Examining STEM Students' Computational Thinking Skills through Interactive Practicum Utilizing Technology

Ni Nyoman Sri Putu Verawati; Khaerul Rijal; Nuraqilla Waidha B Grendis

doi:10.36312/ijece.v2i1.1360

Authors

Ni Nyoman Sri Putu Verawati University of Mataram https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3717-6259
Khaerul Rijal The University of Sheffield
Nuraqilla Waidha B Grendis Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.36312/ijece.v2i1.1360

Keywords:

Computational thinking skills, Interactive practicums, Virtual laboratories, Physical laboratories, virtual simulation, STEM students

Abstract

This research study explores and compares the computational thinking skills demonstrated by STEM students during interactive practicums involving both virtual laboratories and physical laboratories. The objectives of the study are to assess the performance of computational thinking skills in each practicum setting and to determine any differences between the two environments. An experimental approach was adopted, and 106 first-year STEM students from a distinguished private university in Indonesia participated in the study. The students were divided into two groups, one using virtual labs and the other using physical labs. The study employed a portfolio instrument to assess various aspects of computational thinking, including problem reformulation, recursion, problem decomposition, abstraction, and systematic testing. The findings show that both groups of students achieved "good" scores for computational thinking skills. However, students in the virtual labs group demonstrated superior skills compared to the physical labs group. The aspects of problem reformulation and abstraction received the highest scores in both groups, while problem decomposition received the lowest scores. A MANOVA test confirmed statistically significant differences in computational thinking skills between the two practicum environments. The study suggests that the use of virtual labs can positively impact students' computational thinking abilities. The results have implications for educators and institutions seeking to enhance students' computational thinking skills and design effective STEM practicums.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Agbo, F. J., Olaleye, S. A., Bower, M., & Oyelere, S. S. (2023). Examining the relationships between students’ perceptions of technology, pedagogy, and cognition: The case of immersive virtual reality mini games to foster computational thinking in higher education. Smart Learning Environments, 10(1), 16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-023-00233-1

Barak, M., & Assal, M. (2018). Robotics and STEM learning: Students’ achievements in assignments according to the P3 Task Taxonomy—practice, problem solving, and projects. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 28(1), 121–144. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-016-9385-9

Bicak, B. E., Borchert, C. E., & Höner, K. (2021). Measuring and Fostering Preservice Chemistry Teachers’ Scientific Reasoning Competency. Education Sciences, 11(9), Article 9. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11090496

Bilad, M. R., Anwar, K., & Hayati, S. (2022). Nurturing Prospective STEM Teachers’ Critical Thinking Skill through Virtual Simulation-Assisted Remote Inquiry in Fourier Transform Courses. International Journal of Essential Competencies in Education, 1(1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.36312/ijece.v1i1.728

Chen, S.-Y., Lai, Y.-H., & Lin, Y.-S. (2020). Research on Head-Mounted Virtual Reality and Computational Thinking Experiments to Improve the Learning Effect of AIoT Maker Course: Case of Earthquake Relief Scenes. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 1164. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01164

Chevalier, M., Giang, C., El-Hamamsy, L., Bonnet, E., Papaspyros, V., Pellet, J.-P., Audrin, C., Romero, M., Baumberger, B., & Mondada, F. (2022). The role of feedback and guidance as intervention methods to foster computational thinking in educational robotics learning activities for primary school. Computers & Education, 180, 104431. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104431

Çiftçi, A., & Topçu, M. S. (2022). Improving early childhood pre-service teachers’ computational thinking teaching self-efficacy beliefs in a STEM course. Research in Science & Technological Education, 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2022.2036117

Çiftçi, A., & Topçu, M. S. (2023). Improving early childhood pre-service teachers’ computational thinking skills through the unplugged computational thinking integrated STEM approach. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 49, 101337. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2023.101337

Durak, H. Y., & Saritepeci, M. (2018). Analysis of the relation between computational thinking skills and various variables with the structural equation model. Computers & Education, 116, 191–202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.09.004

Ernita, N., Muin, A., Verawati, N. N. S. P., & Prayogi, S. (2021). The effect of inquiry learning model based on laboratory and achievement motivation toward students’ physics learning outcomes. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1816(1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1816/1/012090

Fuhrmann, T., Ahmed, D. I., Arikson, L., Wirth, M., Miller, M. L., Li, E., Lam, A., Blikstein, P., & Riedel-Kruse, I. (2021). Scientific Inquiry in Middle Schools by combining Computational Thinking, Wet Lab Experiments, and Liquid Handling Robots. Interaction Design and Children, 444–449. https://doi.org/10.1145/3459990.3465180

Goode, J., Estrella, R., & Margolis, J. (2006). Lost in Translation: Gender and High School Computer Science. In J. Cohoon & W. Aspray (Eds.), Women and Information Technology (pp. 89–114). The MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/9780262033459.003.0003

Kleine, K., & Pessot, E. (2023). Virtualising labs in engineering education: A typology for structure and development. Higher Education Research & Development, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2023.2228227

Kusmiati, N. (2022). Profile of Computational Thinking Skills in Environmental Change Learning through Virtual Laboratory. Report of Biological Education, 3(2), Article 2. https://doi.org/10.37150/rebion.v3i2.1829

Lei, H., Chiu, M. M., Li, F., Wang, X., & Geng, Y. (2020). Computational thinking and academic achievement: A meta-analysis among students. Children and Youth Services Review, 118, 105439. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.105439

Li, Y., Schoenfeld, A. H., diSessa, A. A., Graesser, A. C., Benson, L. C., English, L. D., & Duschl, R. A. (2020). On Computational Thinking and STEM Education. Journal for STEM Education Research, 3(2), 147–166. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41979-020-00044-w

Lin, S.-Y., Chien, S.-Y., Hsiao, C.-L., Hsia, C.-H., & Chao, K.-M. (2020). Enhancing Computational Thinking Capability of Preschool Children by Game-based Smart Toys. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 44, 101011. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.elerap.2020.101011

Lye, S. Y., & Koh, J. H. L. (2014). Review on teaching and learning of computational thinking through programming: What is next for K-12? Computers in Human Behavior, 41, 51–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.09.012

Ou Yang, F.-C., Lai, H.-M., & Wang, Y.-W. (2023). Effect of augmented reality-based virtual educational robotics on programming students’ enjoyment of learning, computational thinking skills, and academic achievement. Computers & Education, 195, 104721. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104721

Peel, A., & Friedrichsen, P. (2018). Algorithms, Abstractions, and Iterations: Teaching Computational Thinking Using Protein Synthesis Translation. The American Biology Teacher, 80(1), 21–28. https://doi.org/10.1525/abt.2018.80.1.21

Prayogi, S., Ahzan, S., Indriaturrahmi, I., & Rokhmat, J. (2022). Opportunities to Stimulate the Critical Thinking Performance of Preservice Science Teachers Through the Ethno-Inquiry Model in an E Learning Platform. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 21(9), Article 9. https://www.ijlter.org/index.php/ijlter/article/view/5818

Rakhmawati, L., Agung, A. I., & Rohman, M. (2022). Virtual Laboratory-Based Student Worksheets Development for Computational Thinking Practices. 2022 Fifth International Conference on Vocational Education and Electrical Engineering (ICVEE), 221–225. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICVEE57061.2022.9930462

Reginald, G. (2023). Teaching and learning using virtual labs: Investigating the effects on students’ self-regulation. Cogent Education, 10(1), 2172308. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2023.2172308

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), 60–67. https://doi.org/10.1145/1592761.1592779

Román-González, M., Pérez-González, J.-C., & Jiménez-Fernández, C. (2017). Which cognitive abilities underlie computational thinking? Criterion validity of the Computational Thinking Test. Computers in Human Behavior, 72, 678–691. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.08.047

Rubinstein, A., & Chor, B. (2014). Computational Thinking in Life Science Education. PLoS Computational Biology, 10(11), e1003897. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003897

Saritepeci, M. (2020). Developing Computational Thinking Skills of High School Students: Design-Based Learning Activities and Programming Tasks. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 29(1), 35–54. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-019-00480-2

Serrano-Perez, J. J., González-García, L., Flacco, N., Taberner-Cortés, A., García-Arnandis, I., Pérez-López, G., Pellín-Carcelén, A., & Romá-Mateo, C. (2023). Traditional vs. Virtual laboratories in health sciences education. Journal of Biological Education, 57(1), 36–50. https://doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2021.1877776

Shute, V. J., Sun, C., & Asbell-Clarke, J. (2017). Demystifying computational thinking. Educational Research Review, 22, 142–158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2017.09.003

Sun, L., Hu, L., & Zhou, D. (2022). The bidirectional predictions between primary school students’ STEM and language academic achievements and computational thinking: The moderating role of gender. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 44, 101043. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2022.101043

Ung, L.-L., Labadin, J., & Mohamad, F. S. (2022). Computational thinking for teachers: Development of a localised E-learning system. Computers & Education, 177, 104379. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104379

Wing, J. M. (2008). Computational thinking and thinking about computing. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 366(1881), 3717–3725. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2008.0118

Xu, W., Geng, F., & Wang, L. (2022). Relations of computational thinking to reasoning ability and creative thinking in young children: Mediating role of arithmetic fluency. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 44, 101041. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2022.101041

Yang, D., Baek, Y., Ching, Y.-H., Swanson, S., Chittoori, B., & Wang, S. (2021). Infusing Computational Thinking in an Integrated STEM Curriculum: User Reactions and Lessons Learned. European Journal of STEM Education, 6(1), 04. https://doi.org/10.20897/ejsteme/9560

Yang, D., Baek, Y., & Swanson, S. (2020). Developing Computational Thinking through Project-Based Airplane Design Activities. 2020 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE), 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1109/FIE44824.2020.9274021