Monitoring Students’ Perceptions in an App Inventor School Course



Abstract Views
477

Downloads
350

Citations

Share

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.sidebar##

Submitted Feb 28, 2018
Published Mar 8, 2018
10.24018/ejeng.2018.0.CIE.633

Abstract viewed = 477 times

Table of Contents

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##

MIT App Inventor is a block-based programming environment for children and teenagers that sets a “low floor” for allowing creative app building while engaging students in complex computational thinking activities. The present study aims at (a) monitoring students’ perceptions on ‘popularity’ and ‘perceived difficulty’ of certain activities/lessons through the implementation of an App Inventor course in a Greek lower high school, (b) detecting any course design or activity/lesson plan and implementation factors that affected students’ perceptions and finally (c) evaluating their experience with App Inventor in contrast with their previous experience with MicroWorlds Pro and Scratch. Our study confirms students’ positive perceptions such as positive task value beliefs and self-efficacy, identifies features of successful “resources learning” in competence-based learning and finally offers a students’ comparison between App Inventor, MicroWorlds Pro and Scratch.
Keywords: MIT App Inventor Block-Based Programming Students’ Perceptions School Course

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

  1. Gartner Inc, “Gartner Says 6.4 Billion Connected ‘Things’ Will Be in Use in 2016, Up 30 Percent from 2015",” 2015.
     Google Scholar
  2. S. Grover and R. Pea, “Computational thinking in K–12: A review of the state of the field,” Educ. Res., vol. 42, no. 1, pp. 38–43, 2013.
     Google Scholar
  3. European Commission, “Grand Coalition for Digital Jobs,” 2017. [Online]. Available: https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/grand-coalition-digital-jobs.
     Google Scholar
  4. European Commission, “Commission launches ‘Opening Up Education’ to boost innovation and digital skills in schools and universities,” 2017. [Online]. Available: http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-13-859_en.htm.
     Google Scholar
  5. Greek Ministry of Education, “Guidelines on the subject lesson of Informatics in Junior High School.,” 2016.
     Google Scholar
  6. O. Meerbaum-Salant, M. Armoni, and M. Ben-Ari, “Learning computer science concepts with Scratch,” Comput. Sci. Educ., vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 239–264, Sep. 2013.
     Google Scholar
  7. K. Glezou and M. Grigoriadou, “Design Principles of Training Material for Introductory Courses to Programming and Logo by using preconstructed microworlds,” in EdMedia: World Conference on Educational Media and Technology. Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE)., 2009, pp. 1606–1614.
     Google Scholar
  8. M. Berry, “Hello again! Hello World,” Summer Term, no. 2, p. 3, 2017.
     Google Scholar
  9. D. Weintrop, “Minding the gap between blocks-based and text-based programming,” in Proceedings of the 46th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education,ACM, 2015, pp. 720–720.
     Google Scholar
  10. D. Weintrop and U. Wilensky, “To block or not to block, that is the question: students’ perceptions of blocks-based programming,” in Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children, 2015, pp. 199–208.
     Google Scholar
  11. T. W. Price and T. Barnes, “Comparing textual and block interfaces in a novice programming environment,” in Proceedings of the eleventh annual International Conference on International Computing Education Research, ACM., 2015, pp. 91–99.
     Google Scholar
  12. S. Papadakis, M. Kalogiannakis, N. Zaranis, and V. Orfanakis, “Using Scratch and App Inventor for teaching introductory programming in secondary education. A case study,” Int. J. Technol. Enhanc. Learn., vol. 8, no. 3/4, p. 217, 2016.
     Google Scholar
  13. D. Wolber, “App inventor and real-world motivation,” in Proceedings of the 42nd ACM technical symposium on Computer science education .ACM., 2011, pp. 601–606.
     Google Scholar
  14. S. A. Nikou and A. A. Economides, “Transition in student motivation during a scratch and an app inventor course,” in Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON), IEEE., 2014, pp. 1042–1045.
     Google Scholar
  15. M. Resnick, Scratch: "The first ten years". Hello World, Issue 2, Summer Term 2017, p. 22-27, 2017.
     Google Scholar
  16. P. R. Pintrich, “The role of motivation in promoting and sustaining self-regulated learning,” Int. J. Educ. Res., vol. 31, no. 6, pp. 459–470, 1999.
     Google Scholar
  17. X. Roegiers, “Curricular reforms guide schools: but, where to?” Prospects, vol. 37, no. 2, pp. 155–186, Nov. 2007
     Google Scholar
  18. U. Flick, “Triangulation in qualitative research,” in Flick, U. (2004). Triangulation in qualitative research. A companio, 2004, pp. 178–183.
     Google Scholar
  19. G. Panselinas and V. Komis, “‘Scaffolding’through talk in groupwork learning,” Think. Ski. Creat., vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 286–103, 2009.
     Google Scholar


Most read articles by the same author(s)