SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Journal of Educational Technology and Online Learning / 2023 / Cilt: 6 - Sayı: 1

Examining computer science education of Asia-Pacific countries successful in the PISA

Semra FİŞ ERÜMİT
Esra KELES
Pages
82–104
Publication Date
2023-01-31
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Also, the countries’ practices in computer science education were compared to Türkiye, and implications were made about the effects of such works on PISA results.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:In this study, the Computer Science (CS) education in K-12 of the countries in the “Asia-Pacific region”, which are among the top 10 in PISA, and CS education of Türkiye were investigated.
📊
Key Findings & Data:PISA, which is carried out every 3 years by the OECD, evaluates 15-year-old students.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Also, the countries’ practices in computer science education were compared to Türkiye, and implications were made about the effects of such works on PISA results.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Computer science curriculum · Asia-Pacific countries · PISA

Abstract

In this study, the Computer Science (CS) education in K-12 of the countries in the “Asia-Pacific region”, which are among the top 10 in PISA, and CS education of Türkiye were investigated. PISA is conducted to assess science, mathematics, and reading skills. PISA, which is carried out every 3 years by the OECD, evaluates 15-year-old students. When the countries that have been successful in PISA are examined, it has been observed that the number of countries in the “Asia-Pacific region” in the top 10 has increased in recent years. In this study, data analysis was done with document analysis, which included PISA results and reports, OECD reports, computer science curriculum of countries, and academic studies on PISA and computer science education. As a result of the data obtained, the countries’ CS education was compared to identify successful practices. Also, the countries’ practices in computer science education were compared to Türkiye, and implications were made about the effects of such works on PISA results.

🔖

Cite This Article

ERÜMİT, S. F., KELES, E. (2023). Examining computer science education of Asia-Pacific countries successful in the PISA. Journal of Educational Technology and Online Learning, Cilt: 6 - Sayı: 1, 82–104. https://ajindex.com/articles/880581

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (10)

  1. Anil, D., & Ozer, Y. (2012). The effect of the aim and frequency of computer usage on student achievement according to PISA 2006. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 46, 5484-5488. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.06.462
  2. Armoni, M., & Gal-Ezer, J. (2014). Early computing education: why? what? when? who? ACM Inroads, 5(4), 54-59. https://doi.org/10.1145/2684721.2684734
  3. Barut, E., & Kuzu, A. (2017). Türkiye ve İngiltere bilişim teknolojileri öğretim programlarının amaç, kazanım, etkinlik, ölçme ve değerlendirme süreçleri açısından karşılaştırılması. Trakya Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 7(2), 721-745. https://doi.org/10.24315/trkefd.303156
  4. Batur, Z., Ulutaş, M., & Beyret, T. N. (2019). 2018 Lgs Türkçe sorularının Pisa okuma becerileri hedefleri açisindan incelenmesi. Milli Eğitim Dergisi, 48(1), 595-615.
  5. Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative Research Journal, 9(2), 27-40. https://doi.org/10.3316/QRJ0902027
  6. Chauhan, S. (2017). A meta-analysis of the impact of technology on learning effectiveness of elementary students. Computers & Education, 105, 14-30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.11.005
  7. Cheema, J., & Zhang, B. (2013). Quantity and quality of computer use and academic achievement: Evidence from a large-scale international test program. International Journal of Education and Development using ICT, 9(2). Choi, J., An, S., & Lee, Y. (2015). Computing education in Korea-current issues and endeavors. ACM Transactions on Computing Education (TOCE), 15(2), 1-22. https://doi.org/10.1145/2716311
  8. Corbin, J. & Strauss, A. (2008). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks: Sage. Demirer, V., & Sak, N. (2015). Türkiye'de Bilişim Teknolojileri (BT) Eğitimi ve BT Öğretmenlerin Değişen Rolleri. Uluslararası Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 5, 434-448.
  9. Döş, İ., & Atalmış, E. H. (2016). OECD Verilerine Göre Pisa Sınav Sonuçlarının Değerlendirilmesi. Abant İzzet Baysal Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 16(2), 432-450. https://doi.org/10.17240/aibuefd.2016.16.2-5000194936 Education Bureau (2017, n.d.). Technology Education Key Learning Area Curriculum Guide (Primary 1 - Secondary 6). https://www.edb.gov.hk/attachment/en/curriculum-development/kla/technology-edu/curriculum-doc/TE_KLACG_Eng_5_Dec_2017_r2.pdf
  10. Falkner, K., Sentance, S., Vivian, R., Barksdale, S., Busuttil, L., Cole, E.,. & Quille, K. (2019, November). An international comparison