近年來，STEM教育一詞頻繁出現。STEM教育的重要性在於培養學生的科學、技術、工程和數學能力，以應對現代社會的挑戰和需求。透過STEM教育，學生能夠培養創新思維、解決問題的能力和合作精神，並將學習應用於實際情境。STEM教育不僅培養學科知識，更重要的是培養學生的核心能力，如批判性思維、創造力、邏輯思維和溝通能力。目前實施STEM教育常見的做法之一是透過程式設計STEM活動，程式設計STEM活動通常包含學習程式語言、團隊合作、實踐和應用。
本研究旨在探討在程式設計STEM活動中，形成性回饋對學生的程式知識、運算思維能力、參與度和自我效能感的影響。為了達到研究目的，研究團隊開發了PyGuide互動式python程式學習平台，該平台提供形成性回饋和行為序列紀錄功能。本研究舉辦了「一日STEM活動工作坊：Raspberry Pi實戰教學活動」，並將參與學生分為實驗組和控制組，實驗組使用有形成性回饋功能的PyGuide，控制組則不使用形成性回饋功能。研究結果顯示，在程式知識方面，實驗組學生的成績顯著高於控制組，形成性回饋的功能能夠幫助學生提升程式知識。在運算思維能力方面，實驗組學生在演算法思維和問題解決方面表現顯著優於控制組，形成性回饋能夠提升學生的運算思維能力。在參與度方面，實驗組學生的情感參與度顯著高於控制組，形成性回饋能夠提高學生的參與度。然而，在自我效能感方面，實驗組和控制組之間未達到統計顯著性。此外，本研究還發現，使用形成性回饋的學生在程式撰寫的行為序列參數上表現較好，撰寫效率更高。綜合結果顯示，形成性回饋在學生的程式設計能力、運算思維能力和參與度方面具有正面影響，並提供了關於形成性回饋在學習環境中的重要性和對學生學習策略的影響的深入洞察。未來的研究可以進一步探討形成性回饋對學習成果和持久性的影響，以及如何最佳地運用形成性回饋來提高學生的學習效果。

STEM education is gaining attention for its role in developing students' abilities in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. It aims to prepare students for modern society by fostering innovative thinking, problem-solving, and collaboration. This research focuses on the impact of formative feedback in programming-based STEM activities on students' programming knowledge, computational thinking abilities, engagement levels, and self-efficacy. We developed the PyGuide interactive Python learning platform with formative feedback and behavioral sequence recording features.
During the experimental activity, students were divided into experimental and control groups. The experimental group received PyGuide's formative feedback, while the control group did not. The results showed significant improvements in programming knowledge and computational thinking for the experimental group compared to the control group. Students receiving formative feedback also displayed higher emotional engagement but showed no significant difference in self-efficacy compared to the control group.
Moreover, students using formative feedback demonstrated better performance in behavioral sequence parameters related to programming, indicating higher coding efficiency. Overall, formative feedback positively influenced students' programming skills, computational thinking, and engagement in programming-based STEM activities. It also provided valuable insights into the importance of formative feedback in the learning environment and its impact on students' learning strategies.
Future research could delve into the long-term effects of formative feedback on learning outcomes and explore optimal approaches to leverage formative feedback to enhance student learning effectiveness in STEM education.

Agbo, F. J., Oyelere, S. S., Suhonen, J., & Adewumi, S. (2019). A systematic review of computational thinking approach for programming education in higher education institutions. Proceedings of the 19th Koli Calling International Conference on Computing Education Research,
Agbo, F. J., Oyelere, S. S., Suhonen, J., & Laine, T. H. (2021). Co-design of mini games for learning computational thinking in an online environment. Education and Information Technologies, 26(5), 5815-5849.
Ahmed, T., Ledesma, N. R., & Devanbu, P. (2021). SYNFIX: Automatically Fixing Syntax Errors using Compiler Diagnostics. arXiv preprint arXiv:2104.14671.
Ahmed, U. Z., Sindhgatta, R., Srivastava, N., & Karkare, A. (2019). Targeted example generation for compilation errors. 2019 34th IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (ASE),
Ahmed, U. Z., Srivastava, N., Sindhgatta, R., & Karkare, A. (2020). Characterizing the pedagogical benefits of adaptive feedback for compilation errors by novice programmers. Proceedings of the ACM/IEEE 42nd International Conference on Software Engineering: Software Engineering Education and Training,
Albluwi, I. (2018). A closer look at the differences between graders in introductory computer science exams. IEEE Transactions on Education, 61(3), 253-260.
Alemán, J. L. F., Palmer-Brown, D., & Draganova, C. (2010). Evaluating student response driven feedback in a programming course. 2010 10th IEEE international conference on advanced learning technologies,
Alwabel, A. (2022). CoEdit: A novel error correction mechanism in compilers using spelling correction algorithms. Journal of King Saud University-Computer and Information Sciences, 34(10), 8490-8500.
America, E. (2007). Rising above the gathering storm. In: Citeseer.
Angeli, C., Voogt, J., Fluck, A., Webb, M., Cox, M., Malyn-Smith, J., & Zagami, J. (2016). A K-6 computational thinking curriculum framework: Implications for teacher knowledge. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 19(3), 47-57.
Atmatzidou, S., & Demetriadis, S. (2016). Advancing students’ computational thinking skills through educational robotics: A study on age and gender relevant differences. Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 75, 661-670.
Balreira, D. G., Silveira, T. L. d., & Wickboldt, J. A. (2023). Investigating the impact of adopting Python and C languages for introductory engineering programming courses. Computer Applications in Engineering Education, 31(1), 47-62.
Baniassad, E., Zamprogno, L., Hall, B., & Holmes, R. (2021). Stop the (autograder) insanity: Regression penalties to deter autograder overreliance. Proceedings of the 52nd ACM technical symposium on computer science education,
Barbosa Rocha, H. J., Tedesco, P. C. D. A. R., & Costa, E. D. B. (2022). On the use of feedback in learning computer programming by novices: a systematic literature mapping. Informatics in Education.
Barik, T., Ford, D., Murphy-Hill, E., & Parnin, C. (2018). How should compilers explain problems to developers? Proceedings of the 2018 26th ACM joint meeting on European software engineering conference and symposium on the foundations of software engineering,
Bennedsen, J., & Caspersen, M. E. (2019). Failure rates in introductory programming: 12 years later. ACM inroads, 10(2), 30-36.
Benotti, L., Aloi, F., Bulgarelli, F., & Gomez, M. J. (2018). The effect of a web-based coding tool with automatic feedback on students' performance and perceptions. Proceedings of the 49th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education,
Bhatia, S., Kohli, P., & Singh, R. (2018). Neuro-symbolic program corrector for introductory programming assignments. Proceedings of the 40th International Conference on Software Engineering,
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2010). Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom assessment. Phi delta kappan, 92(1), 81-90.
Bloom, B. S., & Krathwohl, D. R. (2020). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. Book 1, Cognitive domain. longman.
Brennan, K., & Resnick, M. (2012). New frameworks for studying and assessing the development of computational thinking. Proceedings of the 2012 annual meeting of the American educational research association, Vancouver, Canada,
Bybee, R. W. (2010a). Advancing STEM education: A 2020 vision. Technology and engineering teacher, 70(1), 30.
Bybee, R. W. (2010b). What is STEM education? In (Vol. 329, pp. 996-996): American Association for the Advancement of Science.
Cardoso, A., Leitão, J., & Teixeira, C. (2019). Using the Jupyter notebook as a tool to support the teaching and learning processes in engineering courses. The Challenges of the Digital Transformation in Education: Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Interactive Collaborative Learning (ICL2018)-Volume 2,
Cavalcanti, A. P., Barbosa, A., Carvalho, R., Freitas, F., Tsai, Y.-S., Gašević, D., & Mello, R. F. (2021). Automatic feedback in online learning environments: A systematic literature review. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 2, 100027.
Cheah, C. S. (2020). Factors contributing to the difficulties in teaching and learning of computer programming: A literature review. Contemporary Educational Technology, 12(2), ep272.
Chen, G., Gully, S. M., & Eden, D. (2001). Validation of a new general self-efficacy scale. Organizational research methods, 4(1), 62-83.
Chen, Z., Jiao, J., & Hu, K. (2021). Formative assessment as an online instruction intervention: Student engagement, outcomes, and perceptions. International Journal of Distance Education Technologies (IJDET), 19(1), 50-65.
Chung, C.-Y., & Hsiao, I.-H. (2020). Investigating patterns of study persistence on self-assessment platform of programming problem-solving. Proceedings of the 51st ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education,
Churchill Jr, G. A. (1979). A paradigm for developing better measures of marketing constructs. Journal of marketing research, 16(1), 64-73.
Clements, D. H., & Meredith, J. S. (1993). Research on Logo: Effects and efficacy. Journal of Computing in Childhood Education, 4(4), 263-290.
Clifford, M. M. (1990). Students need challenge, not easy success. Educational Leadership, 48(1), 22-26.
Cooper, S., Dann, W., & Pausch, R. (2000). Alice: a 3-D tool for introductory programming concepts. Journal of computing sciences in colleges, 15(5), 107-116.
Cousin, G. (2006). An introduction to threshold concepts. In (Vol. 17, pp. 4-5): Taylor & Francis.
Daradoumis, T., Marquès Puig, J. M., Arguedas, M., & Calvet Liñan, L. (2022). Enhancing students’ beliefs regarding programming self-efficacy and intrinsic value of an online distributed Programming Environment. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 34(3), 577-607.
Dasgupta, S., & Hill, B. M. (2017). Learning to code in localized programming languages. Proceedings of the fourth (2017) ACM conference on learning@ scale,
Day, M., Penumala, M. R., & Gonzalez-Sanchez, J. (2019). Annete: An intelligent tutoring companion embedded into the eclipse IDE. 2019 IEEE First International Conference on Cognitive Machine Intelligence (CogMI),
Delev, T., & Gjorgjevikj, D. (2017). Static analysis of source code written by novice programmers. 2017 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON),
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.
Dixson, D. D., & Worrell, F. C. (2016). Formative and summative assessment in the classroom. Theory into practice, 55(2), 153-159.
Dorodchi, M., Dehbozorgi, N., & Frevert, T. K. (2017). ” I wish I could rank my exam's challenge level!”: An algorithm of Bloom's taxonomy in teaching CS1. 2017 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE),
Doshi, J. C., Christian, M., & Trivedi, B. H. (2014). Effect of conceptual cue based (CCB) practical exam evaluation of learning and evaluation approaches: a case for use in process-based pedagogy. 2014 IEEE sixth international conference on technology for education,
Durak, H. Y., Yilmaz, F. G. K., & 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.
Ebrahimi, A., Geranzeli, S., Shokouhi, T., & Tee, E. R. (2013). Programming for children:“Alice and Scratch analysis”. 3rd International Conference on Emerging Trends of Computer and Information Technology (ICETCIT), Singapore,
EDUCATION, F. S. (2021). PROGRESS REPORT ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE FEDERAL STEM EDUCATION STRATEGIC PLAN.
Erol, O., & Çırak, N. S. (2022). The effect of a programming tool scratch on the problem-solving skills of middle school students. Education and Information Technologies, 27(3), 4065-4086.
Fraser, N. (2015). Ten things we've learned from Blockly. 2015 IEEE Blocks and Beyond Workshop (Blocks and Beyond),
Gamse, B. C., Martinez, A., & Bozzi, L. (2017). Calling STEM experts: How can experts contribute to students’ increased STEM engagement? International Journal of Science Education, Part B, 7(1), 31-59.
Gao, X., Li, P., Shen, J., & Sun, H. (2020). Reviewing assessment of student learning in interdisciplinary STEM education. International Journal of STEM Education, 7(1), 1-14.
García-Peñalvo, F. J., & Mendes, A. J. (2018). Exploring the computational thinking effects in pre-university education. In (Vol. 80, pp. 407-411): Elsevier.
Godínez Castellanos, J. L., León, A., Reed, C. L., Lo, J. Y., Ayson, P., Garfield, J., Alva, M., Moreno, M. U., Drake, M. D., & Gordon, M. (2021). Chemistry in Our Community: Strategies and Logistics Implemented to Provide Hands-On Activities to K–12 Students, Teachers, and Families. Journal of Chemical Education, 98(4), 1266-1274.
Gonçales, L., Farias, K., da Silva, B., & Fessler, J. (2019). Measuring the cognitive load of software developers: A systematic mapping study. 2019 IEEE/ACM 27th International Conference on Program Comprehension (ICPC),
Gong, D., Yang, H. H., & Cai, J. (2020). Exploring the key influencing factors on college students’ computational thinking skills through flipped-classroom instruction. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 17(1), 1-13.
Guillot, R., Seanosky, J., Guillot, I., Boulanger, D., Guillot, C., Kumar, V., & Fraser, S. N. (2018). Assessing learning analytics systems impact by summative measures. 2018 IEEE 18th International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT),
Gulwani, S., Radiček, I., & Zuleger, F. (2014). Feedback generation for performance problems in introductory programming assignments. Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Foundations of Software Engineering,
Guo, P. J. (2018). Non-native english speakers learning computer programming: Barriers, desires, and design opportunities. Proceedings of the 2018 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems,
Gyasi, J. F., Zheng, L. Q., & Zhou, Y. D. (2021). Perusing the Past to Propel the Future: A Systematic Review of STEM Learning Activity Based on Activity Theory. Sustainability, 13(16), Article 8828. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13168828
Hadjerrouit, S. (1998). Java as first programming language: a critical evaluation. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 30(2), 43-47.
Hao, Q., Smith IV, D. H., Ding, L., Ko, A., Ottaway, C., Wilson, J., Arakawa, K. H., Turcan, A., Poehlman, T., & Greer, T. (2022). Towards understanding the effective design of automated formative feedback for programming assignments. Computer Science Education, 32(1), 105-127.
Hendrik, H., & Hamzah, A. (2021). Flipped classroom in programming course: A systematic literature review. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (iJET), 16(2), 220-236.
Hermans, F. (2020). Hedy: a gradual language for programming education. Proceedings of the 2020 ACM conference on international computing education research,
Hjorth, M. (2017). Strengths and weaknesses of a visual programming language in a learning context with children. In.
Hsu, T.-C., Abelson, H., Lao, N., & Chen, S.-C. (2021). Is it possible for young students to learn the AI-STEAM application with experiential learning? Sustainability, 13(19), 11114.
Hsu, Y.-C., Irie, N. R., & Ching, Y.-H. (2019). Computational thinking educational policy initiatives (CTEPI) across the globe. TechTrends, 63, 260-270.
Hsu, Y.-S., & Fang, S.-C. (2019). Opportunities and challenges of STEM education. Asia-Pacific STEM teaching practices: From theoretical frameworks to practices, 1-16.
Huang, B., Jong, M. S.-Y., & Chai, C. S. (2022). The design and implementation of a video-facilitated transdisciplinary STEM curriculum in the context of COVID-19 pandemic. Educational Technology & Society, 25(1), 108-123.
Hui, Y. K., Li, C., Qian, S., & Kwok, L. F. (2021). Enhancing students' engagement by giving ongoing formative feedback in a blended learning setting. International Journal of Innovation and Learning, 30(3), 390-407.
Husna, A., Cahyono, E., & Fianti, F. (2019). The effect of project based learning model aided scratch media toward learning outcomes and creativity. Journal of Innovative Science Education, 8(1), 1-7.
Israel-Fishelson, R., & Hershkovitz, A. (2022). Studying interrelations of computational thinking and creativity: A scoping review (2011–2020). Computers & Education, 176, 104353.
ISTE. (2015). CT leadership toolkit. In.
Janke, E., Brune, P., & Wagner, S. (2015). Does outside-in teaching improve the learning of object-oriented programming? 2015 IEEE/ACM 37th IEEE International Conference on Software Engineering,
Kafai, Y. B., & Proctor, C. (2022). A revaluation of computational thinking in K–12 education: Moving toward computational literacies. Educational Researcher, 51(2), 146-151.
Kahn, S., Vertesi, J., Adriaenssens, S., Byeon, J., Fixdal, M., Godfrey, K., Lumbroso, J., & Wagoner, K. (2022). The Impact of Online STEM Teaching and Learning During COVID-19 on Underrepresented Students’ Self-Efficacy and Motivation Breadcrumb. Journal of College Science Teaching, 51(6).
Kang, Y., & Lee, K. (2020). Designing technology entrepreneurship education using computational thinking. Education and Information Technologies, 25, 5357-5377.
Karaahmetoğlu, K., & Korkmaz, Ö. (2019). The effect of project-based arduino educational robot applications on students' computational thinking skills and their perception of basic stem skill levels. Participatory Educational Research, 6(2), 1-14.
Keuning, H., Jeuring, J., & Heeren, B. (2016). Towards a systematic review of automated feedback generation for programming exercises. Proceedings of the 2016 ACM Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education,
Khoirom, S., Sonia, M., Laikhuram, B., Laishram, J., & Singh, T. D. (2020). Comparative analysis of Python and Java for beginners. Int. Res. J. Eng. Technol, 7(8), 4384-4407.
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.
Krusche, S., & Seitz, A. (2018). Artemis: An automatic assessment management system for interactive learning. Proceedings of the 49th ACM technical symposium on computer science education,
Laal, M., Naseri, A. S., Laal, M., & Khattami-Kermanshahi, Z. (2013). What do we achieve from learning in collaboration? Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 93, 1427-1432.
Lagus, J., Longi, K., Klami, A., & Hellas, A. (2018). Transfer-learning methods in programming course outcome prediction. ACM Transactions on Computing Education (TOCE), 18(4), 1-18.
Lee, A. (2015). Determining the effects of computer science education at the secondary level on STEM major choices in postsecondary institutions in the United States. Computers & Education, 88, 241-255.
Lee, H.-Y., Cheng, Y.-P., Wang, W.-S., Lin, C.-J., & Huang, Y.-M. (2023). Exploring the Learning Process and Effectiveness of STEM Education via Learning Behavior Analysis and the Interactive-Constructive-Active-Passive Framework. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 07356331221136888.
Leonard, J., Mitchell, M., Barnes-Johnson, J., Unertl, A., Outka-Hill, J., Robinson, R., & Hester-Croff, C. (2018). Preparing teachers to engage rural students in computational thinking through robotics, game design, and culturally responsive teaching. Journal of Teacher Education, 69(4), 386-407.
Li, Y., & Schoenfeld, A. H. (2019). Problematizing teaching and learning mathematics as “given” in STEM education. In (Vol. 6, pp. 1-13): Springer.
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. In (Vol. 3, pp. 147-166): Springer.
Li, Y., Xiao, Y., Wang, K., Zhang, N., Pang, Y., Wang, R., Qi, C., Yuan, Z., Xu, J., & Nite, S. B. (2022). A systematic review of high impact empirical studies in STEM education. International Journal of STEM Education, 9(1), 72.
Liu, H. (2022). Exploration on the Improvement of Learning Motivation in the Teaching of the C Programming Language Course. International Journal of Social Science and Education Research, 5(11), 65-69.
Lokkila, E., Christopoulos, A., & Laakso, M.-J. (2023). A Data-Driven Approach to Compare the Syntactic Difficulty of Programming Languages. Journal of Information Systems Education, 34(1), 84-93.
Lukychova, N. S., Osypova, N. V., & Yuzbasheva, G. S. (2022). ICT and current trends as a path to STEM education: implementation and prospects. CTE Workshop Proceedings,
Malik, S. I., Mathew, R., Al‐Sideiri, A., Jabbar, J., Al‐Nuaimi, R., & Tawafak, R. M. (2022). Enhancing problem‐solving skills of novice programmers in an introductory programming course. Computer Applications in Engineering Education, 30(1), 174-194.
Maloney, J., Resnick, M., Rusk, N., Silverman, B., & Eastmond, E. (2010). The scratch programming language and environment. ACM Transactions on Computing Education (TOCE), 10(4), 1-15.
Maraza-Quispe, B., Sotelo-Jump, A. M., Alejandro-Oviedo, O. M., Quispe-Flores, L. M., Cari-Mogrovejo, L. H., Fernandez-Gambarini, W. C., & Cuadros-Paz, L. E. (2021). Towards the development of computational thinking and mathematical logic through scratch. International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications, 12(2).
Marin, V. J., Pereira, T., Sridharan, S., & Rivero, C. R. (2017). Automated personalized feedback in introductory Java programming MOOCs. 2017 IEEE 33rd International Conference on Data Engineering (ICDE),
Marwan, S., Gao, G., Fisk, S., Price, T. W., & Barnes, T. (2020). Adaptive immediate feedback can improve novice programming engagement and intention to persist in computer science. Proceedings of the 2020 ACM conference on international computing education research,
McCall, D., & Kölling, M. (2019). A new look at novice programmer errors. ACM Transactions on Computing Education (TOCE), 19(4), 1-30.
Medeiros, R. P., Ramalho, G. L., & Falcão, T. P. (2018). A systematic literature review on teaching and learning introductory programming in higher education. IEEE Transactions on Education, 62(2), 77-90.
Mehmood, E., Abid, A., Farooq, M. S., & Nawaz, N. A. (2020). Curriculum, teaching and learning, and assessments for introductory programming course. IEEE Access, 8, 125961-125981.
Moors, L., Luxton-Reilly, A., & Denny, P. (2018). Transitioning from block-based to text-based programming languages. 2018 International Conference on Learning and Teaching in Computing and Engineering (LaTICE),
Murphy, S., MacDonald, A., Wang, C. A., & Danaia, L. (2019). Towards an understanding of STEM engagement: A review of the literature on motivation and academic emotions. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 19, 304-320.
Nikou, S. A. (2023). Student motivation and engagement in maker activities under the lens of the Activity Theory: a case study in a primary school. Journal of Computers in Education, 1-19.
Ninrutsirikun, U., Imai, H., Watanapa, B., & Arpnikanondt, C. (2020). Principal component clustered factors for determining study performance in computer programming class. Wireless Personal Communications, 115, 2897-2916.
Omer, U., Farooq, M. S., & Abid, A. (2021). Introductory programming course: review and future implications. PeerJ Computer Science, 7, e647.
Pérez, F., & Granger, B. E. (2007). IPython: a system for interactive scientific computing. Computing in science & engineering, 9(3), 21-29.
Parihar, S., Dadachanji, Z., Singh, P. K., Das, R., Karkare, A., & Bhattacharya, A. (2017). Automatic grading and feedback using program repair for introductory programming courses. Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education,
Park, D.-Y., Park, M.-H., & Bates, A. B. (2018). Exploring young children’s understanding about the concept of volume through engineering design in a STEM activity: A case study. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 16, 275-294.
Parsazadeh, N., Cheng, P.-Y., Wu, T.-T., & Huang, Y.-M. (2021). Integrating computational thinking concept into digital storytelling to improve learners’ motivation and performance. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 59(3), 470-495.
Pattanaphanchai, J. (2019). An investigation of students’ learning achievement and perception using flipped classroom in an introductory programming course: A case study of Thailand higher education. Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 16(5), 4.
Patton, E. W., Tissenbaum, M., & Harunani, F. (2019). MIT app inventor: Objectives, design, and development. Computational thinking education, 31-49.
Perera, P., Tennakoon, G., Ahangama, S., Panditharathna, R., & Chathuranga, B. (2021). A systematic mapping of introductory programming languages for novice learners. IEEE Access, 9, 88121-88136.
Pettit, R. S., Homer, J., & Gee, R. (2017). Do Enhanced Compiler Error Messages Help Students? Results Inconclusive. Proceedings of the 2017 ACM SIGCSE Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education,
Pishchukhina, O., & Allen, A. (2021). Supporting learning in large classes: online formative assessment and automated feedback. 2021 30th Annual Conference of the European Association for Education in Electrical and Information Engineering (EAEEIE),
Premchaiswadi, W., Porouhan, P., & Premchaiswadi, N. (2018). Process modeling, behavior analytics and group performance assessment of e-learning logs via fuzzy miner algorithm. 2018 IEEE 42nd Annual Computer Software and Applications Conference (COMPSAC),
Qorbani, H. S., Arya, A., Nowlan, N., & Abdinejad, M. (2021). ScienceVR: A virtual reality framework for STEM education, simulation and assessment. 2021 IEEE international conference on artificial intelligence and virtual reality (AIVR),
Quinn, R. J., & Gray, G. (2020). Prediction of student academic performance using Moodle data from a Further Education setting. Irish Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning, 5(1).
Regnell, B., & Pant, L. (2014). Teaching programming to young learners using Scala and Kojo. Pedagogiska inspirationskonferensen-Genombrottet.
Rich, P., & Browning, S. F. (2022). Using Dr. Scratch as a formative feedback tool to assess computational thinking. In Research anthology on computational thinking, programming, and robotics in the classroom (pp. 550-572). IGI Global.
Ruf, A., Mühling, A., & Hubwieser, P. (2014). Scratch vs. Karel: impact on learning outcomes and motivation. Proceedings of the 9th Workshop in Primary and Secondary Computing Education,
Samsudin, M. A., Jamali, S. M., Md Zain, A. N., & Ale Ebrahim, N. (2020). The effect of STEM project based learning on self-efficacy among high-school physics students. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 16(1), 94-108.
Sana'a, M. A., Dousay, T. A., & Jeffery, C. L. (2020). Integrated learning development environment for learning and teaching C/C++ language to novice programmers. 2020 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE),
Sanders, K., & McCartney, R. (2016). Threshold concepts in computing: past, present, and future. Proceedings of the 16th Koli Calling international conference on computing education research,
Selby, C., & Woollard, J. (2013). Computational thinking: the developing definition.
Sen, C., Ay, Z. S., & Kiray, S. A. (2021). Computational thinking skills of gifted and talented students in integrated STEM activities based on the engineering design process: The case of robotics and 3D robot modeling. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 42, 100931.
Seraj, M., Katterfeldt, E.-S., Bub, K., Autexier, S., & Drechsler, R. (2019). Scratch and Google Blockly: How girls' programming skills and attitudes are influenced. Proceedings of the 19th Koli Calling International Conference on Computing Education Research,
Shi, Y., Tong, M., & Long, T. (2021). Investigating relationships among blended synchronous learning environments, students’ motivation, and cognitive engagement: A mixed methods study. Computers & Education, 168, 104193.
Shute, V. J. (2008). Focus on formative feedback. Review of educational research, 78(1), 153-189.
Shute, V. J., Sun, C., & Asbell-Clarke, J. (2017). Demystifying computational thinking. Educational research review, 22, 142-158.
Silva, L., Mendes, A. J., & Gomes, A. (2020). Computer-supported collaborative learning in programming education: A systematic literature review. 2020 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON),
Sobral, S. R. (2021). Flipped classrooms for introductory computer programming courses.
Socratous, C., & Ioannou, A. (2021). Structured or unstructured educational robotics curriculum? A study of debugging in block-based programming. Educational Technology Research and Development, 69, 3081-3100.
Soosai Raj, A. G., Ketsuriyonk, K., Patel, J. M., & Halverson, R. (2018). Does native language play a role in learning a programming language? Proceedings of the 49th ACM technical symposium on computer science education,
Sun, J. C.-Y., & Hsu, K. Y.-C. (2019). A smart eye-tracking feedback scaffolding approach to improving students' learning self-efficacy and performance in a C programming course. Computers in human behavior, 95, 66-72.
Sun, L., Hu, L., & Zhou, D. (2021). Improving 7th-graders’ computational thinking skills through unplugged programming activities: A study on the influence of multiple factors. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 42, 100926.
Sun, L., Hu, L., & Zhou, D. (2022). Programming attitudes predict computational thinking: Analysis of differences in gender and programming experience. Computers & Education, 181, 104457.
Sun, Q., Wu, J., Rong, W., & Liu, W. (2019). Formative assessment of programming language learning based on peer code review: Implementation and experience report. Tsinghua Science and Technology, 24(4), 423-434.
Szabo, C., Sheard, J., Luxton-Reilly, A., Simon, Becker, B. A., & Ott, L. (2019). Fifteen years of introductory programming in schools: a global overview of K-12 initiatives. Proceedings of the 19th Koli Calling International Conference on Computing Education Research,
Tang, X., Yin, Y., Lin, Q., Hadad, R., & Zhai, X. (2020). Assessing computational thinking: A systematic review of empirical studies. Computers & Education, 148, 103798.
Terada, K., & Watanobe, Y. (2019). Code completion for programming education based on recurrent neural network. 2019 IEEE 11th International Workshop on Computational Intelligence and Applications (IWCIA),
Tikva, C., & Tambouris, E. (2021a). Mapping computational thinking through programming in K-12 education: A conceptual model based on a systematic literature Review. Computers & Education, 162, 104083.
Tikva, C., & Tambouris, E. (2021b). A systematic mapping study on teaching and learning Computational Thinking through programming in higher education. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 41, 100849.
Topi, H., Kaiser, K. M., Sipior, J. C., Valacich, J. S., Nunamaker Jr, J. F., de Vreede, G., & Wright, R. (2010). Curriculum guidelines for undergraduate degree programs in information systems. ACM.
Tshukudu, E., & Cutts, Q. (2020). Understanding conceptual transfer for students learning new programming languages. Proceedings of the 2020 ACM conference on international computing education research,
Ureel II, L. C., & Wallace, C. (2019). Automated critique of early programming antipatterns. Proceedings of the 50th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education,
Utomo, A. Y., & Santoso, H. B. (2015). Development of gamification-enriched pedagogical agent for e-learning system based on community of inquiry. Proceedings of the International HCI and UX Conference in Indonesia,
Venter, M. (2020). Gamification in STEM programming courses: State of the art. 2020 IEEE global engineering education conference (EDUCON),
Wang, C., Shen, J., & Chao, J. (2022). Integrating computational thinking in STEM education: A literature review. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 20(8), 1949-1972.
Wang, L.-H., Chen, B., Hwang, G.-J., Guan, J.-Q., & Wang, Y.-Q. (2022). Effects of digital game-based STEM education on students’ learning achievement: a meta-analysis. International Journal of STEM Education, 9(1), 1-13.
Wang, M.-T., Fredricks, J. A., Ye, F., Hofkens, T. L., & Linn, J. S. (2016). The math and science engagement scales: Scale development, validation, and psychometric properties. Learning and Instruction, 43, 16-26.
Wang, X.-M., & Hwang, G.-J. (2017). A problem posing-based practicing strategy for facilitating students’ computer programming skills in the team-based learning mode. Educational Technology Research and Development, 65, 1655-1671.
Wang, Y., Li, H., Feng, Y., Jiang, Y., & Liu, Y. (2012). Assessment of programming language learning based on peer code review model: Implementation and experience report. Computers & Education, 59(2), 412-422.
Weintrop, D., Beheshti, E., Horn, M., Orton, K., Jona, K., Trouille, L., & Wilensky, U. (2016). Defining computational thinking for mathematics and science classrooms. Journal of science education and technology, 25, 127-147.
Weintrop, D., & Wilensky, U. (2019). Transitioning from introductory block-based and text-based environments to professional programming languages in high school computer science classrooms. Computers & Education, 142, 103646.
Weng, X., Chiu, T. K., & Jong, M. S. (2022). Applying relatedness to explain learning outcomes of STEM maker activities. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 800569.
Wiggins, G. (1998). Educative Assessment. Designing Assessments To Inform and Improve Student Performance. ERIC.
Wing, J. (2011). Research notebook: Computational thinking—What and why. The link magazine, 6, 20-23.
Wing, J. M. (2006). Computational thinking. Communications of the ACM, 49(3), 33-35.
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.
Xie, Y., Fang, M., & Shauman, K. (2015). STEM education. Annual review of sociology, 41, 331-357.
Xu, Z., Ritzhaupt, A. D., Tian, F., & Umapathy, K. (2019). Block-based versus text-based programming environments on novice student learning outcomes: A meta-analysis study. Computer Science Education, 29(2-3), 177-204.
Yadav, A., Hong, H., & Stephenson, C. (2016). Computational thinking for all: Pedagogical approaches to embedding 21st century problem solving in K-12 classrooms. TechTrends, 60, 565-568.
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 (TOCE), 14(1), 1-16.
Yang, F.-C. O., 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.
Yeomans, L., Zschaler, S., & Coate, K. (2019). Transformative and troublesome? Students' and professional programmers' perspectives on difficult concepts in programming. ACM Transactions on Computing Education (TOCE), 19(3), 1-27.
Yildiz Durak, H. (2020). 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, 25, 179-195.
Yilmaz, R., & Yilmaz, F. G. K. (2023). The effect of generative artificial intelligence (AI)-based tool use on students' computational thinking skills, programming self-efficacy and motivation. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 100147.
Yin, Y., Hadad, R., Tang, X., & Lin, Q. (2020). Improving and assessing computational thinking in maker activities: The integration with physics and engineering learning. Journal of science education and technology, 29, 189-214.
Zhang, L., & Nouri, J. (2019). A systematic review of learning computational thinking through Scratch in K-9. Computers & Education, 141, 103607.
蕭智元. (2018). 國教課綱列 [程式設計] 為必修之批判與反思. 臺灣教育評論月刊, 7(9), 9-13.