The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Developing young children's computational thinking with educational robotics: An interaction effect between gender and scaffolding strategy
Abstract
Abstract The study examined the effects of learning with the Bee-Bot on young boys' and girls' computational thinking within the context of two scaffolding techniques. The study reports statistically significant learning gains between the initial and final assessment of children's computational thinking skills. Also, according to the findings, while both boys and girls benefited from the scaffolding techniques, a statistically significant interaction effect was detected between gender and scaffolding strategy showing that boys benefited more from the individualistic, kinesthetic, spatially-oriented, and manipulative-based activity with the cards, while girls benefited more from the collaborative writing activity. In regards to the children's problem-solving strategies during debugging, the results showed that the majority of them used decomposition as a strategy to deal with the complexity of the task. These results are important, because they show that children at this very young age are able to cope with the complexity of a learning task by decomposing it into a number of subtasks that are easier for them to tackle. The research contributes to the body of knowledge about the teaching of computational thinking. In addition, the study has practical significance for curriculum developers, instructional leaders, and classroom teachers, as they can use the results of this study to design curricula and classroom activities with a focus on the broader set of computational thinking skills, and not only coding.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Wing, J. M. (2006) · Communications of the ACM · doi:10.1145/1118178.1118215 · Cited by 8,102
Computational thinking and thinking about computing
Wing, J. M. (2008) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences · doi:10.1098/rsta.2008.0118 · Cited by 1,784
Barr, V., & Stephenson, C. (2011) · ACM Inroads · doi:10.1145/1929887.1929905 · Cited by 1,692
Demystifying computational thinking
Shute, V. J., Sun, C., & Asbell-Clarke, J. (2017) · Educational Research Review · doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2017.09.003 · Cited by 1,466
Lye, S. Y., & Koh, J. H. L. (2014) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2014.09.012 · Cited by 1,421
Children, robotics, and education
Johnson, J. (2003) · Artificial Life and Robotics · doi:10.1007/bf02480880 · Cited by 192
Cited by
Assessing computational thinking: A systematic review of empirical studies
Tang, X., Yin, Y., Lin, Q., Hadad, R., & Zhai, X. (2020) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103798 · Cited by 647
A systematic review of integrating computational thinking in early childhood education
Su, J., & Yang, W. (2023) · Computers and Education Open · doi:10.1016/j.caeo.2023.100122 · Cited by 174
Zhang, Y., Luo, R., Zhu, Y., & Yin, Y. (2021) · Journal of Educational Computing Research · doi:10.1177/0735633121994070 · Cited by 137
Misirli, A., & Komis, V. (2023) · Early Childhood Research Quarterly · doi:10.1016/j.ecresq.2023.05.014 · Cited by 86
Zhang, Y., & Zhu, Y. (2024) · Educational Studies · doi:10.1080/03055698.2022.2107873 · Cited by 75
Metadata
- Authors
- Angeli, C., & Valanides, N.
- Venue
- Computers in Human Behavior
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2020-04
- Volume
- 105
- Pages
- 105954
- ISSN
- 0747-5632 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2922867488
- Cited by
- 412
- References
- 6
- FWCI
- 40.84
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Developing young children's computational thinking with educational robotics: An interaction effect between gender and scaffolding strategy. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.chb.2019.03.018
- The paper
- Angeli, C., & Valanides, N. (2020). Developing young children's computational thinking with educational robotics: An interaction effect between gender and scaffolding strategy. Computers in Human Behavior. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.03.018
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.