Developing Computational Thinking Skills of High School Students: Design-Based Learning Activities and Programming Tasks

  • Mustafa SaritepeciEmail author
Regular Article


This paper is to investigate into the effect of design-based learning (DBL) activities and programing training on computational thinking (CT) skills. In total, 119 from the ninth grade students were recruited for this study conducted within the scope of Computer Science course. A semi-experimental research design was adopted, and DBL activities were included in one group, while the other group attended in the programming training took place. The duration of the study was planned as fourteen weeks and the data were obtained in the 1st and 14th weeks of the experimentation. During the analysis phase, the paired sample t test was employed for in-group comparisons, whereas the independent samples t test analysis was utilized to make comparisons between groups. This study finds evidence to suggest that there was a significant positive development at CT levels after the experimentation in both groups. The most remarkable result to emerge from the data is that DBL activities had also a similar effect on CT skills compared to programming training considered as important in teaching CT and developing it. Further inquiries should be undertaken in the relationship between DBL and programming training with CT skill through qualitative or mixed research designs in depth.


Computational thinking Programming training Design-based learning 


Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

I declare that I have no conflict of interest. I certify that I have NO affiliations with or involvement in any organization or entity with any financial interest (such as honoraria; educational grants; participation in speakers’ bureaus; membership, employment, consultancies, stock ownership, or other equity interest; and expert testimony or patent-licensing arrangements), or nonfinancial interests (such as personal or professional relationships, affiliations, knowledge or beliefs) in the subject matter or materials discussed in this manuscript.


  1. Aho, A. V. (2012). Computation and computational thinking. The Computer Journal, 55(7), 832–835. Scholar
  2. Antonakos, J. L. (2016). Computer technology and computer programming: Research and strategies. CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group.Google Scholar
  3. Ater-Kranov, A., Bryant, R., Orr, G., Wallace, S., & Zhang, M. (2010). Developing a community definition and teaching modules for computational thinking: accomplishments and challenges. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 2010 ACM conference on Information technology education.Google Scholar
  4. Ball, T., Beckett, L., & Isaacson, M. (2015). Formulating the problem: Digital storytelling and the development of engineering process skills. Paper presented at the Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE), 2015 IEEE.Google Scholar
  5. Barr, D., Harrison, J., & Conery, L. (2011). Computational thinking: A digital age skill for everyone. Learning & Leading with Technology, 38(6), 20–23.Google Scholar
  6. Basogain, X., Olabe, M., Olabe, J., Maiz, I., & Castaño, C. (2012). Mathematics Education through Programming Languages. Paper presented at the 21st Annual World Congress on Learning Disabilities.Google Scholar
  7. Basogain, X., Olabe, M. Á., Olabe, J. C., & Rico, M. J. (2017). Computational thinking in pre-university blended learning classrooms. Computers in Human Behavior, 30, 1e8. 10.1016/j.chb.2017.04.058Google Scholar
  8. Beer, R. D., Chiel, H. J., & Drushel, R. (1999). Using autonomous robotics to teach science and engineering. Communications of the ACM, 42(6), 85–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Binkley, M., Erstad, O., Herman, J., Raizen, S., Ripley, M., Miller-Ricci, M., & Rumble, M. (2012). Defining twenty-first century skills. In Assessment and teaching of 21st century skills (pp. 17–66). Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  10. Bubica, N., & Boljat, I. (2018). Assessment of Computational Thinking Paper presented at the International Conference on Computational Thinking Education, Hong Kong: The Education University of Hong Kong.Google Scholar
  11. Bucci, P., Long, T. J., & Weide, B. W. (2001). Do we really teach abstraction? Paper presented at the ACM SIGCSE Bulletin.Google Scholar
  12. Burke, Q., & Kafai, Y. B. (2012). The writers' workshop for youth programmers: digital storytelling with scratch in middle school classrooms. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 43rd ACM technical symposium on Computer Science Education.Google Scholar
  13. Burke, Q., & Kafai, Y. B. (2014). Decade of game making for learning: From tools to communities. In H. Agius & M. C. Angelides (Eds.), Handbook of digital games (pp. 689–709). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.Google Scholar
  14. Cakir, H., Hava, K., Sarıtepeci, M., & Özüdoğru, G. (2017). Lessons Learned: Comparison of Three Cases of Design Based Learning Activities. Paper presented at the EdMedia: World Conference on Educational Media and Technology.Google Scholar
  15. Calder, N. (2010). Using scratch: an integrated problem-solving approach to mathematical thinking. Australian Primary Mathematics Classroom, 15(4), 9–14.Google Scholar
  16. Camacho, M., Esteve-González, V., & Gisbert, M. (2016). From digital storytelling to 3D game-based storytelling: Fostering student’s creativity in initial teacher training. In Global learn (pp. 240–245). Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).Google Scholar
  17. Caperton, I. H. (2010). Toward a theory of game-media literacy: Playing and building as reading and writing. International Journal of Gaming and Computer-Mediated Simulations (IJGCMS), 2(1), 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Chen, G., Shen, J., Barth-Cohen, L., Jiang, S., Huang, X., & Eltoukhy, M. (2017). Assessing elementary students’ computational thinking in everyday reasoning and robotics programming. Computers & Education, 109, 162–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Choi, J., Lee, Y., & Lee, E. (2017). Puzzle based algorithm learning for cultivating computational thinking. Wireless Personal Communications, 93(1), 131–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Chowdhry, B. S. (2013). Successful transformation of ICT graduate program: A role model for developing countries. Wireless Personal Communications, 69(3), 1013–1023.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Czerkawski, B. (2015). Computational thinking in virtual learning environments. Paper presented at the E-Learn: World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education.Google Scholar
  22. Darling-Hammond, L. (2000). Teacher quality and student achievement. Education policy analysis archives, 8, 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. de Paula, B. H., Burn, A., Noss, R., & Valente, J. A. (2018). Playing Beowulf: Bridging computational thinking, arts and literature through game-making. International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction, 16, 39–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Demir, Ö., & Seferoğlu, S. S. (2017). New concepts, different uses: An evaluation related to computational thinking. In H. F. Odabaşı, B. Akkoyunlu, & A. İşman (Eds.), Educational technology readings. Ankara: Pegem Akademi.Google Scholar
  25. Denner, J., Werner, L., & Ortiz, E. (2012). Computer games created by middle school girls: Can they be used to measure understanding of computer science concepts? Computers & Education, 58(1), 240–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Díaz, L. M., & Gaytán-Lugo, L. S. (2016). Computer Animation as a Vehicle for Teaching Computational Thinking. Paper presented at the IFIP World Information Technology Forum.Google Scholar
  27. Doleck, T., Bazelais, P., Lemay, D. J., Saxena, A., & Basnet, R. B. (2017). Algorithmic thinking, cooperativity, creativity, critical thinking, and problem-solving: Exploring the relationship between computational thinking skills and academic performance. Journal of Computers in Education, 4(4), 355–369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Durak, H. Y. (2018). The effects of using different tools in programming teaching of secondary school students on engagement, computational thinking and reflective thinking skills for problem-solving. Technology, Knowledge and Learning. Scholar
  29. Durak-Yildiz, H., & Saritepeci, M. (2018). Analysis of the relation between computational thinking skills and various variables with the structural equation model. Computers & Education. Scholar
  30. Eguíluz, A., Garaizar, P., & Guenaga, M. (2018). An evaluation of open digital gaming platforms for developing computational thinking skills. In Simulation and gaming. Rijeka: InTech.Google Scholar
  31. Ennis, R. H. (1993). Critical thinking assessment. Theory into Practice, 32(3), 179–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Fessakis, G., Gouli, E., & Mavroudi, E. (2013). Problem-solving by 5–6 years old kindergarten children in a computer programming environment: A case study. Computers & Education, 63, 87–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Futschek, G. (2006). Algorithmic thinking: the key for understanding computer science. Paper presented at the International conference on informatics in secondary schools-evolution and perspectives.Google Scholar
  34. García-Peñalvo, F. J., & Mendes, A. J. (2017). Exploring the computational thinking effects in pre-university education. Computer in human behavior, 80, 407–411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Hemmendinger, D. (2010). A plea for modesty. ACM Inroads, 1(2), 4–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Holt, L. (2011). Creating Digital Stories with Scratch to Promote Computational Thinking. Paper presented at the Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference.Google Scholar
  37. Hu, C. (2011). Computational thinking: what it might mean and what we might do about it. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 16th annual joint conference on Innovation and technology in computer science education.Google Scholar
  38. Hung, C.-M., Hwang, G.-J., & Huang, I. (2012). A Project-based digital storytelling approach for improving students' learning motivation, problem-solving competence and learning achievement. Educational Technology & Society, 15(4), 368–379.Google Scholar
  39. ISTE. (2015). Computational thinking leadership toolkit. Retrieved from
  40. ISTE & CSTA. (2011). Operational definition of computational thinking for K–12 education. Retrieved December 25, 2016, from
  41. Jackson, L. A., Witt, E. A., Games, A. I., Fitzgerald, H. E., Von Eye, A., & Zhao, Y. (2012). Information technology use and creativity: Findings from the Children and Technology Project. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(2), 370–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Kalelioglu, 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), 33–55.Google Scholar
  43. Kátai, Z. (2015). The challenge of promoting algorithmic thinking of both sciences- and humanities-oriented learners. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 31(4), 287–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Kazakoff, E. R., Sullivan, A., & Bers, M. U. (2013). The effect of a classroom-based intensive robotics and programming workshop on sequencing ability in early childhood. Early Childhood Education Journal, 41(4), 245–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Kazimoglu, C., Kiernan, M., Bacon, L., & MacKinnon, L. (2012). Learning programming at the computational thinking level via digital game-play. Procedia Computer Science, 9, 522–531.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Kelleher, C., & Pausch, R. (2005). Lowering the barriers to programming: A taxonomy of programming environments and languages for novice programmers. ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR), 37(2), 83–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Kelleher, C., Pausch, R., & Kiesler, S. (2007). Storytelling alice motivates middle school girls to learn computer programming. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems.Google Scholar
  48. Kızılkaya, G., & Aşkar, P. (2009). The development of a reflective thinking skill scale towards problem solving. Education and Science, 34(154), 82–92.Google Scholar
  49. Koorsse, M., Cilliers, C., & Calitz, A. (2015). Programming assistance tools to support the learning of IT programming in South African secondary schools. Computers & Education, 82, 162–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Kordaki, M., & Kakavas, P. (2017). Digital storytelling as an effective framework for the development of computational thinking skills. In: EDULEARN2017, 3–5 July 2017.Google Scholar
  51. Korkmaz, Ö., Çakir, R., & Özden, M. Y. (2017). A validity and reliability study of the Computational Thinking Scales (CTS). Computers in Human Behavior, 72, 558–569.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Korkmaz, Ö., Çakır, R., & Özden, M. Y. (2016). Computational thinking levels scale (CTLS) adaptation for secondary school level. Gazi Journal of Education Sciences, 1(2), 143–162.Google Scholar
  53. Lee, I., Martin, F., & Apone, K. (2014). Integrating computational thinking across the K-8 curriculum. Acm Inroads, 5(4), 64–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Lee, I., Martin, F., Denner, J., Coulter, B., Allan, W., Erickson, J.,… Werner, L. (2011). Computational thinking for youth in practice. ACM Inroads, 2(1), 32–37.Google Scholar
  55. Liu, C.-C., Cheng, Y.-B., & Huang, C.-W. (2011). The effect of simulation games on the learning of computational problem solving. Computers & Education, 57(3), 1907–1918.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Lu, J. J., & Fletcher, G. H. (2009). Thinking about computational thinking. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 41(1), 260–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Marcelino, M. J., Pessoa, T., Vieira, C., Salvador, T., & Mendes, A. J. (2018). Learning Computational Thinking and scratch at distance. Computers in Human Behavior, 80, 470–477.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Martin, S., & Jacobsen, M. (2018). Coding and computational thinking in math and science. Calgary: Alberta Teachers' Association.Google Scholar
  60. Mishra, P., & Yadav, A. (2013). Rethinking technology & creativity in the 21st century. TechTrends, 57(3), 10–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Nam, C. W. (2017). The effects of digital storytelling on student achievement, social presence, and attitude in online collaborative learning environments. Interactive Learning Environments, 25(3), 412–427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. NRC. (2010). Report of a Workshop on the Scope and Nature of Computational Thinking. Retrieved from
  63. Oluk, A., & Korkmaz, Ö. (2016). Comparing students’ scratch skills with their computational thinking skills in terms of different variables. Online Submission, 8(11), 1–7.Google Scholar
  64. Özgen, Y. (2015). Computational thinking. Retrieved from
  65. Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms: Children, computers, and powerful ideas. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  66. Patterson, G. R., DeBaryshe, B. D., & Ramsey, E. (2017). A developmental perspective on antisocial behavior. In Developmental and life-course criminological theories (pp. 29–35). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  67. Pellas, N., & Peroutseas, E. (2016). Gaming in second life via Scratch4SL: Engaging high school students in programming courses. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 54(1), 108–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Pellas, N., & Vosinakis, S. (2018). The effect of simulation games on learning computer programming: A comparative study on high school students’ learning performance by assessing computational problem-solving strategies. Education and Information Technologies, 23, 2423–2452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Peterson, R. E. (2001). Establishing the creative environment in technology education: Creativity doesn't just happen by chance; the prepared environment nourished it. The Technology Teacher, 61(4), 7–11.Google Scholar
  70. Repenning, A., Webb, D., & Ioannidou, A. (2010). Scalable game design and the development of a checklist for getting computational thinking into public schools. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 41st ACM technical symposium on Computer science education.Google Scholar
  71. 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, 14(1), 678–691.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Romero, J. S. (2010). Library programming with LEGO MINDSTORMS, Scratch, and PicoCricket: Analysis of best practices for public libraries. Computers in Libraries, 30(1), 16.Google Scholar
  73. Sadik, A. (2008). Digital storytelling: A meaningful technology-integrated approach for engaged student learning. Educational technology research and development, 56(4), 487–506.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Saritepeci, M. (2017). An experimental study on the ınvestigation of the effect of digital storytelling on reflective thinking ability at middle school level. Bartin University Journal of Faculty of Education, 6(3), 1367–1384.Google Scholar
  75. Sarıtepeci, M. (2017). Analysis of computational thinking skill level in secondary education in terms of various variables. Paper presented at the 5th International Instructional Technologies & Teacher Education Symposium–ITTES, İzmir.Google Scholar
  76. Sarıtepeci, M., & Çakır, H. (2017). Examining perceived satisfaction related to the digital storytelling process. Paper presented at the EdMedia 2017, Washington, DC, United States.Google Scholar
  77. Sarıtepeci, M., & Durak, H. (2017). Analyzing the effect of block and robotic coding activities on computational thinking in programming education. In G. D. Irina Koleva (Ed.), Educational research and practice. Sofia: St. Kliment Ohridski University Press.Google Scholar
  78. Schiro, M., & Lawson, D. (2004). Oral storytelling and teaching mathematics: Pedagogical and multicultural perspectives (Vol. 1). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  79. Standl, B. (2016). A case study on cooperative problem solving processes in small 9th grade student groups. Paper presented at the IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON), 2016.Google Scholar
  80. Subhi, T. (1999). The impact of LOGO on gifted children’s achievement and creativity. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 15(2), 98–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. The College Board. (2012). Computational thinking practices and big ideas, key concepts, and supporting concepts. Retrieved from
  82. Voogt, J., Fisser, P., Good, J., Mishra, P., & Yadav, A. (2015). Computational thinking in compulsory education: Towards an agenda for research and practice. Education and Information technologies, 20(4), 715–728.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Wilson, V., & Harris, M. (2004). Creative change? A review of the impact of design and technology in schools in England. Journal of Technology Education, 15(2), 46–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Wing, J. (2006). Computational thinking. Communications of the ACM, 49(3), 33–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Wing, J. (2008). Computational thinking and thinking about computing. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 366(1881), 3717–3725.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Wing, J. (2014). Computational thinking benefits society. Paper presented at the 40th Anniversary Blog of Social Issues in Computing.
  87. Yadav, A. (2011). Computational thinking in K-12 Education. Retrieved from
  88. Yadav, A., Gretter, S., Good, J., & McLean, T. (2017). Computational thinking in teacher education. In P. Rich & C. B. Hodges (Eds.), Emerging research, practice, and policy on computational thinking (pp. 205–220). Cham: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Yadav, A., Mayfield, C., Zhou, N., Hambrusch, S., & Korb, J. T. (2014). Computational thinking in elementary and secondary teacher education. ACM Transactions on Computing Education, 14(1), 5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Yildiz Durak, H. (2018). Digital story design activities used for teaching programming effect on learning of programming concepts, programming self-efficacy, and participation and analysis of student experiences. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning., 34(6), 740–752.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Yildiz-Durak, H., Karaoglan-Yilmaz, F. G., & Yilmaz, R. (2019). Computational thinking, programming self-efficacy, problem solving and experiences in the programming process conducted with robotic activities. Contemporary Educational Technology, 10(2), 173–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Yılmaz, F. G. K., Yılmaz, R., & Durak, H. Y. (2018). A review on the opinions of teachers about the development of computational thinking skills in K-12. In Teaching computational thinking in primary education (pp. 157–181). Los Angeles, CA: IGI Global.Google Scholar
  93. Zhong, B., Wang, Q., Chen, J., & Li, Y. (2016). An exploration of three-dimensional integrated assessment for computational thinking. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 53(4), 562–590.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© De La Salle University 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Computer Education and Instructional Technology, Ereğli Faculty of EducationNecmettin Erbakan UniversityKonyaTurkey

Personalised recommendations