Prospective Science Teachers’ Self-Confidence in Computational Thinking Skills

S. Syafril, T. Rahayu, G. Ganefri
{"title":"Prospective Science Teachers’ Self-Confidence in Computational Thinking Skills","authors":"S. Syafril, T. Rahayu, G. Ganefri","doi":"10.15294/jpii.v11i1.33125","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study aims to analyze prospective science teachers’ self-confidence in computational thinking skills on three main points: (i) prospective science teachers’ self-confidence in computational thinking skills, (ii) differences in prospective science teachers’ self-confidence in computational thinking skills as per gender, and (iii) differences in prospective science teachers’ self- confidence in computational thinking skills as per expertise (Biology and Physics). A quantitative cross-sectional survey methodology was used as the research design. A total of 1023 prospective science teachers (biology and physics) were randomly selected as the research sample from the 1959 total population. Data were collected using a self-confidence questionnaire on computational thinking skills. The adaptation results were assessed first by five experts before being tested on 74 prospective science teachers from different universities. The results show that prospective science teachers’ self-confidence in computational thinking skills was generally high (Mean = 78.57). The Mann-Whitney U test found no difference in prospective science teachers’ self-confidence in computational thinking skills as per gender (Mean= 78.05, SD= 9.03 for male, Mean= 78.73, SD= 6.86 for female, with a value of F= 6.028, Z= -0.891, Sig= 0.373 0.05). The Independent Sample t-test also showed no difference in prospective science teachers’ self-confidence in computational thinking skills as per expertise. This study concludes that prospective science teachers have high self-confidence in computational thinking skills as crucial skills in the science teaching profession.","PeriodicalId":37652,"journal":{"name":"Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15294/jpii.v11i1.33125","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

This study aims to analyze prospective science teachers’ self-confidence in computational thinking skills on three main points: (i) prospective science teachers’ self-confidence in computational thinking skills, (ii) differences in prospective science teachers’ self-confidence in computational thinking skills as per gender, and (iii) differences in prospective science teachers’ self- confidence in computational thinking skills as per expertise (Biology and Physics). A quantitative cross-sectional survey methodology was used as the research design. A total of 1023 prospective science teachers (biology and physics) were randomly selected as the research sample from the 1959 total population. Data were collected using a self-confidence questionnaire on computational thinking skills. The adaptation results were assessed first by five experts before being tested on 74 prospective science teachers from different universities. The results show that prospective science teachers’ self-confidence in computational thinking skills was generally high (Mean = 78.57). The Mann-Whitney U test found no difference in prospective science teachers’ self-confidence in computational thinking skills as per gender (Mean= 78.05, SD= 9.03 for male, Mean= 78.73, SD= 6.86 for female, with a value of F= 6.028, Z= -0.891, Sig= 0.373 0.05). The Independent Sample t-test also showed no difference in prospective science teachers’ self-confidence in computational thinking skills as per expertise. This study concludes that prospective science teachers have high self-confidence in computational thinking skills as crucial skills in the science teaching profession.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
未来科学教师在计算思维技能方面的自信心
本研究旨在分析未来科学教师对计算思维技能的自信,主要从三个方面:(i)未来科学教师对计算思维技能的自信;(ii)未来科学教师对计算思维技能自信的性别差异;(iii)未来科学教师对计算思维技能自信的专业差异(生物和物理)。采用定量横断面调查方法作为研究设计。从1959年的总人口中随机抽取1023名准科学教师(生物和物理)作为研究样本。数据采用计算思维能力自信问卷收集。适应结果首先由5位专家评估,然后对来自不同大学的74名未来科学教师进行测试。结果显示,准理科教师对计算思维技能的自信心普遍较高(均值= 78.57)。Mann-Whitney U检验发现,未来科学教师在计算思维技能自信方面的性别差异无统计学意义(男性均值= 78.05,SD= 9.03,女性均值= 78.73,SD= 6.86, F= 6.028, Z= -0.891, Sig= 0.373 0.05)。独立样本t检验也显示,不同专业的准科学教师在计算思维技能方面的自信心没有差异。本研究的结论是,未来的科学教师对计算思维技能作为科学教学职业的关键技能有很高的自信。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia
Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia Social Sciences-Education
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
28
期刊介绍: This journal publishes original articles on the latest issues and trends occurring internationally in science curriculum, instruction, learning, policy, and preparation of science teachers with the aim to advance our knowledge of science education theory and practice. Moreover, this journal also covers the issues concerned with environmental education & environmental science.
期刊最新文献
Enhance The Understanding in Periodic Table of Element Using Crossword Puzzles among Form 4 Students Correlation between Pro-Environmental Behavior and Environmental Values of Female Pre-Service Science Teachers in Indonesia A Comparative Study of Basic Science Process Skills of Science Students at Higher Secondary Level in District Rawalpindi, Pakistan Implementation the Ethnoscience-Based Smart Module to Improve Students’ Patriotism Project-Based Learning Via Traditional Game in Physics Learning: Its Impact on Critical Thinking, Creative Thinking, and Collaborative Skills
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1