
12 | Turns two-dimensional figures into three-dimensional ones by algorithm and lines | X | X | ||||
13 | Turns two-dimensional figures into three-dimensional ones by lines | X | X | ||||
14 | Changes ready-made characters into three-dimensional shapes | X | X | ||||
15 | Places the characters onto the stage | X | |||||
16 | Places the three-dimensional characters onto the coordinated ground | X | |||||
17 | Makes out the vision of the characters from different angles | X | X | ||||
18 | Moves the characters in different angles | X | |||||
19 | Directs the characters into different directions | X | |||||
20 | Evaluates own algorithmic setups | X | |||||
21 | Decides on the suitable stage for the selected/drawn characters | X | |||||
22 | Designs the stage to suit the selected/drawn characters | X | X | ||||
23 | Draws an object from different angles by coding | X | X | X | |||
24 | Evaluates peer’s algorithmic setups | X | |||||
25 | Draws expanded geometrical figures with depth | X | X | ||||
26 | Changes the direction of depth images of figures | X | X | X | |||
27 | Animates self-prepared characters/designs | X | X | ||||
28 | Uses logical variables | X | X | X | |||
29 | Forms close and distant perspectives of objects | X | X | X | |||
30 | Animates close/distant/perspectives of objects | X | X | ||||
31 | Provides products for independent needs | X | X | ||||
32 | Explains the designed product by coding | X | |||||
33 | Shares the project written by coding on the Internet | X |
Academic Plan Revised by Coding Technology and Design Course | |||||
PERIOD | UNIT 1. CODE TEACHİNG AND İTS APPLİCATİON İN TECHNOLOGY AND DESİGN COURSE | ||||
AIMS/OUTCOME | TOPICS | ACTİVITIES/PROJECTS | TECHNIQUES IN LEARNING/TEACHING METHODS | RESOURCE AND MATERIAL | |
Week 1 | 1.1. Explains the Technology and Design concept | Activity 1. Slide show | STEM-based/Project-based learning | Interactive board, laptop, projection | |
1.2. Explains design principles | What is Technology and design? | Activity 2. Does drawing activities on electronic board by lines | Problem solving, logical reasoning, critical thinking | Interactive board, laptop, projection | |
1.3. Explains basic design process | Innovative thinking | Activity 3. Draws and designs with pencil and paper. | Brain gymnastics | Interactive board, laptop, projection | |
1.4. Explains the importance of line in design | Activity 4. Forms shapes, configuration and direction with specific length of lines | Interactive board, laptop, projection | |||
Week 2 | 2.1. Gives samples of computer use in the Technology and Design Course | Algorithm | Activity 1: Algorithm games are played | Paper and pencil, Interactive board, projection | |
2.2. Acquires the computer programs to be used in class | Activity 2: Design algorithm on paper and animating it in Scratch | ||||
2.3. Explains simple algorithms | Activity 3: Knowing basic codes | Algorithm on paper | |||
2.4. Writes simple algorithms | Activity 4: Positioning characters, swapping among dots | Movement and control menus, Pencil menu | Paper and pencil, Interactive board, projection | ||
2.5. Masters the order of codes in algorithms | |||||
2.6. Knows that a single instruction will affect the whole program | Notices the effect of constant/delete instructions | Interactive board, laptop, projection | |||
Week 3 | 3.1. Draws two-dimensional geometric figures in algorithm using lines (width–height). | Algorithm, depth | Drawing architectural designs in the environment | Adding to the character or having it drawn by the character. Sound and vision. Relates it to Mathematics | Paper, pencil, Interactive board, laptop, projection |
3.2. Turns two-dimensional figures into three-dimensional ones (width–height–depth) | Activity 1. Two-dimensional geometric figures of a chosen character are drawn | Drawing characters, using lines | |||
3.3. Transfers three-dimensional figures into two-dimensional ones using lines (Reverse procedure) | Activity 2. Observing three-dimensional car design | Adding characters, using lines | Interactive board, laptop, projection | ||
3.4. Turns ready-made characters into three-dimensional ones 3.5. Places characters onto the stage | Activity 3. Figures drawn on the electronic board are turned into three-dimensional ones | ||||
Week 4 | 4.1. Places the three-dimensional characters onto the coordinated plane | Algorithm, location, direction | Developing a product (Moving mechanical designs) | Relates it to Mathematics, connection between coordinate plane and the stage | Pare-pencil, laptop, ınteractive board, projection |
4.2. Makes out the images of characters from different angles | Activity 1. Practices moving a character to the left or right as in a watch in Scratch | Turning in degrees or...into...directions | |||
4.3. Turns the characters into different angles | Activity 2. The image of a cube from different angles | Turning in degrees or...into directions | |||
4.4 Directs characters in different angles 4.5. Evaluates self and peer’s algorithm settings | Activity 3. Students draw characters in the image direction they wish | Turning in degrees or...into direction, moving forwards...steps | |||
Week 5 | 5.1. Decides on the stage to suit the characters | Algorithm, stage, ground | Writing projects on renewable energy | Balance between figure-ground, uses ready-made stage | Interactive board, laptop, projection |
5.2. Designs the stage for the selected/drawn character | Depth of the ground | Activity 1. Stage alteration behind the fixed character | Figure-ground harmony, arranges a genuine stage | ||
5.3. Draws a figure from different angles by coding 5.4. Evaluates self and peer’s algorithm settings 5.5. Produces animations with self-prepared characters/designs | Activity 2. Skin diver Activity 3. Car on the road and stage motion | Starting with geometrical figures draws objects in different angles, interprets visions | |||
Week 6 | 6.1. Draws expanded geometric figures with depth | Designs products to facilitate life for the handicapped | |||
6.2. Alters the images of depth in figures 6.3. Produces animations with self-prepared characters/figures | Activity 1. Lights and alarm of an approaching train | Draws the image of the same figure with depth from different angles | Interactive board, laptop, projection | ||
6.4. Evaluates self and peer’s algorithm settings 6.5. Evaluates self and peer’s algorithm settings (Evaluation) | Activity 2. “If there is someone, opens the door, if not don’t” Coding Activity 3. Writing a code for the priority of an ambulance on the road | Perception, if, variable | |||
Week 7 | 7.1. Forms distant-close images of an object | Algorithm, perspective | Designs advertisement and animation projects | Changes dimensions according to distance | Interactive board, laptop, projection |
7.2. Forms distant-close images of a self-formed object | Activity 1. Flying bats on the wall and changing the dimensions of the bat according to the distance of the wall | Algorithm, if, variables | |||
7.3. Evaluates self and peer’s algorithm settings | Activity 2. Students design own advertisements or animations. | Interactive board, laptop, projection | |||
8. Week | 8.1. Designs independent, needed products | Project | I’m designing my own product | ||
8.2. Explains the own-designed product by coding | Activity 1. Preparing advertisements or projects by animation | ||||
8.3. Shares the program designed by coding on the internet 8.4. Evaluates self and peer’s algorithm settings | Activity 2. The self-produced products are presented in class and suggestions are noted | Interactive board, laptop, project |
Absolutely I Don’t Agree | I Don’t Agree | Partly I Agree | I Agree | Absolutely I Agree | ||
COMPREHENSION | ||||||
In the Technology and Design course | ||||||
1 | I can explain line elements, one of design elements | |||||
2 | I can explain design principles in project making | |||||
3 | I can explain technical drawings of a certain project | |||||
BASIC APPLICATION | ||||||
In Technology and Design course | ||||||
4 | I can take responsibilities in a Project Development Team | |||||
5 | I can develop my manual skills | |||||
6 | I can fix a product through instructions | |||||
7 | I can implement safety conditions in workshops | |||||
8 | I can use the apparatus provided in workshops | |||||
9 | I can search the internet for design | |||||
ADVANCED APPLICATION | ||||||
In Technology and Design course | ||||||
10 | I can design on the computer | |||||
11 | I can replace an object on plane coordinate | |||||
12 | I can do an animated presentation of my project | |||||
13 | I can design mobile mechanical tools | |||||
14 | I can do a product according to its ergonomic use features | |||||
FORMAL ANALYSIS | ||||||
In Technology and Design course | ||||||
15 | I can distinguish the measurements of objects | |||||
16 | I can distinguish geometric figures in objects | |||||
17 | I can distinguish width-length-depth in figure | |||||
18 | I can distinguish the declination of a geometric figure from others | |||||
19 | I can distinguish figure-ground | |||||
FURTHER ANALYSIS | ||||||
In Technology and Design course | ||||||
20 | I can see objects from different angles | |||||
21 | I can do needs analysis for a new project | |||||
22 | I can analyze problems I face | |||||
23 | I can design steps in production | |||||
24 | I can relate my learning outcomes to Technology and Design Courses | |||||
25 | I can compare different areas to use a product | |||||
SYNTHESIS | ||||||
In Technology and Design course, | ||||||
26 | I can recycle waste material | |||||
27 | I can develop projects in saving energy | |||||
28 | I can design products for the handicapped | |||||
29 | I can invent a new product in workshop | |||||
30 | I can write instruction for use | |||||
31 | I can apply the project plans in other lessons | |||||
32 | I can develop product by myself independently | |||||
EVALUATION | ||||||
In technology and Design course, | ||||||
33 | I can evaluate a product according to its features | |||||
34 | I find myself sufficient in design a product | |||||
35 | I can do self-criticisms about my own designs | |||||
36 | I can renew the product in the light of criticisms | |||||
37 | I can criticize my weakness and strengths in T–D courses | |||||
38 | I can comment positively on products developed by my friends |
References
- Atasoy, R.; Cemaloğlu, N. Evaluation of Quality Policies on Education in Turkish Education System. Univ. J. Educ. Res. 2018, 6, 1504–1518. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hameed, I.; Khan, M.B.; Shahab, A.; Hameed, I.; Qadeer, F. Science, technology and innovation through enterpreneurship education in the United Arab Emirates (UAE). Sustainability 2016, 8, 1280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Visvizi, A.; Lytras, M.D.; Daniela, L. Education, Innovation and the Prospect of Sustainable Growth and Development. In The Future of Innovation and Technology in Education: Policies and Practices for Teaching and Learning Excellence, Emerald Studies in Higher Education, Innovation and Technology; Visvizi, A., Lytras, M.D., Daniela, L., Eds.; Emerald Publishing: Bingley, UK, 2018; pp. 297–305. [Google Scholar]
- Ardıç, E.; Altun, A. Dijital çağın öğreneni. Uluslarar. Sos. Bilgilerde Yeni Yaklaşımlar Derg (IJONASS) 2017, 1, 12–30. [Google Scholar]
- Göksel, A.; Güneş, G. Kuşaklar arasi farklılaşma: X ve Y kuşaklarının örgütsel sessizlik davranışı bağlamında analizi. Gazi Üniv. İktisadi ve İdari Bilim. Fak. Derg. 2017, 19, 807–828. [Google Scholar]
- Kalogiannakis, M.; Papadakis, S.T. Proposal for Teaching ScratchJr Programming Environment in Preservice Kindergarten Teachers. In Proceedings of the 12th Conference of the European Science Education Research Association (ESERA), Dublin, Ireland, 21–25 August 2017; pp. 2095–2105, ISBN 978-1-873769-84-3. [Google Scholar]
- Tuncer, M. Ağ toplumunun çocukları: Z kuşağının kişilerarası iletişim becerilerinin çok boyutlu analizi. Atatürk İletişim Derg. 2016, 10, 33–46. [Google Scholar]
- Kanaki, K.; Kalogiannakis, M. Introducing fundamental object-oriented programming concepts in preschool education within the context of physical science courses. Educ. Inf. Technol. 2018, 23, 2673–2698. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yükseltürk, E.; Altıok, S.; Üçgül, M. Oyun programlamanın ilköğretim öğrencilerinin problem çözme becerilerine etkileri: Yaz kampı deneyimleri2. In Proceedings of the 4th International Instructional Technologies & Teacher Education Symposium 2016, Elazığ, Turkey, 6–8 October 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Sayın, Z.; Seferoğlu, S.S. Yeni Bir 21. Yüzyıl becerisi olarak kodlama eğitimi ve kodlamanın eğitim politikalarına etkisi. In XVIII Akademik Bilişim Konferansı-AB; A Dnan Menderes Üniversitesi: Aydın, Turkey, 2016; pp. 3–5. [Google Scholar]
- Demirci, A.; Aykurt, G. Teknoloji ve tasarım dersinde öğretmen ve öğrencilerin karşılaştığı sorunlar. Milli Eğit. Derg. 2014, 44, 170–192. [Google Scholar]
- Erden, O.; Keskin, N. Point of views of technology and design teachers regarding computer assisted teaching and practicability of computer assisted teaching in the lessons of the technology and design. J. Int. Soc. Res. 2015, 8, 642–650. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kaya, Ö. Temel Eğitimde Uygulanan Teknoloji ve Tasarım Dersi Öğretim Programı ve 7. Sınıf Öğretim Programı Uygulamalarının Öğretmen Görüşleriyle Deeğerlendirilmesi. Master’s Thesis, Gazi Üniversitesi/Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara, Turkey, 2008. [Google Scholar]
- Safkan, Ş.İ. Öğretmenlerin Teknoloji ve Tasarım Dersindeki Sorunlara Yaklaşımları. Master’s Thesis, Yakın Doğu Üniversitesi/Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Lefkoşa, Cyprus, 2009. [Google Scholar]
- Serdar, C.; Ceylan, E.; Dalkıran, M. Teknoloji ve tasarım öğretmenlerinin özel alan yeterlik düzeylerinin belirlenmesi. Int. J. Act. Learn. 2016, 1, 38–54. [Google Scholar]
- Tuğcuoğlu, Y. Ortaöğretimde teknoloji ve tasarım dersi için yeni bir model oluşturulması. Sanat Tasar Derg. 2013, 1, 31–34. [Google Scholar]
- Yalçın, Z. İlköğretim II. Kademe Teknoloji ve Tasarım Dersine Öğretmen ve Öğrenci Yaklaşımları. (Yayınlanmamış Yükseklisans Tezi); Selçuk Üniversitesi/Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü: Selçuk, Turkey, 2007. [Google Scholar]
- Birinci Konur, K.; Yıldırım, N. Examples and implications of prospective science teacher’ on project based learning practices. Int. J. Eurasia Soc. Sci. 2017, 8, 2043–2063. [Google Scholar]
- Kırbağ Zengin, F.; Yucasu, Ş. The effects of project based learning method on the preservice science teachers’ environmental literacy. Int. J. Eurasia Soc. Sci. 2017, 8. Available online: http://www.ijoess.com/Makaleler/645441062_36-%20DCXVIII-DCXXXIII%20-%20%20fikriye%20k%C4%B1rba%C4%9F.pdf (accessed on 5 August 2018).
- Uysal, M.P. Yazılım mühendisliğinde deneysel bir çalışma:proje tabanlı ve proje destekli yöntemlerin ürün ve akademik başarıya etkileri. Pamukkale Üniv. Mühendis. Bilim. Derg. 2018, 24, 226–237. [Google Scholar]
- Calder, N. Using scratch: An integrated problem-solving approach to mathematical thinking. Aust. Prim. Math. Classr. 2010, 15, 9–14. [Google Scholar]
- Ford, L.J. Scratch Programming for Teens 1st; Course Technology Press: Boston, MA, USA, 2008. [Google Scholar]
- Maloney, J.; Burd, L.; Kafai, Y.; Rusk, N.; Silverman, B.; Resnick, M. Scratch: A sneak preview. In Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Creating 2004, Connecting and Collaborating through Computing, Kyoto, Japan, 30 January 2004; pp. 104–409. [Google Scholar]
- Shin, S.; Park, P. A study on the effect affecting problem solving ability of primary students through the scratch programming. Adv. Sci. Technol. Lett. 2014, 59, 117–120. [Google Scholar]
- Çağıltay, E.N.; Fal, M. Scratch Ile Programlamayı Öğreniyorum; ODTÜ Yayıncılık: Ankara, Turkey, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Fee, S.B.; Minkley, A.M.H.; Lombardi, T.E. New Directions for Computing Education Embedding Computing across Disciplines; Springer: Berlin, Germany, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Choi, B.; Jung, J.; Beak, Y. In what way can technology enhance student learning? A preliminary study of technology supported learning in matematics. In Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2013 Mar 25 (pp. 3–9); Chesapeake, V.A., Ed.; Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE): Jacksonville, FL, USA, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Serpe, R.L. Gamification through Algebraic Coding. Master’s Thesis, College at Brockport, State University of New York, Education and Human Development, New York, NY, USA, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Portelance, D.J.; Strawhacker, A.L.; Bers, M.U. Constructing the scratcher programming language in the early childhood classroom. Int. J. Technol. Des. Educ. 2016, 26, 489–504. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mitchel, R. ScratchJr: Computer programming in early childhood education as a pathway to academic readiness and success (NSF DRL-1118682). In Poster Presented at DR K-12 PI Meeting; Massachusetts Institute of Technology: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Dasgupta, S. From surveys to collaborative art: Enabling children to program with online data. In Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children, New York, NY, USA, 24–27 June 2013; pp. 28–35. [Google Scholar]
- Roque, R.; Rusk, N.; Blanton, A. Youth roles and leadership in an online creative community. In Proceedings of the Computer Supported Collaborative Learning Conference, Madison, WI, USA, 15–19 June 2013; International Society of the Learning Sciences: Cambridge, UK, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Taylor, M.; Harlow, A.; Forret, M. Using a computer programming environment and an ınteractive whiteboard to ınvestigate some mathematical thinking. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 2010, 8, 561–570. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Weiss, D. The effect of combining 1:1 computing, ınteractive core curriculum and digital teaching platform on learning math: The case of a charter school in New York City. In Handbook on Digital Learning for K-12 Schools (s. 341–354); Springer International Publishing: Berlin, Germany, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- European Schoolnet. Computing Our Future Computer Programming and Coding-Priorities, School Curricula and Initiatives Across Europe; Durando, M., Ed.; European Schoolnet: Brussels, Belgium, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Demir, A.Ö. Çocuğunuza kod yazmayı öğretin. Harvard Business Review Türkiye. 2017. Available online: https://hbrturkiye.com/blog/cocugunuza-kod-yazmayi-ogretin (accessed on 28 March 2017).
- Bandura, A. Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control; Freeman: New York, NY, USA, 1997. [Google Scholar]
- Arseven, A. Öz yeterlilik: Bir kavram analizi. J. Turk. Stud. 2016, 11, 63–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ormord, J.E. Educational Psychology: Developing Learners (5 b); Pearson Prentice Hall: Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA, 2006. [Google Scholar]
- Ansari, M.; ve Khan, S.A. Self-Efficacy as a predictor of life satisfaction among undergraduate students. Int. J. Indian Psychol. 2015, 2, 5–11. [Google Scholar]
- Bandura, A. Self-Efficacy. In Encyclopedia of Human Behavior; Ramachaudran, V.S., Ed.; Academic Press: New York, NY, USA, 1994; Volume 4, pp. 71–81. [Google Scholar]
- Bandura, A. Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychol. Rev. 1977, 84, 191–215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Bandura, A. Exercise of Personal and Collective Efficacy in Changing Societies. Self-Efficacy in Changing Societies; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 1995. [Google Scholar]
- Özdemir, C.; Erdoğan, T. Sınıf öğretmeni adaylarının ilkokuma ve yazma öğretimine ilişkin öz yeterlik inançlarının belirlenmesi. Abant İzzet Baysal Üniv. Eğit. Fak. Derg. 2017, 17, 314–331. [Google Scholar]
- Bong, M. Academic Motivation in Self-Efficacy, Task Value, Achievement Goal Orientations, and Attributional Beliefs. J. Educ. Res. 2010, 97, 287–297. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Çağırgan Gülten, D.; Soytürk, İ. İlköğretim 6. Sınıf Öğrencilerinin Geometri Öz Yeterliklerinin Akademik Başarı Not Ortalamaları ile İlişkisi. Mehmet Akif Ersoy Üniv. Eğit. Fak. Derg. 2013, 1, 55–70. [Google Scholar]
- Diseth, A. Self-efficacy, goal orientations and learning strategies as mediators between preceding and subsequent academic achievement. Learn. Individ. Differ. 2011, 21, 191–195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Motlagh, S.E.; Amrai, K.; Yazdani, M.J.; Abderahim, H.A.; ve Souri, H. The relationship between self-efficacy and academic achievement in high school students. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 2011, 15, 765–768. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Phan, P.H. The Development of English and Mathematics Self-Efficacy: A Latent Growth Curve Analysis. J. Educ. Res. 2012, 105, 196–209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schunk, D.H. Self -efficacy, motivation and performance. J. Appl. Sport Psychol. 1995, 7, 112–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Şeker, B.H.; Erdoğan, A. GoeGebra Yazılımı ile Geometri Öğretiminin Geometri Ders Başarısına ve Geometri Öz-Yeterliğine Etkisi. Uluslar. Toplum Araşt. Derg. 2017, 7, 1–16. [Google Scholar]
- Zimmerman, B.J. Self-Efficacy and educational development. In Self-Efficacy in Changing Societies; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, NY, USA, 1999; pp. 202–231. [Google Scholar]
- Ihmaid, M.K. The Effectiveness of Using Scratch Application in Developing Sixth Graders’ English Vocabulary, Its Retention, and Self-Efficacy. Master’s Thesis, The Islamic University/Faculty of Education, Islamabad, Pakistan, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Yükseltürk, E.; Altiok, S. An investigation of the effects of programming with scratch on the preservice IT teacher’s self-efficacy perceptions and attitudes towards computer programming. Br. J. Educ. Technol. 2016, 48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Giannakos, M.N.; Hubwieser, P.; Ruf, A. Is sel-efficacy in programming decreasing with the level of programming skills? In Proceedings of the 7th Workshop in Primary and Secondary Computing Education, Hamburg, Germany, 8–9 November 2012; pp. 16–21. [Google Scholar]
- Maviş, İ.E. Avrupa Birliği Uyum Sürecinde Teknoloji ve Tasarım Eğitimi. Master’s Thesis, Gazi Üniversitesi/Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara, Turkey, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Creswell, J.W. Research Design Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches (4 b.); SAGE: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Büyüköztürk, Ş.; Çakmak, E.K.; Akgün, Ö.E.; Karadeniz, Ş.; Demirel, F. Bilimsel Araştırma Yöntemleri; Pegem Akademi: Ankara, Turkey, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Engel, K.S.; Moosbrugger, H.; Müller, H. Evaluating the Fit of Structural Equation Models: Test of Significance and Descriptive Goodness-of-Fit Measures. Methods Psychol. Res. Online 2003, 8, 23–74. [Google Scholar]
- Tabachnick, B.G.; Fidell, L.S. Using Multivariate Statistics, 6th ed.; Pearson Education Limited: London, UK, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Tok, Ş. Mikro öğretim yönteminin öğretmen adaylarının özyeterlk inançlarına ve mesleğe yöneliktutumlarına etkisi. Milli Eğit. 2016, 212, 5–25. [Google Scholar]
- Eymur, G.; Çetin, P.S. Argümantasyon tabanlı sorgulayıcı araştırma yönteminin öğretmen adaylarının fen öğretimi öz yeterlik inancına etkisi. Erzincan Üniv. Eğit. Fak. Derg. 2017, 19, 36–50. [Google Scholar]
- Kaya, Z. Koro eğitiminde yapılandırmacı yaklaşımın tutum, öz yeterlik algısı ve akademik başarıya etkisi. İnönü Üniv. Eğit. Bilim. Enst. Derg. 2014, 1, 52–62. [Google Scholar]
- Çoban, A.; Sanalan, A. Fen bilgisi öğretimi dersinde özgün deney tasarım sürecinin öğretmen adayının öz yeterlik algısına etkisi, Erzincan Üniv. Eğit. Fak. Derg. 2002, 2, 1–10. [Google Scholar]
- Şensoy, Ö.; Aydoğdu, M. Araştırma soruşturma tabanlı öğrenme yaklaşımının fen bilgisi öğretmen adaylarının fen öğretimine yönelik öz-yeterlik inanç düzeylerinin gelişimine etkisi. GÜ Gazi Eğit. Fak. Derg. 2008, 28, 69–93. [Google Scholar]
- Calao, L.A.; Correa, H.E.; Leon, J.M.; Robles, G. Developing mathematical thinking with scratch an experiment with 6th grade students. In Design for Teaching and Learning in A Networked World; Springer International Publishing: New York, NY, USA, 2015; pp. 17–27. [Google Scholar]
- Flannery, L.P.; Silverman, B.; Kazakoff, E.R.; Bers, M.U.; Bonta, P.; Resnick, M. Designing ScratchJr: Support for early childhood learning through computer programming. In Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children, New York, NY, USA, 24–27 June 2013; Interaction Design Foundation: New York, NY, USA, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Kukul, V.; Gökçearslan, Ş.; Günbatar, M.S. Computer Programming Self-Efficacy Scale (CPSES) for Secondary School Students: Development, Validation and Reliability. Educ. Technol. Theory Pract. 2017, 7, 158–179. [Google Scholar]
- Kordaki, M. Diverse categories of programming learning activities could be performed within scratch. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 2012, 1162–1166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Numanoğlu, M.; Keser, H. Programlama öğretiminde robot kullanımı-Mbor örneği. Bartın Univ. J. Fac. Educ. 2017, 6, 497–515. [Google Scholar]
- Wang, H.Y.; Huang, I.; Hwang, G.J. Effects of an integrated scratch and project-based learning approach on the learning achievements of gifted students in computer courses. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Advanced Applied Informatics (s. 382–387), Kitakyushu, Japan, 31 August–4 September 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Yüksel, S.; Gündoğdu, K. Scratch Öğretiminde Ayrılıp Birleşme Tekniği Kullanımının Derse Yönelik Tutuma Akademik Başarıya ve Kalıcılığa Etkisi. Ege Eğit. Derg. 2018, 19, 245–261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Saracaloğlu, A.S.; Çelik, B. Web tasarımı ve programlama dersi öğretiminde proje tabanlı öğrenme yaklaşımının öğrenci görüşlerine göre değerlendirilmesi. Kast. Educ. J. 2018, 26, 323–333. [Google Scholar]
- Özyurt, H.; Özyurt, Ö. Görsel programlama dersinde proje tabanlı öğrenme deneyimine ilişkin öğrenci görüşlerinin incelenmesi. Turksih J. Comput. Math. Educ. 2017, 8, 244–260. [Google Scholar]
- Karaduman, B.; Emrahoğlu, N. Maddenin tanecikli yapısı. ünitesinin öğretiminde, bilgisayar destekli ve bilgisayar temelli öğretim yöntemlerinin, akademik başarı ve kalıcılığa etkisi. Kast. Eğit. Derg. 2011, 19, 925–938. [Google Scholar]
- Quille, K.; Bergin, S. Does scratch improve self-efficacy and performance when learning to program in C#? An empirical study. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Engaging Pedagogy, Dublin, Ireland, 13–14 December 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Korkmaz, Ö. The effects of scratch-based game activities on students’ attitudes, self-efficacy and academic achievement. Int. J. Mod. Educ. Comput. Sci. 2016, 1, 16–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kalelioğlu, F.; Gülbahar, Y. The effects of teaching programming via scratch on problem solving skills: A discussion from learners’ perspective. Inform. Educ. 2014, 13, 33–50. [Google Scholar]
- Kalelioğlu, F. A new way of teaching programming skills to K-12 students: Code.org. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2015, 52, 200–210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ötürk, Ö.F. Bilim-Teknoloji-Toplum Hakkındaki Görüşler ile Fen ve Teknoloji Okuryazarlığı Öz Yeterlik Algısı Üzerine Bir Çalışma. Necatibey Eğit. Fak. Elektron. Fen ve Mat. Eğit. Derg. 2016, 10, 1–31. [Google Scholar]
- Önen, F.; Muşlu Kaygısız, G. Fen Bilgisi Öğretmen Adaylarının 6–8 dönemler Arasındaki Fen Öğretimine Yönelik Öz Yeterlik İnançları ve Bu İnanca İlişkin Görüşleri. Kuram ve Uygul. Eğit. Bilim. 2013, 13, 2435–2453. [Google Scholar]
- Bahçeci, D.; Kuru, M. Portfolyo değerlendirmesinin üniversite öğrencilerinin öz yeterlik algısı ve yaşam becerileri üzerine etkisi. Ahi Evran Üniv. Kırşehir Eğit. Fak. Derg. (KEFAD) 2008, 9, 97–111. [Google Scholar]
- İlhan Beyaztaş, D. Sınıf eğitimi öğrencilerinin ingilizce öğretimine yönelik öz-yeterlik inançları. Erzincan Üniv. Eğit. Fak. Derg. 2017, 20, 265–280. [Google Scholar]
- Kılıç, D.; Keleş, Ö.; Uzun, N. Fen Bilimleri Öğretmenlerinin Laboratuvar Kullanımına Yönelik ÖzYeterlik İnançları: Laboratuvar Uygulamaları Programının Etkisi. Erzincan Üniv. Eğit. Fak. Derg. 2015, 17, 218–236. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lewis, M.C. Is pair programming more effective than other forms of collaboration for young students? Comput. Sci. Educ. 2011, 21, 105–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schunk, D.H.; Zimmerman, B.J. Social Origins of Self-Regulatory Competence. Educ. Psychol. 1997, 32, 195–208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Çilingir, E.; Artut, P.D. Gerçekçi Matematik Eğitmi Yaklaşımının İlkokul Öğrencilerinin Başarılarına, Görsel Matematik Okuryazarlığı Öz yeterlik Algılarına ve Problem Çözme Tutumlarına Etkisi. Turk. J. Comput. Math. Educ. 2016, 7, 578–600. [Google Scholar]
- Shin, S.; Park, P.; Bae, Y. The effects of an ınformation-technology gifted program on friendship using scratch programming clutter. Int. J. Comput. Commun. Eng. 2013, 2, 246–249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Theodorou, C.; Kordaki, M. Super Mario: A collaborative game for the learning of variables in programming. Res. Gate 2010, 1, 111–118. [Google Scholar]
- Sanjanaashree, P.; Anand Kumar, M.; Soman, K.P. Language Learning for Visual and Auditory Learners Using Scratch Toolkit. In Proceedings of the 2014 Computer Communication and Informatics International Conference on (s. 1-5), Coimbatore, India, 3–5 January 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Dasgupta, S.; Hale, W.; Hernandez, A.M.; Hill, B.M. Remixing as a Pathway to Computational Thinking. A. f. Machinery (Dü.). In Proceedings of the 19th ACM Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing, San Francisco, CA, USA, 27 May 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Lee, Y.J. Scratch: Multimedia Programming Environment for Young Gifted Learners. Gift. Child Today 2011, 34, 26–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ouahbi, I.; Kaddari, F.; Darhmaoui, H.; Elachqar, A.; ve Lahmine, S. Learning Basic Programming concepts by creating games with scratch programming environment. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 2015, 191, 1479–1482. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Osman, M.A.; Loke, S.P.; Zakaria, M.N.; Downe, A.G. Secondary students’ perfectionism and their response to different programming learning tools. In Proceedings of the 2012 IEEE Colloquium on Humanities, Science and Engineering (CHUSER), Kota Kinabalu, Malaysia, 3–4 December 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Özmen, B.; Altun, A. Undergraduate Students’ Experiences in Programming: Difficulties and Obstacles. Turk. Online J. Qual. Inq. 2014, 5, 9–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ruf, A.; Mühling, A.; Hubwieser, P. Scratch vs. Karel: Impact on learning outcomes and motivation. In Proceedings of the 9th Workshop in Primary and Secondary Computing Education (s. 50–59), Berlin, Germany, 5–7 November 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Erol, O.; Kurt, A.A. The effects of teaching programming with scratch on pre-service information technology teachers’ motivation and achievement. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2017, 77, 11–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fengfeng, K. An implement of design-based learning through creating educational computer games: A case study on mathematics learning during design and computing. Comput. Educ. 2014, 73, 26–39. [Google Scholar]
Pre-Test | Procedure | Post-Test | Interview | Permanence Test | Analyses | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Needs Analysis and Teaching | Picking the Experiment group | Self-efficacy application | Practising revised Tech. and design Program | Self-efficacy scale application | Interview with the Students | Self-efficacy Scale application | Analyzing scales and reporting |
Picking Control Group | Self-efficcy Scale application | Practicising usual Tech. and design Program | Self-efficacy scale application | Self-efficacy Scale application | Analyzing Scales and reporting |
Groups | Tests | N | sd | df | t | p | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Experiment | Pre-test | 30 | 81.63 | 16.64 | 29 | 7.188 | 0.00 |
Post-test | 30 | 114.70 | 17.21 | ||||
Control | Pre-test | 30 | 80.66 | 20.35 | 29 | −2.961 | 0.006 |
Post-test | 30 | 91.03 | 15.30 | ||||
Experiment | Post-test | 30 | 114.70 | 17.21 | 58 | 5.628 | 0.00 |
Control | Post-test | 30 | 91.03 | 15.30 |
Groups | Tests | N | Ss | df | t | p | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Experiment | Permanency | 30 | 113.96 | 15.72 | 29 | 0.216 | 0.831 |
Post- | 30 | 114.70 | 17.21 | ||||
Control | Permanency | 30 | 93.40 | 16.85 | 29 | −0.699 | 0.490 |
Post- | 30 | 91.03 | 15.30 | ||||
Experiment | Permanency | 30 | 113.96 | 15.72 | 58 | 4.885 | 0.00 |
Control | Permanency | 30 | 93.40 | 16.85 |
Themes | Frequencies | % |
---|---|---|
Cognitive output | ||
Application | 133 | 13.05 |
Evaluation | 55 | 5.40 |
Analysis | 36 | 3.53 |
Reasoning | 131 | 12.86 |
Permanency | 29 | 2.85 |
Total | 384 | 37.68 |
Skills | ||
Use of spatial skills | 81 | 7.95 |
Social skills | 146 | 14.33 |
Psychomotor skills | 9 | 0.88 |
Total | 236 | 23.16 |
Affective output | ||
Attitude | 125 | 12.27 |
Motivation | 51 | 5.00 |
Imaginary world | 48 | 4.71 |
Total | 224 | 21.98 |
External output | ||
Transfer | 70 | 6.87 |
Research skill | 33 | 3.24 |
Economizing | 49 | 4.81 |
Occupational inclination | 23 | 2.26 |
Total | 175 | 17.17 |
Overall | 1019 | 100 |
© 2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Özden, C.; Tezer, M. The Effect of Coding Teaching on Students’ Self-Efficacy Perceptions of Technology and Design Courses. Sustainability 2018, 10, 3822. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10103822
Özden C, Tezer M. The Effect of Coding Teaching on Students’ Self-Efficacy Perceptions of Technology and Design Courses. Sustainability. 2018; 10(10):3822. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10103822
Chicago/Turabian StyleÖzden, Celalettin, and Murat Tezer. 2018. "The Effect of Coding Teaching on Students’ Self-Efficacy Perceptions of Technology and Design Courses" Sustainability 10, no. 10: 3822. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10103822
APA StyleÖzden, C., & Tezer, M. (2018). The Effect of Coding Teaching on Students’ Self-Efficacy Perceptions of Technology and Design Courses. Sustainability, 10(10), 3822. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10103822