Computational thinking (CT) is a fundamental skill and an analytical ability that children in the twenty-first century should develop. Students should begin to work with algorithmic problem-solving and computational methods in K-12. Drawing on a conceptual framework (IGGIA) that combines CT and problem-solving, this study designed and implemented an interdisciplinary Scratch course in a primary school, examined the impact of the new problem-solving instructional approach (the adapted IGGIA) on pupils’ CT skills and self-efficacy, and explored the gender differences in these two aspects. A pretest–posttest nonequivalent group design was conducted among 63 fifth-grade students in two computer science classes over 14 weeks. Both quantitative and qualitative data were collected through the administration of CT scales, Scratch artifacts analysis and focus group interviews. The results revealed that the adapted IGGIA (1) significantly improved the CT skills of primary school students; (2) had a significant positive impact on pupils’ CT self-efficacy, especially on their critical thinking, algorithmic thinking and problem-solving; and (3) significantly enhanced girls’ CT skills and self-efficacy. These findings indicated that problem-solving instructional approaches could promote both cognitive and noncognitive aspects of students’ deeper computational learning.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Subscribe to journal
Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Aho, A. V. (2012). Computation and computational thinking. Computer Journal, 55(7), 832–835.
Askar, P., & Davenport, D. (2009). An investigation of factors related to self-efficacy for Java Programming among engineering students. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 8(1), 26–32.
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.
Baek, Y., Yang, D., & Fan, Y. (2019). Understanding second grader’s computational thinking skills in robotics through their individual traits. Information Discovery and Delivery, 47(4), 218–228.
Barr, V., & Stephenson, C. (2011). Bringing computational thinking to K-12: What is involved and what is the role of the computer science education community? ACM Inroads, 2(1), 48–54.
Basu, S., Biswas, G., & Kinnebrew, J. S. (2017). Learner modeling for adaptive scaffolding in a computational thinking-based science learning environment. User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction, 27(1), 5–53.
Benitti, F. B. V., & Spolaôr, N. (2017). How have robots supported STEM teaching? In M. S. Khine (Ed.), Robotics in STEM education: redesigning the learning experience (pp. 103–129). Springer.
Brennan, K., & Resnick, M. (2012). New frameworks for studying and assessing the development of computational thinking. Proceedings of the 2012 Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association (pp. 1–25), Vancouver, Canada.
Celik, V., & Yesilyurt, E. (2013). Attitudes to technology, perceived computer self-efficacy and computer anxiety as predictors of computer supported education. Computers & Education, 60(1), 148–158.
Cheryan, S., Master, A., & Meltzoff, A. N. (2015). Cultural stereotypes as gatekeepers: Increasing girls’ interest in computer science and engineering by diversifying stereotypes. Frontiers in Psychology. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00049
Chiazzese, G., Arrigo, M., Chifari, A., Lonati, V., & Tosto, C. (2019). Educational robotics in primary school: Measuring the development of computational thinking skills with the Bebras tasks. Informatics. https://doi.org/10.3390/informatics6040043
Crews, T., & Butterfield, J. (2003). Gender differences in beginning programming: An empirical study on improving performance parity. Campus-Wide Information Systems, 20(5), 186–192.
CSTA, & ISTE (2011). Operational Definition of Computational Thinking for K-12 Education. http://www.iste.org/docs/pdfs/Operational-Definition-of-Computational-Thinking.pdf. Accessed 2 Aug 2019.
del Olmo-Muno, J., Cozar-Gutierrez, R., & Gonzalez-Calero, J. A. (2020). Computational thinking through unplugged activities in early years of primary education. Computers & Education. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103832
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.
Djurdjevic-Pahl, A., Pahl, C., Fronza, I., & El Ioini, N. (2016). A pathway into computational thinking in primary schools. International symposium on emerging technologies for education (pp. 165–175). Springer.
Drabowicz, T. (2014). Gender and digital usage inequality among adolescents: A comparative study of 39 countries. Computers & Education, 74, 98–111.
Espino, E. E. E., & González, C. G. (2016). Gender and computational thinking: review of the literature and applications. Proceedings of the XVII International Conference on Human Computer Interaction. https://doi.org/10.1145/2998626.2998665
Grover, S., Pea, R., & Cooper, S. (2015). Designing for deeper learning in a blended computer science course for middle school students. Computer Science Education, 25(2), 199–237.
Hendry, G. D., Frommer, M., & Walker, R. A. (1999). Constructivism and problem-based learning. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 23(3), 369–371.
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.
Jones, B. F., Rasmussen, C. M., & Moffitt, M. C. (1997). Real-life problem solving: A collaborative approach to interdisciplinary learning (pp. 57–84). American Psychological Association.
Kalelioglu, 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.
Kalelioglu, F., Gülbahar, Y., & Kukul, V. (2016). A framework for computational thinking based on a systematic research review. Baltic Journal of Modern Computing, 4(3), 583–596.
Korkmaz, Ö., & Bai, X. (2019). Adapting computational thinking scale (CTS) for Chinese high school students and their thinking scale skills level. Participatory Educational Research, 6(1), 10–12.
Krämer, N. C., Karacora, B., Lucas, G., Dehghani, M., Rüther, G., & Gratch, J. (2016). Closing the gender gap in STEM with friendly male instructors? On the effects of rapport behavior and gender of a virtual agent in an instructional interaction. Computers & Education, 99, 1–13.
Lai, A. F., & Yang, S. M. (2011). The learning effect of visualized programming learning on 6 th graders’ problem solving and logical reasoning abilities. Proceedings of 2011 International Conference on Electrical and Control Engineering (pp. 6940–6944). Yichang, China, 16–18 September 2011.
Lye, S. Y., & Koh, J. H. L. (2014). Review on teaching and learning of computational thinking through programming: What is next for K-12? Computers in Human Behavior, 41, 51–61.
Lykke, M., Coto, M., Mora, S., Vandel, N., & Jantzen, C. (2014). Motivating programming students by problem based learning and LEGO robots. Proceedings of 2014 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (pp. 544–555). Istanbul, Turkey, 3–5 April 2014.
Maddrey, E. (2011). The Effect of Problem-Solving Instruction on the Programming Self-efficacy and Achievement of Introductory Computer Science Students. Ph.D. Thesis, Nova Southeastern University.
Martin, D. P., & Rimm-Kaufman, S. E. (2015). Do student self-efficacy and teacher-student interaction quality contribute to emotional and social engagement in fifth grade math. Journal of School Psychology, 53(5), 359–373.
Moreno-León, J., Robles, G., & Román-González, M. (2015). Dr. Scratch: Automatic analysis of Scratch projects to assess and foster computational thinking. RED. Red-Revista De Educacion A Distancia, 46, 1–23.
Panoutsopoulos, B. (2011). Introducing science technology engineering and mathematics in robotics outreach programs. Technology Interface International Journal, 12(1), 47–53.
Papavlasopoulou, S., Giannakos, M. N., & Jaccheri, L. (2019). Exploring children’s learning experience in constructionism-based coding activities through design-based research. Computers in Human Behavior, 99, 415–427.
Pereira, H. B. D. B., Zebende, G. F., & Moret, M. A. (2010). Learning computer programming: Implementing a fractal in a turing machine. Computers & Education, 55(2), 767–776.
Pillay, N., & Jugoo, V. R. (2005). An investigation into student characteristics affecting novice programming performance. SIGCSE Bulletin, 37(4), 107–110.
Pucher, R., & Lehner, M. (2011). Project based learning in computer science–a review of more than 500 projects. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 29, 1561–1566.
Robertson, J., & Howells, C. (2008). Computer game design: Opportunities for successful learning. Computers in Education, 50(2), 559–578.
Román-González, M., Pérez-González, J., & Jiménez-Fernández, C. (2017). Which cognitive abilities underlie computational thinking? criterion validity of the computational thinking test. Computers in Human Behavior, 72, 678–691.
Román-González, M., Pérez-González, J., Moreno-León, J., & Robles, G. (2018). Extending the nomological network of computational thinking with non-cognitive factors. Computers in Human Behavior, 80, 441–459.
Rubio, M. A., Romero-Zaliz, R., Mañoso, C., & Angel, P. (2015). Closing the gender gap in an introductory programming course. Computers & Education, 82, 409–420.
Ruona, W. E. A. (2005). Analyzing qualitative data. In R. A. Swanson & E. F. Holton (Eds.), Foundations and methods of inquiry (pp. 223–263). Berrett-Koehler.
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.
Sáinz, M., & López-Sáez, M. (2010). Gender differences in computer attitudes and the choice of technology-related occupations in a sample of secondary students in Spain. Computers & Education, 54(2), 578–587.
Savery, J. R. (2006). Overview of problem-based learning: Definitions and distinctions. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-based Learning. https://doi.org/10.7771/1541-5015.1002
Schunk, D. H., & Pajares, F. (2005). Competence perceptions and academic functioning. In A. J. Elliot & C. S. Dweck (Eds.), Handbook of competence and motivation (pp. 85–104). The Guilford Press.
Selby, C. C., & Woollard, J. (2013). Computational thinking: The developing definition. Special Interest Group on Computer Science Education (SIGCSE). Canterbury, England, 1–3 July 2013.
Sohrabi, R., Mohammadi, A., & Aghdam, G. A. (2013). Effectiveness of group counseling with problem solving approach on educational self-efficacy improving. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 84, 1782–1784.
Shute, V. J., Sun, C., & Asbell-Clarke, J. (2017). Demystifying computational thinking. Educational Research Review, 22, 142–158.
Siu-Cheung, K., Ming, C. M., & Ming, L. (2018). A study of primary school students’ interest, collaboration attitude, and programming empowerment in computational thinking education. Computers & Education, 127, 178–189.
Slavin, R. E. (2014). Educational psychology: Theory and practice (11th edition). Pearson
Tang, X., Yin, Y., Lin, Q., Hadad, R., & Zhai, X. (2020). Assessing computational thinking: A systematic review of empirical studies. Computers & Education, 148, 1–22.
Ting-Chia, H., Shao-Chen, C., & Yu-Ting, H. (2018). How to learn and how to teach computational thinking: Suggestions based on a review of the literature. Computers & Education, 126, 296–310.
Tsai, C. Y. (2019). Improving students’ understanding of basic programming concepts through visual programming language: The role of self-efficacy. Computers in Human Behavior, 95, 224–232.
Vekiri, I., & Chronaki, A. (2008). Gender issues in technology use: Perceived social support, computer self-efficacy and value beliefs, and computer use beyond school. Computers & Education, 51(3), 1392–1404.
Voskoglou, M. G., & Buckley, S. (2012). Problem solving and computational thinking in a learning environment. Egyptian Computer Science Journal, 36(4), 28–46.
Wang, X. M., & Hwang, G. J. (2017). A problem posing-based practicing strategy for facilitating students’ computer programming skills in the team-based learning mode. Educational Technology Research & Development, 65(6), 1655–1671.
Wei, X., Lin, L., Meng, N., Tan, W., & Kong, S. C. (2020). The effectiveness of partial pair programming on elementary school students’ computational thinking skills and self-efficacy. Computers & Education, 160, 1–15.
Weintrop, D., Beheshti, E., Horn, M., Orton, K., Jona, K., Trouille, L., & Wilensky, U. (2016). Defining computational thinking for mathematics and science classrooms. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 25(1), 127–147.
Webb, H. C. (2013). Injecting Computational Thinking into Computing Activities for Middle School Girls. Ph.D. Thesis. The Pennsylvania State University.
Werner, L. L., Hanks, B., & McDowell, C. (2004). Pair-programming helps female computer science students. Journal on Educational Resources in Computing. https://doi.org/10.1145/1060071.1060075
Wing, J. M. (2006). Computational thinking. Communications of the ACM, 49(3), 33–35.
Yadav, A., Mayfield, C., Zhou, N., Hambrusch, S., & Korb, J. T. (2014). Computational thinking in elementary and secondary teacher education. ACM Transactions on Computing Education (TOCE), 14(1), 1–16.
Yukselturk, E., & Altiok, S. (2017). 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.
Zhang, L., & Nouri, J. (2019). A systematic review of learning computational thinking through Scratch in K-9. Computers & Education. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103607
Thanks to Miss Xu Li for her teaching assistance in this research, and thanks to anonymous reviewers for comments on earlier drafts.
This study was supported by the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities, SNNU (18SZZD01) and the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 61977044).
Conflict of interest
Research involving human participants and/or animals
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
About this article
Cite this article
Ma, H., Zhao, M., Wang, H. et al. Promoting pupils’ computational thinking skills and self-efficacy: a problem-solving instructional approach. Education Tech Research Dev 69, 1599–1616 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-021-10016-5
- IGGIA framework
- Computational thinking skills
- Computational thinking self-efficacy
- Scratch programming