Bilgi işlemsel Düşünme, Hayat Boyu Öğrenme Yetkinlikleri ve Kişilik Özellikleri Arasındaki İlişkinin Path Analizi Kullanılarak İncelenmesi

Year 2021, Volume: 10 Issue: 2, 281 - 292, 05.06.2021

Hatice Yıldız Durak , Mustafa Sarıtepeci , Beyza Aksu Dünya

https://doi.org/10.14686/buefad.888374

Cited By: 8

Abstract

Bu çalışmanın amacı üniversite öğrencilerinin bilgi-işlemsel düşünme, yaşam boyu öğrenme yeterlikleri ve kişilik özellikleri arasındaki ilişkilerin tespit edilmesidir. Çalışmada belirlenen değişkenler arasındaki ilişkileri açıklayan ve yordayan bir model ortaya çıkarmak amaçlanmıştır. Çalışma grubunun belirlenmesinde uygun/elverişli örnekleme yöntemi kullanılmıştır. Betimsel tarama türündeki bu çalışmada, 228 tane üniversitede öğrenim gören öğrenciden sosyal medya üzerinden veri toplanmıştır. Verilerin analizinde betimsel istatistikler, korelasyon ve yol analizi kullanılmıştır. Araştırma sonucunda; yol analizi bulguları doğrultusunda, dışa dönüklük, yumuşak başlılık, ve deneyime açıklık, hesaplamalı düşünme üzerinde istatistiksel olarak anlamlı ve pozitif etkilidir. Kişilik boyutlarından yumuşak başlılık büyük derecede etkiye sahipken dışa dönüklük ve deneyime açıklık bilgi-işlemsel düşünme üzerinde orta etkiye sahiptir. Ayrıca, bilgi-işlemsel düşünme yaşam boyu öğrenme yetkinliklerini önemli ölçüde yordamaktadır.

Keywords

Bilgi-işlemsel düşünme, Yaşam boyu öğrenme becerileri, Kişilik özellikleri, Üniversite öğrencileri

Examining the Relationship between Computational Thinking, Lifelong Learning Competencies and Personality Traits Using Path Analysis

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to determine the relationship between computational thinking, lifelong learning competencies and personality traits of university students. It was aimed to create a model that explains and predicts the relationship among the variables determined in the study. Convenience sampling method was used in determining the study group. Data were collected from 228 university students through social media. Descriptive statistics, correlation and path analysis were used to analyze the data. The results indicated that extroversion, agreeableness, and openness are statistically significant predictors of computational thinking. Among the personality traits, agreeableness yielded the greatest effect, while extroversion and openness resulted in medium effect on computational thinking. In addition, computational thinking significantly predicts lifelong learning competencies.

Keywords

Computational Thinking, Lifelong Learning Competencies, Personality Traits, University Students

References

• Ambrosio, A. P., Macedo, J., da Silva Almeida, L., & Franco, A. (2014). Exploring Core Cognitive Skills of Computational Thinking. In Psychology of Programming Interest Group Annual Conference 2014 (p. 25).
• Aho, A. V. (2012). Computation and computational thinking. The Computer Journal, 55(7), 832-835. doi:10.1093/comjnl/bxs074 Alsancak Sırakaya, D. (2019). Programlama öğretiminin bilgi işlemsel düşünme becerisine etkisi. Turkish Journal of Social Research/Turkiye Sosyal Arastirmalar Dergisi, 23(2), 575-590.
• Barr, D., Harrison, J., & Conery, L. (2011). Computational thinking: A digital age skill for everyone. Learning & Leading with Technology, 38(6), 20-23.
• Bath, D. M., & Smith, C. D. (2009). The relationship between epistemological beliefs and the propensity for lifelong learning. Studies in Continuing Education, 31(2), 173-189.
• Burbaitė, R., Drąsutė, V., & Štuikys, V. (2018, April). Integration of computational thinking skills in STEM-driven computer science education. In 2018 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON) (pp. 1824-1832). IEEE.
• Chartrand, J. M., Rose, M. L., Elliott, T. R., Marmarosh, C., & Caldwell, S. (1993). Peeling back the onion: Personality, problem solving, and career decision-making style correlates of career indecision. Journal of Career Assessment, 1(1), 66-82.
• Chen, G., Shen, J., Barth-Cohen, L., Jiang, S., Huang, X., & Eltoukhy, M. (2017). Assessing elementary students’ computational thinking in everyday reasoning and robotics programming. Computers & Education, 109, 162-175.
• Costa Jr, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Four ways five factors are basic. Personality and individual differences, 13(6), 653-665.
• Curtis, R. G., Windsor, T. D., & Soubelet, A. (2015). The relationship between Big-5 personality traits and cognitive ability in older adults–a review. Aging, Neuropsychology, and Cognition, 22(1), 42-71.
• Durak, H. Y., & Durak, A. (2020). Öğretim Teknolojisi ve Hayat Boyu Öğrenme: Hayat Boyu Öğrenme Bağlamında Teknoloji Kullanımını Ele Alan Tezlerde Ortaya Çıkan Eğilimler, Fırsatlar ve Zorluklar. [Educational Technology and Lifelong Learning: Tendencies, Oppurtunities and Challenges in Thesis on Technology Use in Lifelong Learning]. Öğretim Teknolojisi ve Hayat Boyu Öğrenme Dergisi, 1(1), 88-106.
• Ekşioğlu, S., Tarhan, S., & Gündüz, H. Ç. (2017). Yaşam boyu öğrenme eğilimleri İle özyetkinlik beklentisi ve kişilik özellikleri arasındaki ilişkinin incelenmesi. [ Investigating the Relationship among Lifelong Learning Tendency, Self-competency Expectations and Personality Traits]. Kastamonu Eğitim Dergisi, 25(5), 1925-1940.
• European Commission (2018). Proposal for a council recommendation on key competences for lifelong learning. Brussels https://eur-lex. europa. eu/legalcontent/EN/TXT.
• Field, J. (2012). Transitions in lifelong learning: Public issues, private troubles, liminal identities. Studies for the Learning Society, 2, 4–11.
• Gülbahar, Y. Kert, S. B. ve Kalelioğlu F. (2019). Bilgi işlemsel düşünme becerisine yönelik öz yeterlik algısı ölçeği: Geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Türk Bilgisayar ve Matematik Eğitimi Dergisi 10(1), 1-29.
• ISTE(2015). CT Leadership toolkit. Retrieved from http://www.iste.org/docs/ct-documents/ctleadershipt-toolkit.pdf?sfvrsn=4.
• Klug, J., Lüftenegger, M., Bergsmann, E., Spiel, C., & Schober, B. (2016). Secondary school students’ LLL competencies, and their relation with classroom structure and achievement. Frontiers in psychology, 7, 680.
• Korkmaz, Ö., Çakır, R., & Özden, M. Y. (2015). Bilgisayarca düşünme beceri düzeyleri ölçeğinin (bdbd) ortaokul düzeyine uyarlanması. Gazi Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 1(2), 143-162.
• Korkmaz, Ö., Cakir, R., & Özden, M. Y. (2017). A validity and reliability study of the computational thinking scales (CTS). Computers in Human Behavior, 72, 558-569.
• Landers, R. N., & Lounsbury, J. W. (2006). An investigation of Big Five and narrow personality traits in relation to Internet usage. Computers in human behavior, 22(2), 283-293.
• Lin, L. Y. (2010). The relationship of consumer personality trait, brand personality and brand loyalty: an empirical study of toys and video games buyers. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 4, 17.
• Lüftenegger, M., Finsterwald, M., Klug, J., Bergsmann, E., van de Schoot, R., Schober, B., & Wagner, P. (2016). Fostering pupils’ lifelong learning competencies in the classroom: evaluation of a training programme using a multivariate multilevel growth curve approach. European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 13(6), 719-736.
• Juškevičienė, A., & Dagienė, V. (2018). Computational thinking relationship with digital competence. Informatics in Education, 17(2), 265-284.
• McCrae, R. R., & John, O. P. (1992). An introduction to the five‐factor model and its applications. Journal of personality, 60(2), 175-215.
• Nouri, J., Zhang, L., Mannila, L., & Norén, E. (2020). Development of computational thinking, digital competence and 21st century skills when learning programming in K-9. Education Inquiry, 11(1), 1-17.
• Ones, D. S., Viswesvaran, C., & Dilchert, S. (2005). Cognitive Ability in Selection Decisions. In O. Wilhelm & R. W. Engle (Eds.), Handbook of understanding and measuring intelligence (p. 431–468). Sage Publications, Inc. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781452233529.n24
• Reiter-Palmon, R., Illies, J. J., & Kobe-Cross, L. M. (2009). Conscientiousness is not always a good predictor of performance: The case of creativity. The International Journal of Creativity & Problem Solving, 19(2), 27.
• Roccas, S., Sagiv, L., Schwartz, S. H., & Knafo, A. (2002). The big five personality factors and personal values. Personality and social psychology bulletin, 28(6), 789-801.
• Román-González, M., Pérez-González, J. C., Moreno-León, J., & Robles, G. (2016). Does computational thinking correlate with personality? The non-cognitive side of computational thinking. In Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Technological Ecosystems for Enhancing Multiculturality (pp. 51-58).
• Román-González, M., Pérez-González, J. C., Moreno-León, J., & Robles, G. (2018). Extending the nomological network of computational thinking with non-cognitive factors. Computers in Human Behavior, 80, 441-459.
• Saleem, H., Beaudry, A., & Croteau, A. M. (2011). Antecedents of computer self-efficacy: A study of the role of personality traits and gender. Computers in human behavior, 27(5), 1922-1936.
• Sayın, Z., & Seferoğlu, S. S. (2016). Yeni bir 21. yüzyıl becerisi olarak kodlama eğitimi ve kodlamanın eğitim politikalarına etkisi. Akademik Bilişim Konferansı, 3-5.
• Scherer, R., & Gustafsson, J. E. (2015). The relations among openness, perseverance, and performance in creative problem solving: A substantive-methodological approach. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 18, 4-17.
• Sengupta, P., Dickes, A., & Farris, A. (2018). Toward a phenomenology of computational thinking in STEM education. In Computational thinking in the STEM disciplines (pp. 49-72). Springer, Cham.
• Sharples, M. (2000). The design of personal mobile technologies for lifelong learning. Computers & education, 34(3-4), 177-193.
• Shute, V. J., Sun, C., & Asbell-Clarke, J. (2017). Demystifying computational thinking. Educational Research Review, 22, 142-158.
• Stajkovic, A. D., Bandura, A., Locke, E. A., Lee, D., & Sergent, K. (2018). Test of three conceptual models of influence of the big five personality traits and self-efficacy on academic performance: A meta-analytic path-analysis. Personality and individual differences, 120, 238-245.
• Sulea, C., Van Beek, I., Sarbescu, P., Virga, D., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2015). Engagement, boredom, and burnout among students: Basic need satisfaction matters more than personality traits. Learning and Individual Differences, 42, 132-138. T. C. Cumhurbaşkanlığı Strateji ve Bütçe Başkanlığı. (2019). On Birinci Kalkınma Planı (2019-2023). http://www.sbb.gov.tr/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/OnbirinciKalkinmaPlani.pdf adresinden erişilmiştir.
• Watson, D., & Clark, L. A. (1997). Extraversion and its positive emotional core. In Handbook of personality psychology (pp. 767-793). Academic Press.
• Wing, J. M. (2006). Computational thinking. Communications of the ACM, 49(3), 33-35.
• Yildiz-Durak, H., & Saritepeci, M. (2018). Analysis of the relation between computational thinking skills and various variables with the structural equation model. Computers & Education, 116, 191-202.
• Yildiz Durak, H., & Saritepeci, M. (2019). Occupational burnout and cyberloafing among teachers: Analysis of personality traits, individual and occupational status variables as predictors. The Social Science Journal, 56(1), 69-87.
• Zhang, L., & Nouri, J. (2019). A systematic review of learning computational thinking through Scratch in K-9. Computers & Education, 141, 103607.