International Association of Educators   |  ISSN: 1949-4270   |  e-ISSN: 1949-4289

Original article | Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research 2020, Vol. 15(2) 143-165

The Effect of Coding Education on 5th, 6th and 7th Grade Students' programming Self-Efficacy and Attitudes About Technology

Gözde Okal, Bekir Yıldırım & Serkan Timur

pp. 143 - 165   |  DOI:   |  Manu. Number: MANU-2003-02-0001.R1

Published online: June 20, 2020  |   Number of Views: 343  |  Number of Download: 860


This study aimed to determine the effect of teaching model developed on coding education on students' self-efficacy and attitude towards technology. The research was conducted on 64 students who were the 5th, 6th and 7th grades of a secondary school during the fall semester of 2018-2019 academic years. The research was designed in accordance with the exploratory sequential design from mixed research designs. The data were collected through the programming self-efficacy scale, the technology attitude scale and semi-structured interview form. The results of the analysis of quantitative data indicated that the model developed for coding education had a positive effect on students' programming self-efficacy and attitudes towards technology. It was found that the students expressed positive opinions about coding education. The students think that coding education facilitates the teaching of many different subjects such as mathematics and science. The students also think that they can do many activities such as code/program writing, designing games and robots, and solving problems with their coding education.

Keywords: Coding, Self-Efficacy, Technology, Attitude, Secondary School

How to Cite this Article?

APA 6th edition
Okal, G., Yildirim, B. & Timur, S. (2020). The Effect of Coding Education on 5th, 6th and 7th Grade Students' programming Self-Efficacy and Attitudes About Technology . Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research, 15(2), 143-165. doi: 10.29329/epasr.2020.251.8

Okal, G., Yildirim, B. and Timur, S. (2020). The Effect of Coding Education on 5th, 6th and 7th Grade Students' programming Self-Efficacy and Attitudes About Technology . Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research, 15(2), pp. 143-165.

Chicago 16th edition
Okal, Gozde, Bekir Yildirim and Serkan Timur (2020). "The Effect of Coding Education on 5th, 6th and 7th Grade Students' programming Self-Efficacy and Attitudes About Technology ". Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research 15 (2):143-165. doi:10.29329/epasr.2020.251.8.

  1. Akpınar, Y., & Altun, A. (2014). The need for programming training in information society schools. Elementary Education Online, 13(1), 1–4. [Google Scholar]
  2. Ala-Mutka, K. (2004). Problems in learning and teaching programming. Retrieved from:  [Google Scholar]
  3. Arabacıoğlu, C., Bülbül, H., & Filiz, A. (2007). A new approach to teaching computer programming. Paper presented at the Academic Computing Conference, the Kutahya, Turkey.  [Google Scholar]
  4. Balanskat, A., & Engelhardt, K. (2014). Computing our future: Computer programming and coding - Priorities, school curricula and initiatives across Europe. European Schoolnet. Retrieved from:  [Google Scholar]
  5. Balcı, A. (2016). Research methods techniques and principles in social sciences. Ankara: Pegem Academy Publishing. [Google Scholar]
  6. Byrne, P., & Lyons, G. (2001). The effect of student attributes on success in programming. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 33(3), 49-52.  [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  7. Calder, N. (2010). Using scratch: An integrated problem-solving approach to mathematical thinking. Australian Primary Mathematics Classroom, 15(4), 9–14. [Google Scholar]
  8. Choi, J. Lee, Y., & Lee, E. (2016). Puzzle based algorithm learning for cultivating computational thinking. Wireless Personal Communications, 93(1), 131-145.  [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  9. (2015a). The hour of code is here. Retrieved from:  [Google Scholar]
  10. Cohen, L. & Manion, L. (1997). Research methods in education (4th ed.). Routledge: London and New York. [Google Scholar]
  11. Creswell, J.W. (2008). Educational research planning, conducting and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. Upper Saddle River, N.J., Pearson/Merrill Prentice Hall. [Google Scholar]
  12. Çetin, E. (2012). The effect of computer programming education on children’s problem solving skills. (Unpublished master's thesis). Gazi University: Ankara.  [Google Scholar]
  13. Coşar, M. (2013). Effects of computer programming studies on academic success, critical thinking skills and programming-based attitudes in problem-based learning environment. (Unpublished PhD dissertation). Gazi University: Ankara. [Google Scholar]
  14. European Commission (2014). Coding-the 21st century skill. European Commission. Retrieved from:  [Google Scholar]
  15. Futschek, G. (2006). Algorithmic thinking: the key for understanding computer science. R. T. Mittermeir (Ed.), Informatics Education – The Bridge between Using and Understanding Computers (C. 4226, s. 159-168). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg.  [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  16. Grover, S., & Pea, R. D. (2013). Computational thinking in K-12: A review of the state of the field. Educational Researcher, 42(1), 38-43. [Google Scholar]
  17. Güden, C. (2015). Examining secondary school students' cognitive process skills and attitudes towards science and technology course (Çanakkale sample). (Unpublished master's thesis). Canakkale Onsekiz Mart University, Canakkale. [Google Scholar]
  18. Holden, E., & Weeden., E.  (2003). The impact of prior experience inan information technology programming course sequence. In Proceeding of the 4th conference on Information technology curriculum, pages 41–46. Indiana: USA.  [Google Scholar]
  19. Jegede, P.O. (2009). Predictors of java programming self-efficacy among engineering students in a Nigerian university. International Journal of Computer Science and Information Security, 4(1 & 2).  [Google Scholar]
  20. Johnson, R. B., Onwuegbuzie, A. J. & Turner, L. A. (2007) Toward a definition of mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1, 112-133. [Google Scholar]
  21. Kalelioğlu, 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. [Google Scholar]
  22. Kasalak, İ. (2017). Effects of robotic coding activities on the effectiveness of secondary school students 'self-efficacy and student experience about activities. (Unpublished master thesis). Hacettepe University, Ankara. [Google Scholar]
  23. Kaučič, B., & Asič, T. (2011). Improving introductory programming with Stratch?. Paper presented at 34th International Convention Conferance, Opatija, Croatia. [Google Scholar]
  24. Kukul, V., Gökçearslan, Ş., & Günbatar, M. (2017). Computer programming self-efficacy scale (CPSES) for secondary school students: development, validation and reliability. Educational Technology Theory and Practice, 7(1), 158-179.  [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  25. Mazman, S.G. & Altun, A. (2013-October). The effect of introductory to programming course on programming self-efficacy of CEIT students. Journal of Instructional Technologies & Teacher Education JITTE, 2(3), 24-29. [Google Scholar]
  26. Merriam, S., B. (2009). Qualitative research. A guide to design and implementation, (2nd e.d.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. [Google Scholar]
  27. Miles, M.B., & Huberman, A.M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis (2nd edition). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. [Google Scholar]
  28. Monroy-Hernández, A., & Resnick, M. (2008). Empowering kids to create and share programmable media. Interactions, 15(2), 50-53. [Google Scholar]
  29. Namlı, N. A., & Şahin, M. C. (2017). The Effect of algorithm training on problem solving skills. Recep Tayyip Erdogan Universtiy Journal of Social Sciences, 3(5), 135-153. [Google Scholar]
  30. Oluk, A., & Saltan, F. (2015). Effects of using the scratch program in 6th grade information technologies courses on algorithm development and problemsolving skills [Special issue]. Participatory Educational Research, 10-20. [Google Scholar]
  31. Özmen, B., & Altun, A. (2014). Undergraduate students' experiences in programming: difficulties and obstacles. Turkish Online Journal of Qualitative Inquiry, 5(3), 1-27. [Google Scholar]
  32. Patton, M. (2002). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Beverly Hills, CA: SAGE. [Google Scholar]
  33. Penmetcha, M. R. (2012). Exploring the effectiveness of robotics as a vehicle for computational thinking. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Purdue University: Purdue.  [Google Scholar]
  34. Ramalingam, V., & Wiedenbeck, S. (1998). Development and validation of scores on a computer programming self-efficacy scale and group analyses of novice programmer self-efficacy. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 19(4), 367–381.  [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  35. Resnick, M., Maloney, J., Monroy-Hernández, A., Rusk, N., Eastmond, E., Brennan, K., Millner, A., Rosenbaum, E., Silver, J., Silverman, B., & Kafai, Y. (2009). Scratch: Programming for all. Communications of the ACM, 52(11). [Google Scholar]
  36. Resnick, M., & Ocko, S. (1990). LEGO/Logo: learning though and about design. Retrieved from:  [Google Scholar]
  37. Sarıkaya, M. (2018). Student views on coding training. Ondokuz Mayis University Journal of Education Faculty, 37(2), 79-90. [Google Scholar]
  38. Shin, S., & Park, P. (2014). A study on the effect affecting problem solving ability of primary students through the Scratch programming. Advanced Science and Technology Letters, 59, 117–120. [Google Scholar]
  39. Shin, S., Park, P., & Bae, Y. (2013). The effects of an information-technology gifted program on friendship using scratch programming language and clutter. International Journal of Computer and Communication Engineering, 2(3), 246-249. [Google Scholar]
  40. SPSS Statistics (Version 22) [Computer software]. Chicago, IL: SPSS. [Google Scholar]
  41. Şahutoğlu, N. G. (2018). The effects of using EBA coding module on middle school learners beliefs about their self-efficacy on programming and the views of learners about the module. (Unpublished master's thesis). University of Gaziantep, Gaziantep. [Google Scholar]
  42. Taylor, M., Harlow, A., & Forret, M. (2010). Using a computer programming environment and an interactive whiteboard to investigate some mathematical thinking. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 8, 561- 570.  [Google Scholar]
  43. Türker, P. M., & Pala, F. K. (2018). Ortaokul Öğrencilerinin, Öğretmenlerin ve Öğrenci Velilerinin Kodlamaya Yönelik Görüşleri. İlköğretim Online, 17(4), 2013- 2029. [Google Scholar]
  44. Wiedenbeck, S., LaBelle, D., & Kain, V. (2004). Factors affecting course outcomes in introductory programming. In Proceedings of the 16th Workshop of the Psychology of Programming Interest Group (pp. 97–110). Carlow, Ireland.   [Google Scholar]
  45. Wing, J. M. (2006). Computational thinking. Communications of the ACM, 49(3), 33-35. [Google Scholar]
  46. Vatansever, Ö., & Baltacı Göktalay, Ş. (2018). How does teaching programming through scratch affect problem-solving skills of 5th and 6th grade middle school students?, International Journal of Eurasia Social Sciences, 9(33), 1778-1801. [Google Scholar]
  47. Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2011). Qualitative research methods in the social sciences. Ankara: Seckin Publishing. [Google Scholar]
  48. 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.  [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  49. Yurdugül, H., & Aşkar, P. (2008). An investigation of the factorial structures of pupils’ attitude towards technology (patt): A Turkish sample. Elementary Education Online, 7(2), 288-309.  [Google Scholar]
  50. Ziatdinov, R., & Musa, S. (2012). Rapid mental computation system as a tool for algorithmic thinking of elementary school student’s development. European researcher, Series A, (7), 1105-1110. [Google Scholar]