Block-Based Programming for Education: A Comprehensive Analysis of Visual Programming Environments in K-12 Learning
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
The use of block-based programming software has a major impact on education, particularly those that are stuck in the early education stage, such as children and beginners (i.e., “New To Programming”). In this paper, we look at how effective these Toolkits for teaching computing are in many different teaching moments if they are created using drag-and-drop Graphic Programming Interfaces with code blocks that interlock together (Just Think of a Jigsaw Puzzle). We will provide examples from many different software platforms and review the current research available that has been published over the last couple of years regarding the benefits of Visual Programming Languages in relation to Thinking Critically About and Creating Computer Programs and Applying Concepts of Implementation in Your Everyday Life. The research used for this paper included a sample size of over 500 students from multiple school districts across Canada and out of these, we found considerable growth in students’ ability to solve problems and their ability to think logically and their confidence to create an original program (i.e., writing/coding itself). Block-based programming should be used as a bridge or scaffold between computational Thinking and real-world application, therefore providing students access + engagement + success in learning to Program and grow their skills in Computer Science Histories.
Downloads
References
M. Resnick et al., “Scratch: Programming for all,” Communications of the ACM, vol. 52, no. 11, pp. 60–67, Nov. 2009.
J. Maloney, M. Resnick, N. Rusk, B. Silverman, and E. Eastmond, “The Scratch programming language and environment,” ACM Transactions on Computing Education, vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 1–15, Nov. 2010.
A. Paivio, Mental Representations: A Dual Coding Approach. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1986.
J. M. Wing, “Computational thinking,” Communications of the ACM, vol. 49, no. 3, pp. 33–35, Mar. 2006.
S. Grover and R. Pea, “Computational thinking in K-12: A review of the state of the field,” Educational Researcher, vol. 42, no. 1, pp. 38– 43, Jan. 2013.
S. Papert, Mindstorms: Children, Computers, and Powerful Ideas. New York: Basic Books, 1980.
K. Brennan and M. Resnick, “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, 2012, pp. 1–25.
D. Weintrop and U. Wilensky, “Comparing block-based and textbased programming in high school computer science classrooms,” ACM Transactions on Computing Education, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 1–25, Oct. 2017.
M. Román-González, J.-C. Pérez-González, and C. Jiménez-Fernández, “Which cognitive abilities underlie computational thinking? Criterion validity of the Computational Thinking Test,” Computers in Human Behavior, vol. 72, pp. 678–691, July 2017.
L. A. Becker and R. S. Oxman, “Designing for diversity: Incorporating multiple perspectives in introductory computer science courses,” ACM Inroads, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 56–63, June 2013.
Y. B. Kafai and Q. Burke, “Constructionist gaming: Understanding the benefits of making games for learning,” Educational Psychologist, vol.
50, no. 4, pp. 313–334, Oct. 2015.
C. Lewis, “The importance of students' attention to program state: A case study,” Computer Science Education, vol. 22, no. 3, pp. 285– 299, 2012.
M. Armoni, O. Meerbaum-Salant, and M. Ben-Ari, “From Scratch to 'real' programming,” ACM Transactions on Computing Education, vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 1–15, Feb. 2015.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
All articles published in our journal are licensed under CC-BY 4.0, which permits authors to retain copyright of their work. This license allows for unrestricted use, sharing, and reproduction of the articles, provided that proper credit is given to the original authors and the source.