Patterns of Computational Thinking Development while Solving Unplugged Coding Activities Coupled with the 3S Approach for Self-Directed Learning
Using unplugged coding activities to promote computational thinking (CT) among secondary learners has become increasing popular. Benefits of using unp.
- Pub. date: July 15, 2020
- Pages: 1025-1045
- 619 Downloads
- 1139 Views
- 8 Citations
Using unplugged coding activities to promote computational thinking (CT) among secondary learners has become increasing popular. Benefits of using unplugged coding activities involve the cost-effective implementation, the ability to promote computer science concepts and self-efficacy in learning computer programming, and the engaging nature of active learning through collaboration. However, there is insufficient information regarding qualitative investigation on how learners develop their CT skills while working on unplugged coding tasks. This study therefore developed unplugged coding activities using flowcharts for high school students to learn computer science concepts, and to promote their CT skills. The activities consisted of five missions encompassing the concepts of sequence, repetition, input & variable, condition, and loop with condition. The data collection was carried out with 120 high students whose participation was video recorded and observed. A thematic analysis revealed that patterns of CT development started from initially developed, to partially developed and fully developed stages, respectively. The various stages were derived from different abilities to apply the computer science concepts to complete the missions with different expressions of CT skills. In addition, the study proposed a 3S self-directed learning approach for fostering the CT development, composing of self-check (in pairs), self-debug (in pairs), and scaffolding. It is therefore suggested to use the 3S model integrated with the unplugged coding activities for developing CT among high school learners.
Keywords: Computational thinking, unplugged coding, flowcharts, 3S approach, computer science concepts.
References
Aho, A. V. (2012). Computation and computational thinking. The Computer Journal, 55(7), 832–835. https://doi.org/10.1093/comjnl/bxs074
Alaoutinen, S., & Smolander, K. (2010). Student self-assessment in a programming course using bloom’s revised taxonomy. In R. Ayfer & J. Impagliazzo (Eds.), Proceedings in the 15th Annual Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education (pp. 155–159). Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/1822090.1822135
Bachu, E., & Bernard, M. (2014). Visualizing problem solving in a strategy game for teaching programming. In H. R. Arabnia, A. Bahrami, L. Deligiannidis, G. Jandieri, A. M. G. Solo & F. G. Tinetti (Eds.), Proceedings in the 2014 International Conference on Frontiers in Education: Computer Science and Computer Engineering (pp. 1–7). CSREA Press.
Bourdeau, D., Roberts, D., Wood, B., & Korioth, J. (2017). A study of video-mediated opportunities for self-directed learning in required core curriculum. International Journal of Educational Methodology, 3(2), 85–91. https://doi.org/10.12973/ijem.3.2.85
Brackmann, C. P., Roman-gonzalez, M., Robles, G., Moreno-leon, J., Casali, A., Barone, D., Federal, I., Iffar, F., Brackmann, C. P., Roman-gonzalez, M., Rey, U., Carlos, J., Rey, U., Carlos, J., Moreno-leon, J., Casali, A., & Barone, D. (2017). Development of computational thinking skills through unplugged activities in primary school. In M. Knobelsdorf & R. Romeike (Eds.), Proceedings in the 12th Workshop on Primary and Secondary Computing Education (pp. 65–72). Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/3137065.3137069
Brennan, K., & Resnick, M. (2012). New frameworks for studying and assessing the development of computational thinking. In A. F. Ball (Ed.), Proceedings in the 2012 Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association (pp. 25–50). American Educational Research Association. http://scratched.gse.harvard.edu/ct/files/AERA2012.pdf
Brusilovsky, P., & Sosnovsky, S. (2005). Individualized exercises for self-assessment of programming knowledge: an evaluation of quizpack. Journal on Educational Resources in Computing, 5(3), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1145/1163405.1163411
Bulus Kirikkaya, E., & Basaran, B. (2019). Investigation of the effect of the integration of arduino to electrical experiments on students’ attitudes towards technology and ict by the mixed method. European Journal of Educational Research, 8(1), 31–48. https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.8.1.31
Changtong, N., Maneejak, N., & Yasri, P. (2020). Approaches for implementing stem (science, technology, engineering & mathematics) activities among middle school students in thailand. International Journal of Educational Methodology, 6(1), 185–198. https://doi.org/10.12973/ijem.6.1.185
Ertugrul-Akyol, B. (2019). Development of computational thinking scale : Validity and reliability study. International Journal of Educational Methodology, 5(3), 421–432. https://doi.org/10.12973/ijem.5.3.421
Giordano, D., & Maiorana, F. (2015). Teaching algorithms: visual language vs flowchart vs textual language. In O. Kaynak, M. E. Auer & M. Llamas (Eds.), Proceedings in 2015 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON) (pp. 499–504). Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers. https://doi.org/10.1109/EDUCON.2015.7096016
Grover, S., & Pea, R. (2013). Computational thinking in k-12: a review of the state of the field. Educational Researcher, 42(1), 38–43. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X12463051
Gunbatar, M. S., & Karalar, H. (2018). Gender differences in middle school students’ attitudes and self-efficacy perceptions towards mblock programming. European Journal of Educational Research, 7(4), 925. https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.7.4.923
Hooshyar, D., Ahmad, R. B., Yousefi, M., Fathi, M., Horng, S.-J., & Lim, H. (2016). Applying an online game-based formative assessment in a flowchart-based intelligent tutoring system for improving problem-solving skills. Computers & Education, 94, 18–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.10.013
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
Hubwieser, P., Giannakos, M., Berges, M., Brinda, T., Diethelm, I., Magenheim, J., Pal, Y., Jackova, J., & Jasute, E. (2015). A global snapshot of computer science education in k-12 schools. In N. Ragonis & P. Kinnunen (Eds.), Proceedings in the 2015 ITiCSE on Working Group Reports (pp. 65–83). Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/2858796.2858799
Kert, S. B. (2019). A proposal of in-service teacher training approach for computer science teachers. European Journal of Educational Research, 8(2), 477–489. https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.8.2.477
Kim, N. J., Belland, B. R., & Walker, A. E. (2018). Effectiveness of computer-based scaffolding in the context of problem-based learning for stem education: bayesian meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 30(2), 397–429. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-017-9419-1
Linder, S. P., Abbott, D., & Fromberger, M. J. (2006). An instructional scaffolding approach to teaching software design. Journal of Computing Sciences in Colleges, 21(6), 238–250. https://doi.org/10.5555/1127442.1127472
Lye, S. Y., Koh, J. H. L., Yee Lye, S., & Hwee Ling Koh, J. (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
Mladenovic, M., Boljat, I., & Zanko, Z. (2018). Comparing loops misconceptions in block-based and text-based programming languages at the k-12 level. Education and Information Technologies, 23(4), 1483–1500. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-017-9673-3
Noone, M., & Mooney, A. (2018). Visual and textual programming languages: a systematic review of the literature. Journal of Computers in Education, 5(2), 149–174. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-018-0101-5
Pauline-Graf, D., & Mandel, S. E. (2019). Defining preliminary research for digital game-based learning evaluation: Best practices. International Journal of Educational Methodology, 5(4), 623–635. https://doi.org/10.12973/ijem.5.4.623
Pisanpanumas, P., & Yasri, P. (2018). SOLO taxonomy: increased complexity of conceptual understanding about the interconnection between convection and natural disasters using hands-on activities. SSRN Electronic Journal, 7(2), 91–103. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3262589
Rahimi, E., Barendsen, E., & Henze, I. (2017). Identifying students’ misconceptions on basic algorithmic concepts through flowchart analysis. In V. Dagien & A. Hellas (Eds.), Informatics in Schools: Focus on Learning Programming (pp. 155–168). Springer International Publishing.
Roman-Gonzalez, M., Perez-Gonzalez, J.-C., & Jimenez-Fernandez, C. (2017). Which cognitive abilities underlie computational thinking? criterion validity of the computational thinking test. Computers in Human Behavior, 72, 678–691. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.08.047
Scanlan, D. A. (1989). Structured flowcharts outperform pseudocode: an experimental comparison. IEEE Software, 6(5), 28–36. https://doi.org/10.1109/52.35587
Setiawan, D. W., Suharno, & Triyanto. (2019). The influence of active learning on the concept of mastery of sains learning by fifth grade students at primary school. International Journal of Educational Methodology, 5(1), 177–181. https://doi.org/10.12973/ijem.5.1.189
Sharma, R., Jain, A., Gupta, N., Garg, S., Batta, M., & Dhir, S. K. (2016). Impact of self-assessment by students on their learning. International Journal of Applied & Basic Medical Research, 6(3), 226–229. https://doi.org/10.4103/2229-516X.186961
Shute, V. J., Sun, C., & Asbell-clarke, J. (2017). Demystifying computational thinking. Educational Research Review, 22, 142–158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2017.09.003
Sondakh, D. E., Osman, K., & Zainudin, S. (2020). A proposal for holistic assessment of computational thinking for undergraduate: content validity. European Journal of Educational Research, 9(1), 33–50. https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.9.1.33
Threekunprapa, A., & Yasri, P. (n.d.). The role of augmented reality based unplugged computer programming approach in the effectiveness of computational thinking. International Journal of Mobile Learning and Organisation.
Threekunprapa, A., & Yasri, P. (2020). Unplugged coding using flowblocks for promoting computational thinking and programming among secondary school students. International Journal of Instruction, 13(3). Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.29333/
Toheri, Winarso, W., & Haqq, A. A. (2020). Where exactly for enhance critical and creative thinking: the use of problem posing or contextual learning. European Journal of Educational Research, 9(2), 877–887. https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.9.2.877
Van De Pol, J., Volman, M., & Beishuizen, J. (2010). Scaffolding in teacher–student interaction: a decade of research. Educational Psychology Review, 22, 271–296. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-010-9127-6
Westphal, B. T., Harris, F. C., & Fadali, M. S. (2003). Graphical programming: a vehicle for teaching computer problem solving. In E. Innovations (Ed.), Proceedings in 33rd Annual Frontiers in Education (FIE2003) (pp. 19–23). Stipes Publishing L.L.C. https://doi.org/10.1109/FIE.2003.1264759
Wing, J. M. (2006). Computational thinking. Communications of the ACM, 49(3), 33-35. https://doi.org/10.1145/1118178.1118215
Yuksel, H. (2019). Experiences of prospective physical education teachers on active gaming within the context of school-based physical activity. European Journal of Educational Research, 8(1), 199–211. https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.8.1.199
Zanko, Z., Mladenovic, M., & Boljat, I. (2019). Misconceptions about variables at the k-12 level. Education and Information Technologies, 24(2), 1251–1268. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-018-9824-1
Zvarych, I., Kalaur, S., Prymachenko, N. M., Romashchenko, I. V., & Romanyshyna, O. I. (2019). Gamification as a tool for stimulating the educational activity of students of higher educational institutions of ukraine and the united states. European Journal of Educational Research, 8(2), 875–891. https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.8.3.875