Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Attitudes of IT teacher candidates towards computer programming and their self-efficacy and opinions regarding to block-based programming

  • Published:
Education and Information Technologies Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The aim of this study is to determine the attitudes of pre-service teachers towards programming, the perceptions of self-efficacy about block-based programming and the opinions of pre-service teachers on the use of educational robots. This research is a quantitative and qualitative research conducted using a mixed research design. The study group of the research consisted of 140 undergraduate students from the universities in Turkey, studying in the Department of Computer Education and Instructional Technologies. The data were collected through the Attitude Scale of Computer Programming Learning, the Self-Efficacy Perception Scale Related to Block-Based Programming and the interview form developed by the researchers. The quantitative data were analyzed by arithmetic mean, standard deviation, pearson r correlation, regression, t-test and ANOVA analysis, and the qualitative data were analyzed by content analysis method and the following results were obtained: the attitudes of pre-service teachers and their perceptions of self-efficacy are above average and interrelated. The pre-service teachers’ perceptions of self-efficacy vary according to grade level. However, their attitudes do not differ according to class level. However, the perceptions of self-efficacy and the attitudes have been found to differ according to the university where they study gender and education. In addition, pre-service teachers’ opinions about educational robots are that educational robots contribute to problem solving and programming skills.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

Not applicable.

References

  • Afari, E., & Khine, M. S. (2017). Robotics as an educational tool: Impact of lego mindstorms. International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 7(6), 437–442.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Akçay, A., (2015). Analyzing self-efficacy of programming skills in terms of problem solving and inquiry skills. (Master thesis). Necmettin Erbakan University, Institute of Educational, Konya.

  • Altun, A., & Kasalak, İ. (2018). Perceived self-efficacy scale development study related to block-based programming: Scratch case. Educational Technology Theory and Practice, 8(1), 209–225.

    Google Scholar 

  • Atmatzidou, S., & Demetriadis, S. (2016). Advancing students’ computational thinking skills through educational robotics: A study on age and gender relevant differences. Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 75, 661–670.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bardakçı, S., Kılıçer, K., & Özeke, V. (2017). A Projection from Computer Education & Instructional Technologies Departments in Turkey. Educational Technology Theory and Practice, 7(2), 123–148. https://doi.org/10.17943/etku.286627.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baz, F. (2018). A comparative analysis of coding software for children. Current Research in Education, 4(1), 36–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chaudhary, V., Agrawal, V., Sureka, P., & Sureka, A. (2016). An Experience Report on Teaching Programming and Computational Thinking to Elementary Level Children Using Lego Robotics Education Kit. In 2016 IEEE eighth international conference on Technology for Education (T4E). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/t4e.2016.016.

  • Chavkin, N. F., & Williams, D. L. (1988). Critical issues in teacher training for parent involvement. Educational Horizons, 66(2), 87–89.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, C., Haduong, P., Brennan, K., Sonnert, G., & Sadler, P. (2018). The effects of first programming language on college students’ computing attitude and achievement: A comparison of graphical and textual languages. Computer Science Education, 28(2), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/08993408.2018.1547564.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diyas, Y., Brakk, D., Aimambetov, Y., & Sandygulova, A. (2016). Evaluating peer versus teacher robot within educational scenario of programming learning. In the Eleventh ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human Robot Interaction (pp. 425-426). IEEE press.

  • Erol, O., & Kurt, A. A. (2017a). Investigation of CEIT students’ attitudes towards programming. Mehmet Akif Ersoy University Education Faculty Journal, 1(41), 314–325.

    Google Scholar 

  • Erol, O., & Kurt, A. A. (2017b). The effects of teaching programming with scratch on pre-service information technology teachers’ motivation and achievement. Computers in Human Behavior, 77, 11–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.08.017.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ersoy, H., Madran, R. O. & Gülbahar, Y. (2016). A method profosed for teaching programming language: Robotic programming. Academic Information Conference 11-XIII.

  • Fidan, U., & Yalçın, Y. (2012). Lego Nxt Training Kit. The Journal of Afyon Kocatepe University Science Institute, 12(2012), 01510 1–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gezgin, D. M., & Adnan, M. (2016). The Students' of mechanical engineering and econometrics perceptions of self-efficacy research. Ahi Evran University Kırşehir Education Faculty Journal, 17(2), 509–525.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gülbahar, Y., & Kalelioğlu, F. (2018). Information and communication technologies and computer science: The process of curriculum development. National Education Journal, 47(217), 5–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gunbatar, M., & Karalar, H. (2018). Gender differences in middle school students’ attitudes and self-efficacy perceptions towards mBlock programming. European Journal of Educational Research, 7(4), 925–933.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hernández, D., Trejo, H., & Ordoñez, E. (2015). Development of an exploration land robot using low-cost andOpen Sourceplatforms for educational purposes. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 582, 12007. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/582/1/012007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hu, H. (2017). A low-cost autonomous robot and educational platform for intelligent automation experiments. DEStech Transactions on Engineering and Technology Research, (ameme). https://doi.org/10.12783/dtetr/ameme2017/16221

  • Imhof, M., Vollmeyer, R., & Beierlein, C. (2007). Computer use and the gender gap: The issue of access, use, motivation, and performance. Computers in Human Behavior, 23(6), 2823–2837. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2006.05.007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Işık, A., Çiltaş, A., & Baş, F. (2010). Teacher training and teaching profession. Atatürk University Journal of Social Sciences Institute, 14(1), 53–62.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jaipal-Jamani, K., & Angeli, C. (2017). Effect of robotics on elementary preservice teachers’ self-efficacy, science learning, and computational thinking. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 26(2), 175–192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jdeed, M., Zhevzhyk, S., Steinkellner, F., & Elmenreich, W. (2017). Spiderino - A low-cost robot for swarm research and educational purposes. In 2017 13th workshop on intelligent solutions in embedded systems (WISES). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/wises.2017.7986929.

  • Johnson, R. B., & Christensen, L. B. (2004). Educational research: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed approaches. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33(7), 14–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kadir, W. M., Samin, R. E., & Ibrahim, B. S. (2012). Internet controlled robotic arm. Process Engineering, 41, 1065–1071.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kallia, M., & Sentance, S. (2018). Are boys more confident than girls? In Proceedings of the 13th Workshop in Primary and Secondary Computing Education on - WiPSCE ‘18. ACM Press. https://doi.org/10.1145/3265757.3265773.

  • Karimi, Z., Baraani-Dastjerdi, A., Ghasem-Aghaee, N., & Wagner, S. (2016). Links between the personalities, styles and performance in computer programming. Journal of Systems and Software, 111, 228–241. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2015.09.011.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kazakoff, E. R., Sullivan, A., & Bers, M. U. (2012). The effect of a classroom-based intensive robotics and programming workshop on sequencing ability in early childhood. Early Childhood Education Journal, 41(4), 245–255. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-012-0554-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Korkmaz, Ö., & Altun, H. (2014). A validity and reliability study of the learning computer programming attitude scale (LeCoPAS). Mevlana International Journal of Education, 4(1), 30–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Korkmaz, Ö., Çakır, R., Özden, M., Oluk, A., & Sarıoğlu, S. (2015). Investigation of individuals’ computational thinking skills in terms of different variables. Ondokuz Mayıs University Faculty of Education Journal, 34(2), 68–87.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kusuma, I. D., Utaminingrum, F., & Kakeshita, T. (2018). A toolkit to learn algorithmic thinking using mBot robot. Information Processing Society of Japan Kyushu Branch Tuesday Country Information Symposium.

  • Lamb, A., & Johnson, L. (2011). Scratch: Computer programming for 21st century learners.

  • Lego Mindstorms NXT. (2018). In Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Retrieved 22:40, Nov 20, 2018, Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lego_Mindstorms_NXT.

  • Lim, G. W., & Kim, C. S. (2019). The effect of modular robot programming education on learning motivation of informatics curriculum. The Journal of Korean Association of Computer Education, 22(1), 79–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luo, R. C., & Su, K. L. (2003). A multi agent multi sensor based real-time sensory control system for intelligent security robot. IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, 2, 2394–2399.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morse, J. M. (2003). Principles of mixed methods and multimethod research design. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research (pp. 189–208). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Naya, M., Varela, G., Llamas, L., Bautista, M., Prieto, A., & Duro, R. J. (2017). Robobo: The next generation of educational robot. In ROBOT 2017: Third Iberian Robotics Conference (Vol. 2, p. 359). Springer.

  • Numanoğlu, M., & Keser, H. (2017). Robot usage in programming teaching - Mbot example. Bartın University Faculty of Education Journal, 6(2), 497–515. https://doi.org/10.14686/buefad.306198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oktay, A. (2013). Teaching profession and Teacher's specifications. Journal of Educational Sciences, 3(3), 187–193.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ouahbi, I., Kaddari, F., Darhmaoui, H., Elachqar, A., & Lahmine, S. (2015). Learning basic programming concepts by creating games with scratch programming environment. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 191, 1479–1482. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.04.224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Özdemirci, E., Ersin, Ç., & Canal, M. (2017). Realization of application set for Arduino Uno. Mehmet Akif Ersoy University Journal of the Graduate School of Natural and Applied Sciences, 8(special 1), 127–133.

    Google Scholar 

  • Özdinç, F., & Altun, A. (2014). Factors effecting information technology teacher Trainees' programming process. Primary Education Online, 13(4).

  • Özmen, B., & Altun, A. (2014). Undergraduate Students' experiences in programming: Difficulties and obstacles. Turkish Online Journal of Qualitative Inquiry, 5(3), 1–27. http://dergipark.gov.tr/tojqi/issue/21404/229409.

  • Özyurt, Ö., & Özyurt, H. (2014). A study for determining computer programming students’ attitudes towards programming and their programming self-efficacy. Theory and Practice in Education, 11(1), 51–67.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Rubio, M. A., Romero-Zaliz, R., Mañoso, C., & de Madrid, A. P. (2015). Closing the gender gap in an introductory programming course. Computers & Education, 82, 409–420. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.12.003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sayın, Z., & Seferoğlu, S. S. (2016). Coding education as a new 21st century skill and its effect on educational policies. Academic Informatics Conference, 3-5.

  • Shukla, A., Singh, R., Agarwal, R., Suhail, M., Saha, S. K., & Chaudury, S. (2017). Development of a low-cost education platform. In proceedings of the advances in robotics on - AIR ‘17. ACM Press. https://doi.org/10.1145/3132446.3134902.

  • Silva, M. P., Neves, D., Gonçalves, J., & Costa, P. (2016). Proposal of the microfactory robotic competition, of the factory environment and of its official robot which is also a low cost versatile educational robot. In INTED2016 Proceedings. IATED. https://doi.org/10.21125/inted.2016.1008.

  • Sırakaya, M. (2018). Student views on coding training. Ondokuz Mayıs University Faculty of Education Journal, 37(2), 79–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Telegenov, K., Tlegenov, Y., & Shintemirov, A. (2015). A low-cost open-source 3-D-printed three-finger gripper platform for research and educational purposes. IEEE Access, 3, 638–647. https://doi.org/10.1109/access.2015.2433937.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Toh, E., Poh, L., Causo, A., Tzuo, P. W., Chen, I., & Yeo, S. H. (2016). A review on the use of robots in education and young children. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 19(2), 136–143.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsan, J., Boyer, K. E., & Lynch, C. F. (2016). How early does the CS gender gap emerge? In Proceedings of the 47th ACM Technical Symposium on Computing Science Education - SIGCSE ‘16. ACM Press. https://doi.org/10.1145/2839509.2844605.

  • Witherspoon, E. B., Schunn, C. D., Higashi, R. M., & Shoop, R. (2018). Attending to structural programming features predicts differences in learning and motivation. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 34(2), 115–128. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wong, N. K. (2015). Affordable open-source Mobile robot kit for education and research. Davis: University of California.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yağcı, M. (2016). Effect of attitudes of information technologies (IT) preservice teachers and computer programming (CP) students toward programming on their perception regarding their self-sufficiency for programming. International Journal of Human Sciences, 13(1). https://doi.org/10.14687/ijhs.v13i1.3502.

  • Yılmaz, N., Sağıroğlu, Ş., & Bayrak, M. (2013). General aimed web based Mobile robot: Sunar. Gazi University Journal of Faculty of Engineering and Architecture, 21(4).

  • Yu, B. G., Lee, W. G., & Kim, J. (2015). The utilization time of effective programming in the programming education utilizing the robot. International Journal of Imaging and Robotics, 15(3), 106–115.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yukselturk, E., & Altiok, S. (2016). 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. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12453.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yünkül, E., Durak, G., Çankaya, S., & Mısırlı, Z. (2017). The effects of scratch software on students’ computational thinking skills. Necatibey Faculty of Education Journal of Electronic Science and Mathematics Education, 11(2), 502–517. https://doi.org/10.17522/balikesirnef.373424.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computer Education and Instructional Technology, Science Institute, Amasya University, Amasya, Turkey

    Emre Çoban

  2. Department of Computer Engineering, Technology Faculty, Amasya University, Amasya, Turkey

    Özgen Korkmaz

  3. Department of Computer Education and Instructional Technology, Education Faculty, Amasya University, Amasya, Turkey

    Recep Çakır & Feray Uğur Erdoğmuş

Authors
  1. Emre Çoban
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Özgen Korkmaz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Recep Çakır
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Feray Uğur Erdoğmuş
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Özgen Korkmaz.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Çoban, E., Korkmaz, Ö., Çakır, R. et al. Attitudes of IT teacher candidates towards computer programming and their self-efficacy and opinions regarding to block-based programming. Educ Inf Technol 25, 4097–4114 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10164-w

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10164-w

Keywords

Search

Navigation