KaydedilenlerDerginizi ekleyin

Dergiler / Ordu Üniversitesi Bilim ve Teknoloji Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 16

Ortaokul Öğrencileri İçin Türkçe Kodlama Dilinin Geliştirilmesi: Delphi Çalışması

Development of Turkish Coding Language for Secondary School Students: Delphi Study

Adil Yıldız(TRABZON UNIVERSITY)0000-0002-7383-3885
Lokman Şılbır(TRABZON UNIVERSITY)0000-0003-3655-2512
Hasan Karal(TRABZON UNIVERSITY)0000-0002-3555-050X
Sayfa
—
Yayın Tarihi
2026-10-05
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

Çalışma sonucunda, 19 programlama teriminin Türkçe karşılıkları konusunda %77,56 oranında ortak görüş elde edilmiştir.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:Bu çalışma, özellikle ortaokul öğrencileri için tasarlanmış bir Türkçe kodlama dili geliştirmeyi amaçlayan bir araştırmayı ele almaktadır.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:Çalışma sonucunda, 19 programlama teriminin Türkçe karşılıkları konusunda %77,56 oranında ortak görüş elde edilmiştir.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:Bu çalışma, Türkçe kodlama dili geliştirme çalışmalarına temel oluşturabilir ve öğrencilere kodlamayı öğrenmek için daha uygun bir dil sunabilir.
🔬Tür:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Kapsam:Genişletilmiş Akademik Örneklem
⚙️Değişkenler:Turkish coding language · secondary school students · computer programming

Özet

Bu çalışma, özellikle ortaokul öğrencileri için tasarlanmış bir Türkçe kodlama dili geliştirmeyi amaçlayan bir araştırmayı ele almaktadır. Bilgisayar programlama dillerinin eğitimdeki önemi arttıkça, öğrencilere teknik beceri ve bilgi kazandırmak için bu dillerin öğretim müfredatlarına dahil edilmesi giderek yaygınlaşmaktadır. Bu bağlamda, Türkçe kodlama dilinin geliştirilmesi, öğrencilere kendi dillerine ve kültürel bağlamlarına uygun bir programlama dili sunmanın yanı sıra, Türkiye'deki teknoloji sektörünün gelişimine de katkıda bulunacaktır. Ortaokul öğrencilerine programlama dilleri öğretmenin, yaratıcılık, problem çözme yetenekleri ve eleştirel düşünme becerilerini geliştirme gibi birçok avantajı vardır. Ayrıca, öğrencilere bilgisayar bilimi, yazılım mühendisliği ve diğer ilgili alanlarda daha fazla ilerlemek için gerekli temeli sağlar. Bu bağlamda, araştırmanın amacı, ortaokul öğrencileri için geliştirilen Türkçe kodlama dilinin özelliklerini belirlemektir. Çalışmada, Delphi yöntemi kullanılarak Türkçe kodlama dilinin sözdizimi hakkında uzman görüşleri alınmıştır. Çalışma sonucunda, 19 programlama teriminin Türkçe karşılıkları konusunda %77,56 oranında ortak görüş elde edilmiştir. Ayrıca, nesnelerle etkileşim halindeki "object.action" ve "object.property" kod yapısının, öğrencilerin nesne tabanlı kodlamaya geçişini kolaylaştırabileceği öne sürülmüştür. Bu çalışma, Türkçe kodlama dili geliştirme çalışmalarına temel oluşturabilir ve öğrencilere kodlamayı öğrenmek için daha uygun bir dil sunabilir.

Abstract

This study deals with a research aiming to develop a Turkish coding language specially designed for secondary school students. As the importance of computer programming languages in education increases, it is becoming increasingly common to include these languages in teaching curricula to provide students with technical skills and knowledge. In this context, the development of the Turkish coding language will not only offer students a programming language suitable for their own language and cultural context, but will also contribute to the development of the technology industry in Turkey. Teaching programming languages to secondary school students has many advantages, such as improving creativity, problem-solving abilities and critical thinking skills. It also provides students with the necessary foundation to make further advancements in computer science, software engineering and other related fields. In this context, the aim of the research is to determine the features of the Turkish coding language developed for secondary school students. In the study, expert opinions were sought about the syntax of the Turkish coding language by using the Delphi method. As a result of the study, a 77.56% common opinion was obtained regarding the Turkish equivalents of 19 programming terms. It has also been suggested that the "object.action" and "object.property" code structure in interaction with objects may facilitate students' transition to object-based coding. This study can form the basis for Turkish coding language development studies and offer students a more suitable language to learn coding.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

Yıldız, A., Şılbır, L., Karal, H. (2026). Ortaokul Öğrencileri İçin Türkçe Kodlama Dilinin Geliştirilmesi: Delphi Çalışması. Ordu Üniversitesi Bilim ve Teknoloji Dergisi, Cilt: 16. https://doi.org/10.54370/ordubtd.1843223

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (57)

  1. Alqarni, A. (2025). Network dynamics and the impact of gamification on computational thinking and visual programming in primary education. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 63(5), 1186–1218. https://doi.org/10.1177/07356331251337628
  2. Aksu, B. (2015). Hipotezlerin, değişkenlerin ve örneklemin belirlenmesi. In M. Metin (Ed.), Eğitimde Bilimsel Araştırma Yöntemleri (pp. 21–43). Pegem.
  3. Al-Thani, N. J., Santhosh, M. E., Bhadra, J., & Ahmad, Z. (2023). The prominent roles of undergraduate mentors in an online near-peer mentoring model. Sustainability, 15(4), 3020. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15043020
  4. Araujo, L. G. J., Bittencourt, R. A., & Santos, D. M. B. (2018). An analysis of a media-based approach to teach programming to middle school students. Proceedings of the 49th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, 1005–1010. https://doi.org/10.1145/3159450.3159526
  5. Aytekin, A., Sönmez Çakır, F., Yücel, Y. B., & Kulaözü, İ. (2018). Geleceğe yön veren kodlama bilimi ve kodlama öğrenmede kullanılabilecek bazı yöntemler. Avrasya Sosyal ve Ekonomi Araştırmaları Dergisi, 5(5), 24–41. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/asead/issue/40925/494055
  6. Bağra, A., & Kılınç, H. H. (2021). Ortaokul öğrencilerinin kodlama eğitimine ilişkin görüşleri. Maarif Mektepleri Uluslararası Sosyal ve Beşeri Bilimler Dergisi, 4(1), 36–51. https://doi.org/10.47155/mamusbbd.946241
  7. Balanskat, A., & Engelhardt, K. (2015). Computing our future: Computer programming and coding Priorities, school curricula and initiatives across Europe. http://www.eun.org/documents/411753/817341/Computing+our+future_final_2015.pdf/d3780a64-1081-4488-8549-6033200e3c03
  8. Ben Idris, M., & Ammar, H. (2018). The correlation between Arabic student’s English proficiency and their computer programming ability at the university level. International Journal of Managing Public Sector Information and Communication Technologies, 9(1), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3466182
  9. Bhatti, S., Dewani, A., Maqbool, S., & Memon, M. A. (2019). A web based approach for teaching and learning programming concepts at middle school level. International Journal of Modern Education and Computer Science, 11(4), 46-53. https://doi.org/10.5815/ijmecs.2019.04.06
  10. Boldbaatar, N., & Şendurur, E. (2018). Developing 3ducational 3D games with StarLogo: The role of backwards fading in the transfer of programming experience. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 57(6), 1468–1494. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633118806747
  11. Buitrago Flórez, F., Casallas, R., Hernández, M., Reyes, A., Restrepo, S., & Danies, G. (2017). Changing a generation’s way of thinking: Teaching computational thinking through programming. Review of Educational Research, 87(4), 834–860. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654317710096
  12. Butterworth, T., & Bishop, V. (1995). Identifying the characteristics of optimum practice: Findings from a survey of practice experts in nursing, midwifery and health visiting. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 22(1), 24–32. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2648.1995.22010024.x
  13. Büyüköztürk, Ş., Çakmak, E. K., Akgün, Ö. E., Karadeniz, Ş., & Demirel, F. (2014). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri (18th ed.). Pegem Akademi.
  14. Chen, L., Xiao, S., Chen, Y., Song, Y., Wu, R., & Sun, L. (2024). ChatScratch: An AI-augmented system toward autonomous visual programming learning for children aged 6-12. Proceedings of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1145/3613904.3642229
  15. Cheon, J., Kang, D., Kim, G., & Woo, G. (2015). A concise Korean programming language. Journal of KIISE, 42(4), 496–503. https://www.dbpia.co.kr/journal/articleDetail?nodeId=NODE06267593
  16. Code.org. (2020). https://code.org/
  17. Dalkey, N. C., & Rourke, D. L. (1971). Experimental assessment of Delphi procedures with group value judgments. ERIC. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED068441.pdf
  18. De Silva, D., Vidhanaarachchi, S., Siriwardana, K., Gunasekara, S., Piyumantha, U., & Thilakaratne, S. (2023). RookieScript: Constructive programming learning space for beginners. Research Square Platform LLC. https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-3419553/v1
  19. Dirik, M. (2019). Türkçe bir başlangıç düzey programlama dili geliştirimi [Master]. Ege Üniversitesi, Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü.
  20. Eluri, P., & David, D. (2023). Insights to improve computer science education by enhancing the java language and tools. Journal of Student Research, 12(1). https://doi.org/10.47611/jsrhs.v12i1.3994
  21. Ersoy, H., & Aydın, S. (2015). Ortaokul öğrencilerine programlama becerileri kazandırmada scratch’in etkililiği. In M. Akgül, C. H. Aydın, & S. Gümüş (Eds.), 17. Akademik Bilişim Konferansı (pp. 483–486). Anadolu Üniversitesi.
  22. Espinoza Mina, M. A., & Sierra Cedeño, A. Y. (2018). Análisis comparativo entre ASP.NETy PHP. INNOVA Research Journal, 25–43. https://doi.org/10.33890/innova.v3.n4.2018.474
  23. Franklin, D., Hill, C., Dwyer, H. A., Hansen, A. K., Iveland, A., & Harlow, D. B. (2016). Initialization in Scratch. In Proceedings of the 47th ACM Technical Symposium on Computing Science Education (pp. 217-222). https://doi.org/10.1145/2839509.2844569
  24. Galdo, A. C., Celepkolu, M., Lytle, N., & Boyer, K. E. (2022). Pair programming in a pandemic: Understanding middle school students’ remote collaboration experiences. Proceedings of the 53rd ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, Volume 1, 335–341. https://doi.org/10.1145/3478431.3499324
  25. Gizachew, F. (2022). Design and implementation of amharic-based ide with high-level programming language. Eai Endorsed Transactions on Creative Technologies, 22(30). https://doi.org/10.4108/eai.7-2-2022.173333
  26. Hsu, C.-C., & Sandford, B. A. (2007). The Delphi technique: Making sense of consensus. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 12(10), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.7275/pdz9-th90
  27. Ibrahim Nnass, Michael A. Cowling, & Roger Hadgraft. (2022). Identifying the difficulties of learning programming for non-english speakers at CQuniversity and Sebha university. Journal of Pure & Applied Sciences, 21(4), 290–295. https://doi.org/10.51984/jopas.v21i4.2258
  28. Johnson, L., Becker, S. A., Victoria, E., Freeman, A., Kampylis, P., Vuorikari, R., & Punie Yves. (2014). Horizon report Europe > 2014 schools edition. In Horizon Report Europe. The New Media Consortium. Kalelioğlu, F. (2015). A new way of teaching programming skills to K-12 students: Code.org. Computers in Human Behavior, 52, 200–210. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.05.047
  29. Kommaraju, K., Pennington, K., Kolish, K., Twining, C., & Kelm, D. (2024). Determination of priorities for lung transplant education for pulmonary and critical care medicine fellows. ATS Scholar, 5(4), 587–598. https://doi.org/10.34197/ats-scholar.2024-0046oc
  30. Kuru, İ. (2016). Mobil cihazlar için her ortama uyumlu Türkçe programlama dili geliştirmesi [Master]. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi, Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü.
  31. Lang, T. (1995). An overview of four futures methodologies. Manoa Journal of Fried and Half-Fried Ideas, 7, 1–43.
  32. Lenet, T., McIsaac, D. I., Hallet, J. H., Jerath, A., Lalu, M. M., Nicholls, S. G., … Wood, E. (2023). Intraoperative blood management strategies for patients undergoing noncardiac surgery. JAMA Network Open, 6(12), e2349559. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.49559
  33. Lowe, T. (2019). Debugging: The key to unlocking the mind of a novice programmer? 2019 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1109/FIE43999.2019.9028699
  34. Ludlow, J. (2002). III. B. 2. Delphi Inquiries and Knowledge Utilization. In H. A. Linstone & M. Turoff (Eds.), The Delphi method: Techniques and applications (pp. 97–118). Addison Wesley Publishing Company. https://web.njit.edu/~turoff/pubs/delphibook/delphibook.pdf
  35. Maksimenkova, O., & Podbelskiy, V. V. (2010). Programming as a part of software engineering education. In Proceedings of the Spring/Summer Young Researchers’ Colloquium on Software Engineering (No. 4). https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/programming-as-a-part-of-the-software-engineering-education
  36. McCulloch, G. (2019). Coding is for everyone—as long as you speak English | WIRED. https://www.wired.com/story/coding-is-for-everyoneas-long-as-you-speak-english/
  37. Michaeli, T., & Romeike, R. (2019). Improving debugging skills in the classroom. Proceedings of the 14th Workshop in Primary and Secondary Computing Education, 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1145/3361721.3361724
  38. Moumoutzis, N., Xanthaki, C., Perrakis, S., Manousakas, M., & Pavlova, L. (2021). Promoting Python code clubs in Greece: A teacher training program and a case study. Digital Presentation and Preservation of Cultural and Scientific Heritage, 11, 187-202. https://doi.org/10.55630/dipp.2021.11.16
  39. Newley, A., Deniz, H., Kaya, E., & Yesilyurt, E. (2016). Engaging elementary and middle school students in robotics through hummingbird kit with snap! Visual programming language. Journal of Learning and Teaching in Digital Age, 1(2), 20-26. https://izlik.org/JA94UZ68LM
  40. Olatunji, E. K., Oladosu, J. B., Odejobi, O. A., & Olabiyisi, S. O. (2019). A needs assessment for indigenous african language-based programming languages. Annals of Science and Technology, 4(2), 1-5. https://doi.org/10.2478/ast-2019-0007
  41. Olatunji, E. K., Oladosu, J. B., Odejobi, O. A., & Olabiyisi, S. O. (2018). Towards development of an indigenous African language-based programming language. Fuoye Journal of Engineering and Technology, 3(2). https://doi.org/10.46792/fuoyejet.v3i2.191
  42. Papadakis, S., Kalogiannakis, M., Orfanakis, V., & Zaranis, N. (2019). The appropriateness of scratch and app inventor as educational environments for teaching introductory programming in primary and secondary education. In Early childhood development: Concepts, methodologies, tools, and applications (pp. 797–819). IGI Global.
  43. Paparo, G., Hartmann, M., & Grillenberger, M. (2021). A scratch challenge: Middle school students working with variables, lists and procedures. Proceedings of the 21st Koli Calling International Conference on Computing Education Research. https://doi.org/10.1145/3488042.3488065
  44. Piteira, M., & Costa, C. (2013). Learning computer programming: Study of difficulties in learning programming. Proceedings of the 2013 International Conference on Information Systems and Design of Communication, 75–80. https://doi.org/10.1145/2503859.2503871
  45. PYPL Popularity of Programming Language. (2022). https://pypl.github.io/PYPL.html
  46. Quisaguano Collaguazo, L. R., Venegas, M. S. P., Guerrero, A. A. A., & Beltrán, S. H. C. (2022). Desarrollo híbrido con flutter. Ciencia Latina: Revista Multidisciplinar, 6(4), 4594-4609. https://doi.org/10.37811/cl_rcm.v6i4.2959
  47. Rich, P. J., Browning, S. F., Perkins, M. K., Shoop, T., Yoshikawa, E., & Belikov, O. M. (2019). Coding in K-8: International trends in teaching elementary/primary computing. TechTrends, 63(3), 311–329. https://doi.org/10.1007/S11528-018-0295-4/TABLES/8
  48. Şahin, A. E. (2001). Eğitim araştırmalarında delphi tekniği ve kullanımı. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 20, 215–220. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/87971
  49. Schmidt, R. C. (1997). Managing Delphi surveys using nonparametric statistical techniques. Decision Sciences, 28(3), 763–774. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.1997.tb01330.x
  50. Scratch Offline Editor. (2020). https://scratch.mit.edu/download
  51. Scratch Online Editor. (2020). https://scratch.mit.edu/projects/editor/
  52. So, M. H., & Kim, J. M. (2018). An analysis of the difficulties of elementary school students in python programming learning. International Journal on Advanced Science Engineering and Information Technology, 8(4-2), 1507-1512. https://doi.org/10.18517/ijaseit.8.4-2.2720
  53. Stolpe, K., & Hallström, J. (2023). Visual programming as a tool for developing knowledge in stem subjects. BRILL. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004687912_007
  54. Umezawa, K., Ishida, K., Nakazawa, M., & Hirasawa, S. (2023). Proposal and evaluation of intermediate content for the transition from visual to text-based programming languages. Presented at the Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. https://doi.org/10.24251/hicss.2023.011
  55. Villalobos Fernández, L. A., De la Ossa Osegueda, Á., Rodríguez-Villagra, O. A., & Vergara Heidke, A. E. (2020). Resolución de diagramas de flujo y pseudocódigo por parte de estudiantes de Ciencias de la Computación de la Universidad de Costa Rica. Revista Tecnología, Ciencia y Educación, 17, 129–146. https://doi.org/10.51302/tce.2020.491
  56. Vogels, S., Ritchie, E. D., van der Burg, B. L. S. B., Scheltinga, M. R. M., Zimmermann, W. O., & Hoencamp, R. (2022). Clinical consensus on diagnosis and treatment of patients with chronic exertional compartment syndrome of the leg: A delphi analysis. Sports Medicine, 52(12), 3055–3064. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-022-01729-5
  57. Woods, J. M., Scott, H. F., & Zaveri, P. P. (2018). Creating consensus educational goals for pediatric sepsis via multicenter modified delphi. AEM Education and Training, 2(4), 254–258. https://doi.org/10.1002/aet2.10123