Examination of Projects Prepared by Prospective Secondary School Mathematics Teachers Using Scratch

Year 2023, , 209 - 221, 30.06.2023

Selva Büşra Turan , Ahmet Erdoğan

https://doi.org/10.51535/tell.1250651

Abstract

The aim of this study is to examine the projects prepared by prospective secondary school mathematics teachers using Scratch for the learning outcomes in the Mathematics Course Curriculum (Secondary School 5th, 6th, 7th, and 8th grades) in terms of the proficiency level of programming concepts and computational thinking concepts. 73 prospective secondary school mathematics teachers participated in this research in which the case study design was used. Prospective teachers prepared Scratch projects related to the 5th, 6th, 7th, and 8th-grade level learning outcomes of the Mathematics Course Curriculum. A total of 292 Scratch projects were examined within the scope of the research. Scratch projects were evaluated through the "Scratch Projects Assessment Rubric" and the "Dr. Scratch Assessment Tool". The result of the research showed that most of the criteria in the "Scratch Projects Assessment Rubric" were provided in more projects than at the beginning as new projects were developed by the prospective teachers at different grade levels every week. Nevertheless, it was evident from the Dr. Scratch evaluation that as the prospective instructors utilized the Scratch program, the level of proficiency of the projects they created is improved. It is recognized that this beneficial development has occurred because of the rise in the number of potential instructors who have experience with the Scratch program.

Keywords

Prospective Mathematics Teachers, Scratch, Programming Concepts, Computational Thinking Concepts

References

• Akkoç, H. (2013). Using technology in mathematics education for conceptual understanding. M.F. Özmantar, E. Bingölbali ve H. Akkoç (Ed). Mathematical Misconceptions and Proposed Solutions (pp. 361-392). Ankara: Pegem Academy.
• Akpınar Y. & Altun, A. (2014). The need for programming education in information society schools. Elementary Education Online 13(1), 1-4.
• Armoni, M. (2013). On teaching abstraction in CS to novices. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 32(3), 265-284.
• Atun, H. & Usta, E. (2019). The effects of programming education planned with TPACK framework on learning outcomes. Participatory Educational Research, 6(2), 26-36.
• Aytekin, A., Sönmez Çakır, F., Yücel, Y.B. & Kulaözü, İ. (2018). Coiıng science directed to future and some methods to be available and coding learned. Eurasian Journal of Researches in Social and Economics (EJRSE), 5(5), 24-41.
• Calder, N. (2018). Using Scratch to facilitate mathematical thinking’. Waikato Journal of Education, 23(2), 43-58. https://doi.org/10.15663/wje.v23i2.654.
• Demir, Ö. & Seferoğlu, S.S. (2017). New concepts, different uses: An assessment of computational thinking. H.F. Odabaşı, B. Akkoyunlu & A. İşman (Ed.). Educational technology readings 2017 (pp. 801-830). Sakarya: Sakarya University Press.
• 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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.08.006.
• Doğan, S. (2014). Functions of education. C.T. Uğurlu (Ed.), Introduction to educational science (pp.39-53). Eğiten Book.
• Erdoğan, T. & Şimşek, A. (2018). Teaching programming and drama. Y. Gülbahar & H. Karal (Ed.), Teaching programming from theory to practice (pp. 237-269). Ankara: Pegem Academy.
• Ersoy, Y. (1997). Mathematics education in schools: Literacy in mathematics. Hacettepe University Journal of Education, 13, 115-120.
• Erümit, A. K. & Berigel, M. (2018). History of programming languages and programming teaching. Y. Gülbahar ve H. Karal (Ed.), Teaching programming from theory to practice (pp. 2-36). Ankara: Pegem Academy.
• Funke, A., Geldreich, K., & Hubwieser, P. (2017, April). Analysis of scratch projects of an introductory programming course for primary school students. Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON),1229-1236.
• Gabriele, L., Bertacchini, F., Tavernise, A., Vaca-Cárdenas, L., Pantano, P., & Bilotta, E. (2019). Lesson planning by computational thinking skills in Italian pre-service teachers. Informatics in Education, 18(1), 69-104.
• Genç, Z. & Karakuş, S. (2011). Learning through design: Using scratch in instructional computer games design. 5th International Computer & Instructional Technologies Symposium, 22-24 September 2011 Fırat University, Elazıg, Turkey.
• Germia, E. & Panorkou, N. (2020). Using scratch programming to explore coordinates. Mathematics teacher: Learning & Teaching PK-12 113 (4), 293-300. https://doi.org/10.5951/MTLT.2018.0032.
• Gomes, A. & Mendes, A. (2007). Learning to program difficulties and solutions. International Conference on Engineering Education ICEE 2007. Coimbra, Portugal.
• Güleryüz, H., Dilber, R. & Erdoğan, İ. (2020). Prospective Teachers' Views on Coding Training in Stem Applications. Journal of Ağrı İbrahim Çeçen University Social Sciences Institute, 6 (1), 71-83. https://doi.org/10.31463/aicusbed.610909.
• Hoover, A. K., Barnes, J., Fatehi, B., Moreno-León, J., Puttick, G., Tucker-Raymond, E., & Harteveld, C. (2016, October). Assessing computational thinking in students' game designs. In Proceedings of the 2016 annual symposium on computer-human interaction in play companion extended abstracts (pp. 173-179).
• Iskrenovic-Momcilovic, O. (2020). Improving geometry teaching with scratch. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 15(2). https://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/7807
• İnce Muslu, B. & Erduran, A. (2020). Analyzing of Technology Integration Process in Mathematics Education. The Journal of Buca Faculty of Education, 50,258-273.
• Karal, H., Çakmak – Şılbır, G. & Yıldız, M. (2018). The role of computational thinking and coding in STEM education. S. Çepni (Ed.). STEM education from theory to practice (pp. 397-419). Ankara: Pegem Academy.
• Lewis, C. M. & Shah, N. (2012). Building upon and enriching grade four mathematics standards with programming curriculum. 43rd ACM technical symposium on Computer Science Education, 57–62. https://doi.org/10.1145/2157136.2157156.
• Maloney, J. H., Peppler, K., Kafai, Y., Resnick, M., & Rusk, N. (2008, March). Programming by choice: urban youth learning programming with scratch. In Proceedings of the 39th SIGCSE technical symposium on Computer science education, 367-371.
• Maloney, J., Resnick, M., Rusk, N., Silverman, B., & Eastmond, E. (2010). The scratch programming language and environment. ACM Transactions on Computing Education, 10(4), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1145/1352135.1352260.
• Miles, M.B. & Huberman, A.M. (1994). Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE.
• Ministry of National Education [MONE]. (2018). Secondary School Mathematics (Grades 9, 10, 11 and 12) Curriculum Retrived September 10, 2021, from http://mufredat.meb.gov.tr/Dosyalar/201821102727101OGM%20MATEMAT%C4%B0K%20PRG%2020.01.2018.pdf.
• Mo, W., Zhang, Y., Fu, Y., Lin, J., Gao, H. & Lin, Y. (2021). Effects of a scratch-based extenential learning approach on students' math learning achievements and interest. 2021 International Symposium on Educational Technology (ISET), 261-265. 10.1109/ISET52350.2021.00062.
• Moreno-Leon, J. & Robles, G. (2015). Analyze your Scratch projects with Dr. Scratch and assess your computational thinking skills. Scratch2015Ams.
• Moreno-León, J., Robles, G. & Roman- Gonzalez, M. (2015). Dr. Scratch: Automatic analysis of scratch projects to assess and foster computational thinking. Revista de Educación a Distancia 46, 1-23.
• Oluk, A. & Çakır, R. (2021). The effect of code.org activities on computational thinking and algorithm development skills. Journal of Teacher Educational and Lifelong Learning,3(2), 32-40.
• Öztürk, A. (2021). Examining the games designed by secondary school mathematics teachers with the Scratch program in line with the teacher and student views: Reflections from algebra (Master’s thesis). Bartın University.
• Papadakis, S., & Kalogiannakis, M. (2019). Evaluating a course for teaching İntroductory programming with Scratch to pre-service kindergarten teachers. International Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning, 11(3), 231-246.
• Setyawan, T. Y. (2020). Primary school pre-service teachers' competence level of computational concepts in programming using Dr. Scratch. Jurnal Inovasi Teknologi Pendidikan, 7(2), 177-187. https://doi.org/10.21831/jitp.v7i2.36185
• Şimşek, E. (2018). The effect of robotics and scratch applications on computational thinking skills and academic achievement in programming instruction (Master’s thesis). Ondokuz Mayıs University.
• Troiano, G. M., Chen, Q., Alba, Á. V., Robles, G., Smith, G., Cassidy, M., Tucker- Raymond, E., Puttick, G. & Harteveld, C. (2020, April). Exploring How Game Genre in Student-Designed Games Influences Computational Thinking Development. 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1145/3313831.3376755.
• Usta, E. & Korkmaz, Ö. (2010). Pre-service teachers’ computer competencies, perception of technology use and attitudes toward teaching career. International Journal of Human Sciences, 7(1), 1335-1349.
• Üzümcü, Ö. & Bay, E. (2018). A new 21st century skill in education: Computational thinking Uluslararası Türk Kültür Coğrafyasında Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 3(2), 1-16.
• Wilson, A., Hainey, T., & Connolly, T. (2012, October). Evaluation of computer games developed by primary school children to gauge understanding of programming concepts. 6th European Conference on Games Based Learning, 549.
• Wing, M. J. (2006). Computational thinking. Communications Of The ACM 49(3), 33-35. https://doi.org/10.1145/1118178.1118215.
• Yıldırım, A. & Şimşek, H. (2006). Qualitative Research Methods. Ankara: Seçkin Publishing.
• Yıldız Durak, H. and Karaoğlan Yılmaz, F. G. (2019). An Investigation of Prospective Teachers' Educational Digital Game Designs for Mathematics Teaching and Their Opinions on the Design Process. Ege Journal of Education, 20(1), 262-278. https://doi.org/10.12984/egeefd.1095321.
• Yıldız Durak, H. Karaoğlan Yılmaz, F. G. & Yılmaz, R. (2018). Examination of Educational Project Products Prepared by Teacher Candidates During Programming Instruction With Scratch. International Symposium of Academic Studies on Education and Culture Full Text Paper Book, 129-136.
• Yoon, I., Kim, J., & Lee, W. (2016). The analysis and application of an educational programming language (RUR-PLE) for a pre-introductory computer science course. Cluster Computing, 19(1), 529-546.
• Yükseltürk, E. & Üçgül, M. (2018). Block based programming. Y. Gülbahar ve H. Karal (Ed.), Teaching programming from theory to practice (pp. 2-36). Ankara: Pegem Academy.