Plugged or Unplugged Teaching: A Case Study of Students’ Preferences for the Teaching of Programming

https://doi.org/10.21585/ijcses.v4i1.82

Authors

Keywords:

Programming Teaching, PSS Model, Plugged Activities, Unplugged Activities, Student Satisfaction

Abstract

This study is an investigation of the effects of plugged and unplugged activities in a programming course using the Programming in Seven Steps (PSS) model on pupils' satisfaction and activity type preferences. A case study method was used in the classroom was the case. Data included students' diary, their responses on semi-structured interview forms, and semi-structured interviews with a selected sub-set of students. The collected data were analyzed by content analysis technique. It has been found that there are different factors that positively affect student satisfaction for "Conditional Structures", "Variables" and "Loops" courses that are processed according to YAP model. In addition, students' preferences and reasons for activity type differ. Study results show that training students with their preferred activity types increases their satisfaction and enable them to overcome associated difficulties more easily. It is concluded that because the PSS model is effective with students with different learning environment preferences, it can be used as a model to increase learner satisfaction with programming instruction.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Ala-Mutka, K. (2004). Problems in learning and teaching programming. Institute of Soft ware Systems, Tampere University of Technology. Retrieved June 15, 2018 from https://www.cs.tut.fi/~edge/literature_study.pdf

Arabac?o?lu, T., Bülbül, H. ?., & Filiz, A. (2007, January). A New Approach to Computer Programming Teaching. In Proceedings of the 9th Academic Informatics Conference, Dumlup?nar University, Kütahya, Turkey.

A?kar, P., & Davenport, D. (2009). An investigation of factors related to self-efficacy for Java programming among engineering students. TOJET: The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 8(1), 26-27.

Asad, K., Tibi, M., & Raiyn, J. (2016). Primary school pupils’ attitudes toward learning programming through visual interactive environments. World journal of education, 6(5), 20. doi:10.5430/wje.v6n5p20 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5430/wje.v6n5p20

Atalay, O.(2010). Effect of the use of drama method on the 5th grade students success in information technologies course. Unpublished Master Thesis. Gazi University, Education Sciences Institute, Ankara.

Brennan, K., & Resnick, M. (2012, April). New frameworks for studying and assessing the development of computational thinking. In Proceedings of the 2012 annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Vancouver, Canada, 1(25).

Brown, Q., Mongan, W., Kusic, D., Garbarine, E., Fromm, E., & Fontecchio, A. (2013). Computer aided instruction as a vehicle for problem solving: Scratch programming environment in the middle years classroom. Retrieved September 22, 2017 from http://www.pages.drexel.edu/~dmk25/ASEE_08.pdf

Büyüköztürk, ?., Çakmak, E. K., Akgün, Ö. E., Karadeniz, ?., & Demirel, F. (2016). Bilimsel ara?t?rma yöntemleri. Ankara: Pegem Akademi.

Byrne, P., & Lyons, G. (2001). The effect of student attributes on success in programming. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 33(3), 49-52. doi: 10.1145/377435.377467 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/377435.377467

Calder, N. (2010). Using Scratch: An integrated problem-solving approach to mathematical thinking. Australian Primary Mathematics Classroom, 15(4), 9-14.

Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2005). Research methods in education (5th ed.).London: Routledge Falmer.

Coull, N. J., & Duncan, I. M. (2011). Emergent requirements for supporting introductory programming. Innovation in Teaching and Learning in Information and Computer Sciences, 10(1), 78-85. doi: 10.11120/ital.2011.10010078 DOI: https://doi.org/10.11120/ital.2011.10010078

Creswell, J. W. (2013). Steps in conducting a scholarly mixed methods study. DBER Speaker Series. 48.

Çatlak, ?., Tekdal, M., & Baz, F. Ç. (2015). The Status of Teaching Programming with Scratch: A Document Review Work. Journal of Instructional Technologies & Teacher Education, 4(3), 13-25.

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. doi: 10.1080/15391523.2014.888272 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2014.888272

Denner, J., Werner, L., & Ortiz, E. (2012). Computer games created by middle school girls: Can they be used to measure understanding of computer science concepts?. Computers & Education, 58(1), 240-249. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2011.08.006 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.08.006

Erümit A. K., Karal H., ?ahin G., Aksoy D.A., Aksoy A., & Benzer A.?. (2019). A Model Suggested for Programming Teaching: Programming in Seven Steps. Education & Science. 44(197), 155-183. doi: 10.15390/EB.2018.7678 DOI: https://doi.org/10.15390/EB.2018.7678

Fessakis, G., Gouli, E., & Mavroudi, E. (2013). Problem solving by 5–6 years old kindergarten children in a computer programming environment: A case study. Computers & Education, 63, 87-97. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2012.11.016 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.11.016

Fesakis, G., & Serafeim, K. (2009). Influence of the familiarization with scratch on future teachers’ opinions and attitudes about programming and ICT in education. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 41(3), 258-262. doi: 10.1145/1562877.1562957 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/1562877.1562957

Futschek, G., & Moschits, J. (2010). Developing algorithmic thinking by inventing and playing algorithms. Retrieved December 9, 2016 from https://publik.tuwien.ac.at/ files/PubDat_187461.pdf

Futschek, G. (2006). Algorithmic thinking: The key for understanding computer science. In: Mittermeir, R. (Ed.), Informatics Education The Bridge between Using and Understanding Computers. Vol. 4226 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer Berlin / Heidelberg, ss. 159 – 168.

Futschek, G., & Moschitz, J. (2011, October). Learning algorithmic thinking with tangible objects eases transition to computer programming. In International Conference on Informatics in Schools: Situation, Evolution, and Perspectives, 155-164. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-24722-4_14

Giannakos, M. N., Jaccheri, L., & Proto, R. (2013, April). Teaching computer science to young children through creativity: Lessons learned from the case of Norway. In Proceedings of the 3rd Computer Science Education Research Conference on Computer Science Education Research, Heerlen.

Ginat, D. (2004). On novice loop boundaries and range conceptions. Computer Science Education, 14(3), 165-181. doi: 10.1080/0899340042000302709 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0899340042000302709

Gomes, T. C. S., Falcão, T. P., & Tedesco, P. C. D. A. R. (2018). Exploring an approach based on digital games for teaching programming concepts to young children. International journal of child-computer interaction, 16, 77-84. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcci.2017.12.005 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcci.2017.12.005

Gomes, A., & Mendes, A. J. (2007, September). Learning to program - difficulties and solutions. In International Conference on Engineering Education, Coimbra.

Grover, S., Pea, R., & Cooper, S. (2016, March). Factors influencing computer science learning in middle school. In Proceedings of the 47th ACM technical symposium on computing science education, New York. doi: 10.1145/2839509.2844564 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/2839509.2844564

Hawi, N. (2010). Causal attributions of success and failure made by undergraduate students in an introductory-level computer programming course. Computers & Education, 54(4), 1127-1136. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2009.10.020 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2009.10.020

Helminen, J., & Malmi, L. (2010, October). Jype-a program visualization and programming exercise tool for Python. In Proceedings of the SOFTVIS '10 Proceedings of the 5th international symposium on Software visualization, 153-162, Utah, USA. doi: 10.1145/1879211.1879234 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/1879211.1879234

Hermans, F., & Aivaloglou, E. (2017, November). To Scratch or not to Scratch?: A controlled experiment comparing plugged first and unplugged first programming lessons. In Proceedings of WiPSCE '17 the 12th Workshop on Primary and Secondary Computing Education, 49-56. doi: 10.1145/3137065.3137072 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/3137065.3137072

Kafai, Y. B., & Q. Burke. (2014). Connected code: Why children need to learn programming. MIT Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/9992.001.0001

Kalelio?lu, 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.

Kalelio?lu, F. (2015). A new way of teaching programming skills to K-12 students: Code.org. Computers in Human Behavior, 52, 200-210. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2015.05.047 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.05.047

Karaosmano?lu, G., & Ad?güzel, Ö. (2017). Effects of Creative Drama Method On Students Academic Achievements In Ict Lessons Of Sixth Grades. Elementary Education Online, 16(2), 693-712.

Kelleher, C., Pausch, R., & Kiesler, S. (2007, April). Storytelling Alice motivates middle school girls to learn computer programming. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, ACM, 1455-1464. doi: 10.1145/1240624.1240844 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/1240624.1240844

Klopfer, E., & Yoon, S. (2005). Developing games and simulations for today and tomorrow’s tech savvy youth. TechTrends, 49(3), 33-41. doi: 10.1007/BF02763645 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02763645

Kobsiripat, W. (2015). Effects of the media to promote the scratch programming capabilities creativity of elementary school students. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 174, 227- 232. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.01.651 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.01.651

Kotsopoulos, D., Floyd, L. M., Khan, S. S., Namukasa, I. K., Somanath, S., Weber, J. L., & Yiu, C. (2017). A Pedagogical Framework for Computational Thinking. Digital Experiences in Mathematics Education. 3(2), 154-171. doi: 10.1007/s40751-017-0031-2 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40751-017-0031-2

Lahtinen, E., Ala-Mutka, K., & Jarvinen, H. (2005) A Study of Difficulties of Novice Programmers. In Acm Sigcse Bulletin, ACM, 37(3), 14-18. doi: 10.1145/1067445.1067453 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/1067445.1067453

Lai, C. S., & Lai, M. H. (2012, June). Using computer programming to enhance science learning for 5th graders in Taipei. International Symposium on computer, consumer and control, 146-148. Taiwan. IEEE. doi: 10.1109/IS3C.2012.45 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/IS3C.2012.45

Lai, A., & Yang, S. (2011, September). The learning effect of visualized programming learning on 6th graders’ problem solving and logical reasoning abilities. In Electrical and Control Engineering (ICECE), 2011 International Conference on, IEEE, 6940-6944. doi: 10.1109/ICECENG.2011.6056908 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/ICECENG.2011.6056908

Law, K. M., Lee, V. C., & Yu, Y. T. (2010). Learning motivation in e-learning facilitated computer programming courses. Computers & Education, 55(1), 218-228. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2010.01.007 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.01.007

Leifheit, L., Jabs, J., Ninaus, M., Moeller, K., & Ostermann, K. (2018, October). Programming Unplugged: An Evaluation of Game-Based Methods for Teaching Computational Thinking in Primary School. In ECGBL 2018 12th European Conference on Game-Based Learning (p. 344). Academic Conferences and publishing limited.

Malan, D. J., & Leitner, H. H. (2007). Scratch for budding computer scientists. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 39(1), 223-227. doi: 10.1145/1227310.1227388 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/1227310.1227388

Mannila, L., Peltomäki, M., & Salakoski, T. (2006). What about a simple language? Analyzing the difficulties in learning to program. Computer Science Education, 16(3), 211-227. doi: 10.1080/08993400600912384 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/08993400600912384

McMillan, J. H. (2000). Educational research: Fundamentals for the consumer (3th ed.). New York: Longman.

Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2015). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. San Francisco: John Wiley & Sons.

Milková, E., & Hulkova, A. (2013). Algorithmic and logical thinking development: base of programming skills. WSEAS Transactions on Computers, 12(2), 41-51.

Naharro-Berrocal, F., Pareja-Flores, C., Urquiza-Fuentes, J., & Velazquez-Iturbide, J. A. (2002). Approaches to comprehension-preserving graphical reduction of program visualizations. In Proceedings of the 2002 ACM symposium on Applied computing, ACM, 771-777. doi: 10.1145/508791.508941 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/508791.508941

Özmen, B., & Altun, A. (2014). Undergraduate students' experiences in programming: difficulties and obstacles. Turkish Online Journal of Qualitative Inquiry, 5(3), 1-27. doi: 10.17569/tojqi.20328 DOI: https://doi.org/10.17569/tojqi.20328

Pinto, A., & Escudeiro, P. (2014, June). The use of scratch for the development of 21st century learning skills in ICT. Information Systems and Technologies, 9th Iberian Conference, (pp. 1-4). IEEE. doi: 10.1109/CISTI.2014.6877061 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/CISTI.2014.6877061

Qian, Y., & Lehman, J. D. (2016). Correlates of success in introductory programming: A study with middle school students. Journal of Education and Learning, 5(2), 73. doi: :10.5539/jel.v5n2p73 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5539/jel.v5n2p73

Robins, A., Rountree, J., & Rountree, N. (2003). Learning and teaching programming: A review and discussion. Computer Science Education, 13(2), 137-172. doi: 10.1076/csed.13.2.137.14200 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1076/csed.13.2.137.14200

Sar?o?lu, T., & Kartal, G. (2017). Drama as Method—An Alternative in Teaching Information and Communication Technologies? Elementary Education Online, 16(1), 366-376.

Sáez-López, J. M., Román-González, M., & Vázquez-Cano, E. (2016). Visual programming languages integrated across the curriculum in elementary school: A two year case study using “Scratch” in five schools. Computers & Education, 97, 129-141. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2016.03.003 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.03.003

Schwartz J., Stagner J., & Morrison, W. (2006). Kid's programming language (KPL). In ACM SIGGRAPH 2006 Educators program, ACM. doi: 10.1145/1179295.1179348 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/1179295.1179348

Seppälä, O., Malmi, L., & Korhonen, A. (2006). Observations on student misconceptions—A case study of the Build–Heap Algorithm. Computer Science Education, 16(3), 241-255. doi: 10.1080/08993400600913523 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/08993400600913523

Seyhan, H. G. (2015). Okul öncesi fen e?itiminde analoji kullan?m?n?n önemi ve analoji örnekleri. Cumhuriyet International Journal of Education, 4(2), 15-28. DOI: https://doi.org/10.30703/cije.321366

Shih, I.-J. (2014). The effect of scratch programming on the seventh graders’ mathematics abilities and problem solving attitudes. Unpublished master’s thesis. Taipei University, Taiwan.

Silverman, D. (2013). Doing qualitative research: A practical handbook. London: SAGE Publications.

Stolee, K. T., & Fristoe, T. (2011, March). Expressing computer science concepts through Kodu game lab. In Proceedings of the 42nd ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, 99-104. Dallas, USA. doi: 10.1145/1953163.1953197 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/1953163.1953197

?ahin, G.(2018). A methodology for teaching programming at middle school level. Unpublished Master Thesis. Karadeniz Technical University, Education Sciences Institute, Trabzon.

Taylor, M., Harlow, A., & Forret, M. (2010). Using a computer programming environment and an interactive whiteboard to investigate Some Mathematical Thinking. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 8 (2010), 561-570. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.12.078 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.12.078

Tsalapatas, H., Heidmann, O., Alimisi, R., & Houstis, E. (2012). Game-based programming towards developing algorithmic thinking skills in primary education. Scientific Bulletin of the" Petru Maior" University of Targu Mures, 9(1), 56-63.

Tsarava, K., Moeller, K., Pinkwart, N., Butz, M., Trautwein, U., & Ninaus, M. (2017, October). Training computational thinking: Game-based unplugged and plugged-in activities in primary school. In European Conference on Games Based Learning, 687-695. Nijmegen, Netherlands.

Wagner, T. (2008). The global achievement gap: Why even our best schools don't teach the new survival skills our children need-and what we can do about it. New York: Basic Books.

Weigend, M. (2014). The digital woodlouse--scaffolding in science-related scratch projects. Informatics in Education, 13(2), 293-305. doi: 10.15388/infedu.2014.09 DOI: https://doi.org/10.15388/infedu.2014.09

Wilson, A., & Moffat, D.C. (2010, September). Evaluating Scratch to introduce younger school children to programming. In Proceedings of the 22nd Annual Psychology of Programming Interest Group, Leganés, Spain.

Wu, W., Chang, C., & He, Y. (2010). Using Scratch as game-based learning tool to reduce learning anxiety in programming course. In Proceedings of Global Learn Asia Pacific, 1845- 1852.

Y?ld?r?m, A., & ?im?ek, H. (2005). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel ara?t?rma yöntemleri. Ankara: Seçkin Yay?nc?l?k.

Zanetti, H., Borges, M., & Ricarte, I. (2016, November). Pensamento Computacional no Ensino de Programação: Uma Revisão Sistemática da Literatura Brasileira. In Brazilian Symposium on Computers in Education (Simpósio Brasileiro de Informática na Educação-SBIE), 27(1), 21. doi: 10.5753/cbie.sbie.2016.21 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5753/cbie.sbie.2016.21

Published

2020-08-14

How to Cite

ERÜMIT, A. K., & SAHIN, G. (2020). Plugged or Unplugged Teaching: A Case Study of Students’ Preferences for the Teaching of Programming. International Journal of Computer Science Education in Schools, 4(1), 3–32. https://doi.org/10.21585/ijcses.v4i1.82

Issue

Vol. 4 No. 1 (2020): International Journal of Computer Science Education in Schools

Section

Full Papers
Copyright & Licensing

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

    1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
    2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
    3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).