全球教育掀起了程式語言的學習風潮，歐美各國甚至將程式語言的課程納入小學教育之中。但程式設計過程中包含許多抽象概念，對於兒童來說，是難以理解，許多孩童往往於課堂內參與教師實務操作演練後，仍無法自行思考其他問題解決能力，甚至因為挫折感而失去學習動機。本研究目標透過「Program the World」愛自造者協會，在偏鄉地區的程式教學計畫，觀察教學者與學習者的互動與回饋中，發掘遊戲式教學策略以促進孩童學習程式邏輯。

本研究運用行動研究，在臺南左鎮，岡林教會所進行遊戲式程式教學。進行前三次的行動循環，藉由孩童的學習反應及教師們的教學觀察，從中發現教師難以同時顧及學習狀況不同的孩童，根據孩童的學習成效給予額外任務練習，能幫助教師平衡整體課堂的教學步調；促使孩童們形成學習小組進行互相學習，有助於降低孩童只模仿教師所提供程式碼的行為；教師們應依照學生的學習成效，給予學生不一樣的學習目標。

經由上述發現，建立出後兩次之行動循環，透過教師培訓去探討更多程式課程需求。行動發現，教材的設計上須讓新的教師掌握孩子們所缺乏抽象概念；培訓課程應提高教師們的教學上的信心；發現由三種不同類型的教師的所組成教學小組，可促進教師之間的知識提升及教學策略的產生。

經由五次行動循環，本研究歸納愛自造者協會的經驗，建立一套名為「編碼樂」教學服務系統，此系統提供4種主要的服務以促進兒童程式教學。本論文並以六個人物誌，透過情境描述、使用者旅程來呈現該服務的具體內容。本研究主要貢獻包括: (一) 發掘遊戲式策略以促進程式學習；(二) 促進新教師之教學團隊發展；(三) 建立一套教學服務，以協助教師與學生在程式課程「教」與「學」之需求。

The Learn-to-Code movement is important in the information age. But learning programming is difficult for kids. By observing the interactions of instructors and young learners in the “Program the World Association”, this research study how to use game-based strategy to teach kids to learn programming.

Using the method of action research, the research investigated children’s need of learning and the requirements of designing courses. The first three action cycles took place in Ganglin Presbyterian Church in Zuozhen, Tainan. We observed it is difficult for tutors to attend to all children in a class. According to children’s learning efficiency, tutors could give them different challenging tasks to practice. It can help tutors keep their teaching pace in the class. We experienced in grouping children in different types of learning teams and promote them to learn from others. It could avoid children only mimicking the code which is provided by tutors. We encouraged tutors should make children have own target according to their learning efficiency.

We couducted last two action cycles to investigate more needs of a programming course from tutor training. We learned it is necessary to let the new tutors understand what the new concepts are for children and how to deliver them clearly to children with the teaching materials. The tutor training course should enhance the tutor’s confidence. By grouping the teaching group of three types of tutors, we could make tutor enhance each other knowledge and generate the usable teaching strategies in a group discussion.

Through five cycles of action, we summarized practice of “Program the World Association” into the Playful Coding service. We also identified six personas, scenarios, and user journeys to present the service. The main contributions of this research include: (1) to explore game-based strategies to enhance children’s learning, (2) to recruit new talents to deliver the programming knowledge through tutor training, and (3) to formulate the service, Playful Coding, to support tutor’s teaching and children’s learning in friendly environments.

Bayliss, J. D. (2007). The effects of games in CS1-3. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 2007 conference on game development in computer science education.
Bishop-Clark, C. (1992). Protocol analysis of a novice programmer. SIGCSE Bull, 24(3), 14-18.
Bruckman, A. (1998). Community support for constructionist learning. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), 7(1-2), 47-86.
Brydon-Miller, M., Greenwood, D., & Maguire, P. (2003). Why action research? Action Research, 1(1), 9-28.
Caspersen, M. E., & Bennedsen, J. (2007). Instructional design of a programming course: a learning theoretic approach. Proceedings of theThird International Workshop on Computing Education Research, 111-122.
Davis, V. (2013). Westwood students celebrate the “Hour of Code”, from http://www.tynker.com/blog/articles/success-stories/how-we-introduced-coding-to-kids-using-tynker-puzzles/
DeVries, R. (2002). Play in the early education curriculum: Four interpretations. Developing Constructivist Early Childhood Curriculum: Practical Principles and Activities, 13-34.
Drake, P., & Sung, K. (2011). Teaching introductory programming with popular board games. Proceedings of the 42nd ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, 619-624.
Garris, R., Ahlers, R., & Driskell, J. E. (2002). Games, motivation, and learning: A research and practice model. Simulation & Gaming, 33(4), 441-467.
Gomes, A., & Mendes, A. J. (2007, September). Learning to program-difficulties and solutions. Paper presented at the International Conference on Engineering Education–ICEE, Coimbra, Portugal.
GOV.UK. (2013, October) .National curriculum, from https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/national-curriculum
Hartmann, W., Nievergelt, J., & Reichert, R. (2001, September). Kara, finite state machines, and the case for programming as part of general education. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 2001 IEEE Symposia on Human-Centric Computing Languages and Environment, Stresa, Italy.
Jiau, H. C., Chen, J. C., & Ssu, K.-F. (2009). Enhancing self-motivation in learning programming using game-based simulation and metrics. IEEE Transactions on Education, 52(4), 555-562.
Killen, R. (2006). Effective teaching strategies: Lessons from research and practice. South Melbourne, Vic: Cengage Learning Australia.
Kim, B., Park, H., & Baek, Y. (2009). Not just fun, but serious strategies: Using meta-cognitive strategies in game-based learning. Computers & Education, 52(4), 800-810.
Lahtinen, E., Ala-Mutka, K., & Järvinen, H.-M. (2005). A study of the difficulties of novice programmers. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 37(3), 14-18.
Li, F. W., & Watson, C. (2011, December). Game-based concept visualization for learning programming. In Proceedings of the third international ACM workshop on Multimedia technologies for distance learning (pp. 37-42). ACM
Maheshwari, P. (1997). Improving the learning environment in first-year programming: integrating lectures, tutorials, and laboratories. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 16(1), 111-131.
Malan, K., & Halland, K. (2004, October). Examples that can do harm in learning programming. Paper presented at the Companion to the 19th annual ACM SIGPLAN Conference on Object-Oriented Programming Systems, Languages, and Applications, Vancouver, Canada.
Meluso, A., Zheng, M., Spires, H. A., & Lester, J. (2012). Enhancing 5th graders’ science content knowledge and self-efficacy through game-based learning. Computers & Education, 59(2), 497-504.
Papastergiou, M. (2009). Digital game-based learning in high school computer science education: Impact on educational effectiveness and student motivation. Computers & Education, 52(1), 1-12.
Papert, S. (1993). The Children's Machine: Rethinking School in the Age of the Computer. New York: Basic Books.
Perkins, D. N., & Martin, F. (1986, June). Fragile knowledge and neglected strategies in novice programmers. In first workshop on empirical studies of programmers on Empirical studies of programmers (pp. 213-229).
Pivec, M. (2006). Affective and emotional aspects of human-computer interaction: Game-based and innovative learning approaches (Vol. 1). USA: IOS Press.
Pivec, M. (2007). Editorial: Play and learn: potentials of game‐based learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 38(3), 387-393.
Pond, K., Ul‐Haq, R., & Wade, W. (1995). Peer review: a precursor to peer assessment. Programmed Learning, 32(4), 314-323.
Prensky, M. (2005). Listen to the natives. Educational Leadership, 63(4), 8-13.
Resnick, M. (2007, June). All I really need to know (about creative thinking) I learned (by studying how children learn) in kindergarten. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 6th ACM SIGCHI Conference on Creativity & Cognition, Washington, DC, USA.
Resnick, M. (2008). Sowing the seeds for a more creative society. Learning & Leading with Technology, 35(4), 18-22.
Resnick, M., & Silverman, B. (2005, June). Some reflections on designing construction kits for kids. In Proceedings of the 2005 conference on Interaction design and children (pp. 117-122). ACM.
Schollmeyer, M. (1996). Computer programming in high school vs. college. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 28, 378-382.
Tucker, A. (2003). A model curriculum for K-12 computer science: Final report of the ACM K-12 task force curriculum committee. New York, USA: ACM.
Whitebread, D. (1997). Developing children’s problem-solving: The educational uses of adventure games. Information Technology and Authentic Learning, 13-37.
Woodhead, M. (2002). Work, Play and Learning in the Lives of Young Children. New York: David Fulton.