Startseite Bildungswissenschaften The Impact of “Scratch” on Student Engagement and Academic Performance in Primary Schools
Artikel Open Access

The Impact of “Scratch” on Student Engagement and Academic Performance in Primary Schools

  • Damira Belessova , Almira Ibashova , Aziza Zhidebayeva , Guldana Shaimerdenova EMAIL logo und Venera Nakhipova
Veröffentlicht/Copyright: 15. März 2024

Abstract

This study aimed to investigate the impact of the Scratch programming environment on student engagement and academic performance in primary informatics education. The research was conducted over three academic years (2020–2023) in educational organizations (ADAN and Navoiy schools) involving 170 first and third-grade students. The Student Engagement Instrument (SEI) was used to assess cognitive, emotional, and behavioral engagement, and academic performance was evaluated based on trimester grades in informatics. The results indicated significant improvement in both student engagement and academic performance post-implementation of Scratch. Cognitive, emotional, and behavioral engagement scores showed a marked increase, from an average SEI score of 3.3 to 4.0 for first graders and 3.7 to 4.4 for third graders. Similarly, academic performance demonstrated a considerable enhancement, with average grades rising from 53.5 to 80.3 for first graders and 57.3 to 84.5 for third graders over four trimesters. Teachers’ observational data, complemented by qualitative focus group discussions, reinforced these findings.

1 Introduction

The burgeoning significance of digital information technologies in school teaching has been acknowledged by educational experts globally, heralding an era of innovative instructional methodologies (Haleem, Javaid, Qadri, & Suman, 2022). The advent of these technologies has unequivocally revolutionized pedagogical practices, paving the way for a more immersive, interactive, and engaging learning experience. As the focus of modern-day education shifts towards cultivating learners who are adept at navigating the digital landscape, the relevance and importance of integrating these technologies in teaching become more pronounced (Kuhail, ElSayary, Farooq, & Alghamdi, 2022). In light of this educational paradigm shift, numerous proposals have been advanced by researchers advocating for the creation of information and educational environments within schools (Gussenova, Babaev, & Smagulov, 2020). These proposals (Irma, 2019; Tapia-Fonllem, Fraijo-Sing, Corral-Verdugo, Garza-Teran, & Moreno-Barahona, 2020) primarily emphasize the need to foster an academic culture that appreciates and harnesses the immense potential of digital technology in facilitating meaningful learning experiences. They propose the creation of comprehensive digital ecosystems in schools, encompassing various elements such as digitally enhanced curriculum design, e-learning platforms, and advanced pedagogical tools (Joshi, 2022; Nicolay, Erazo, Esteve-Gonzalez, & Vaca, 2015). Amid the array of technological innovations, a few have gained widespread recognition and have been instrumental in significantly contributing to the development of information and educational environments in schools (Mhlongo, Mbatha, Ramatsetse, & Dlamini, 2023). Such systems have been revolutionary in fostering a collaborative and engaging educational atmosphere, instilling in students critical digital literacy skills, and ultimately, preparing them for the challenges of a technologically driven world. Consequently, the transformation that these technologies induce in the educational environment substantiates their integral role in modern academic infrastructures, underlining the need for their widespread adoption and effective utilization (U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Technology, 2017).

The use of information and educational environments in school practice has been steadily gaining traction, serving as a transformative impetus driving pedagogical innovation. A specific illustration of this can be drawn from a myriad of schools across the globe that have integrated Learning Management Systems, such as Google Classroom, into their teaching practices (Dash, 2019). This digital platform facilitates seamless interaction between teachers and students, allowing the provision and completion of assignments, exchange of ideas, and timely feedback, all within a consolidated virtual environment. As schools continue to explore the potential of these environments, there has been a marked shift towards the development of new and innovative approaches to create and integrate these systems into teaching practices. In one particular case, a school has deployed a school-wide Digital Learning Environment (DLE) (Brown, Dehoney, & Millichap, 2015), which, unlike traditional learning systems, offers a more personalized learning experience. The DLE effectively intertwines various resources, tools, and services, promoting a learner-centered educational approach. Furthermore, the emergence of immersive technologies, such as Virtual Reality (VR) and Augmented Reality, has inspired an entirely new paradigm for creating information and educational environments. A noteworthy case is the utilization of VR in history classes, where students are transported to different eras, providing them with a uniquely immersive learning experience (Calvert & Abadia, 2020). These instances underscore the dynamism in the creation and application of information and educational environments in schools, suggesting a promising trajectory for future educational practices.

The matter of student engagement in primary schools represents a focal concern in contemporary pedagogical discourse, underpinning the broader objectives of academic achievement, social development, and lifelong learning. Student engagement, understood as the degree of attention, curiosity, interest, and passion that students exhibit in the learning process, is a multifaceted phenomenon intricately intertwined with cognitive, emotional, and behavioral components of student participation in educational activities. Recent research (Appleton, Christenson, & Furlong, 2008; Li & Xue, 2023) suggests a growing issue with student disengagement at the primary level, characterized by low academic performance, high dropout rates, and negative attitudes towards school, presenting serious implications for individual learning outcomes and systemic educational efficacy. This scenario underscores an exigent need to reimagine traditional teaching methodologies and embrace more innovative, student-centered approaches. It is widely recognized that traditional didactic pedagogies, with their emphasis on passive learning, have shown limitations in fostering active engagement, critical thinking, and problem-solving skills in students (Semple & Currie, 2022). Hence, the call for innovative teaching methodologies – those that leverage digital technologies, incorporate active learning strategies, and nurture a stimulating and inclusive learning environment – is compelling. Such approaches, pivoted on the learner’s curiosity, creativity, and active participation, promise to reinvigorate the educational landscape, enhancing student engagement, improving learning outcomes, and fostering a lifelong love for learning. Therefore, addressing the issue of student engagement in primary schools through innovative teaching methods is not just timely, but of paramount importance, setting the course for the future of education.

In light of the burgeoning imperative to invigorate student engagement in primary schools and the promising potential of innovative teaching methodologies, this research endeavor sets forth a clear and significant objective. The focus of our investigation is to ascertain the impact of the Scratch learning platform on student engagement. Scratch, an educational tool developed by the MIT Media Lab, is aimed at introducing primary school students to the rudiments of programming, thus providing a creative outlet while fostering problem-solving skills (Scratch, 2023). The underlying premise of this study is rooted in the hypothesis that the use of such an interactive learning environment may enhance students’ engagement in the learning process. Through its visually appealing, easy-to-use interface, Scratch enables students to create their own interactive stories, games, and animations, thereby offering an immersive learning experience. Therefore, the central objective of our research is to examine whether, and to what extent, the implementation of Scratch in a primary school curriculum influences students’ attention, curiosity, and interest in learning. This objective extends to evaluating the potential of Scratch as not only a pedagogical tool for improving not just the cognitive, but also the emotional and behavioral facets of student engagement. Ultimately, our study strives to contribute to the academic discourse surrounding the use of innovative digital tools in education and their impact on student engagement.

Our research endeavor, predicated on evaluating the impact of the Scratch learning platform on student engagement, seeks to address a series of specific research questions and hypotheses. First, to what degree does the use of Scratch in primary school classrooms enhance the cognitive engagement of students, marked by increased attention, curiosity, and interest in learning activities? This question is coupled with the hypothesis that the introduction of Scratch in the curriculum fosters a significant upswing in cognitive engagement, largely due to its interactive and immersive learning experiences. Second, we question whether the utilization of Scratch influences the emotional aspects of student engagement, manifesting as increased enjoyment, motivation, and positive attitudes towards learning. The corresponding hypothesis proposes that Scratch, by creating a more stimulating and enjoyable learning environment, positively influences students’ emotional engagement. Lastly, we probe whether the use of Scratch encourages greater behavioral engagement, characterized by active participation, persistence, and effort in learning tasks. We hypothesize that the interactive nature of Scratch motivates students to become more actively involved in their learning, thereby enhancing behavioral engagement. These research questions and hypotheses, crafted with specificity and academic rigor, aim to illuminate the potential of Scratch as a pedagogical tool for augmenting student engagement in primary schools.

2 Related Studies

The appraisal of past studies is instrumental in the context of our research, offering a comprehensive understanding of the theoretical and empirical landscape that underpins the exploration of Scratch’s impact on student engagement. Such reviews not only equip us with a nuanced understanding of existing knowledge but also illuminate potential gaps, which our study aims to address. In this regard, understanding the theoretical underpinnings of Scratch and its relationship with student engagement is crucial. Scratch, an interactive programming environment developed by the Lifelong Kindergarten Group at MIT Media Lab, is grounded in the constructivist learning theory (Scratch, 2023). This theory posits that learners actively construct knowledge through interaction with their environment. In the context of Scratch, this environment is a virtual platform that encourages learners to create, experiment, and innovate, thereby fostering active cognitive engagement. Additionally, Scratch embodies principles of situated learning by providing a context (creating animations, stories, and games) that makes the learning process meaningful and relevant for students (Hagge, 2017). This relevance and active engagement are pivotal in driving student engagement, both behaviorally and emotionally. Similarly, the theoretical underpinning of other comparable platforms is primarily linked to the tenets of active and constructivist learning theories. These platforms, much like Scratch, provide a hands-on, immersive environment where students can learn by doing, stimulating their interest, curiosity, and motivation – key elements of student engagement. Therefore, in both Scratch and similar platforms, the theoretical foundation suggests a strong potential to enhance student engagement by virtue of their interactive and immersive design (Cope & Kalantzis, 2009).

The literature on the impact of Scratch on student engagement presents key findings that underscore its pedagogical potential (Iyamuremye, Nsabayezu, & Habimana, 2022). For instance, several studies have reported significant improvements in students’ cognitive engagement (Campbell & Atagana, 2022), with increased curiosity, persistence, and enhanced problem-solving skills attributed to Scratch’s hands-on and creative environment (Fagerlund, Hakkinen, Vesisenaho, & Viiri, 2021; Iyamuremye et al., 2022). In terms of emotional engagement, students exposed to Scratch have shown elevated interest and enjoyment in learning, particularly owing to the platform’s interactive and gamified nature. These studies, predominantly utilizing quantitative methodologies like pre and post-tests, surveys, and observational metrics, have substantiated the positive relationship between Scratch and various aspects of student engagement (Ferrer-Mico, Prats-Fernandez, & Redo-Sanzhez, 2012). The implications of these methodologies for our research are manifold, offering rigorous approaches to measure engagement while highlighting the need for careful consideration of factors like sample characteristics and instructional context.

In terms of similar platforms, research encompassing platforms like Code.org, Blockly, and Alice also unveils promising impacts on student engagement. These platforms, like Scratch, adhere to the constructivist pedagogical approach, integrating coding and interactive learning (Dodge, 2023). Reported outcomes often mirror those associated with Scratch, particularly in terms of fostering cognitive and emotional engagement (Chang, 2014; Seraj, Katterfeldt, Bub, Autexier, & Drechsler, 2019). The methodologies employed in these studies range from mixed methods, incorporating both qualitative and quantitative data, to case study approaches.

Drawing parallels and distinctions between Scratch and these platforms elucidates the universal impact of constructivist, interactive digital environments on student engagement. However, unique features of Scratch, such as its story-telling and animation capabilities, appear to provide additional layers of engagement, harnessing creativity, and imagination beyond the coding and logical thinking commonly emphasized in other platforms. Therefore, the overarching evidence from past studies reinforces the proposition that Scratch, along with similar platforms, significantly contributes to enhancing student engagement, albeit with unique nuances reflective of their individual features.

Research by de Almeida, Almeida, Rocha, and Ferreira (2021) discusses the Scratch4All project, which had a positive impact on the school environment by allowing young people to engage with technology educationally. It helped develop not only programming skills but also skills in other school subjects. Also another study by de Almeida, Teixeira, and Almeida (2019) indicates that Scratch programming language can significantly influence the skills acquired by students in the classroom, enhancing computational thinking and digital literacy. The study aimed to evaluate the impact on students’ knowledge, attitudes, and capacities, as well as the school community at large. Some research (Uluay, 2022) focuses on the views of pre-service elementary teachers about programming after experiencing Scratch. The study found a positive tendency towards programming among participants after the implementation process, with many expressing a desire to improve in this field and use programming technologies in their future professional lives.

3 Materials and Methods

3.1 Study Design and Participants

This experimental study was conducted within the ADAN and Navoiy secondary general education organizations, involving students from three first-grade classrooms and two third-grade classrooms, totaling 170 participants. The research, spanning over three years, adopted a longitudinal design to track changes in student engagement with informatics education through the use of the Scratch programming environment. The study was structured into three stages, each with specific objectives contributing to the overall research aim. The first stage focused on establishing a theoretical foundation, the second on developing educational materials and a teaching methodology, and the final stage on evaluating the effectiveness of these materials and methodologies (Figure 1).

Figure 1 
                  Design chart, indicating the timeline, stages, and key activities of the study.
Figure 1

Design chart, indicating the timeline, stages, and key activities of the study.

3.2 Data Collection Methods and Instruments

Data were collected using a combination of instruments to assess student engagement and the effectiveness of the Scratch programming curriculum. The primary tool was a modified version of the Student Engagement Instrument (SEI) (Appleton, Christenson, Kim, & Reschly, 2006), which measured cognitive, emotional, and behavioral aspects of engagement. Additionally, a Scratch-based project was designed to evaluate students’ practical skills and engagement, complemented by an observation checklist used by teachers to monitor student behavior and engagement during Scratch sessions. Below are questions that were included in the pre-test and post-test of the SEI related to the impact of Scratch projects on student engagement (Table 1).

Table 1

Sample questions used for SEI

SEI factors Pretest Questions Posttest Questions
Cognitive I believe using Scratch will make it easier for me to understand complex concepts Using Scratch has made it easier for me to understand complex concepts
I think that Scratch will help me to better express my ideas in schoolwork Scratch has helped me to better express my ideas in schoolwork
Emotional I am excited about using Scratch in the educational process I have enjoyed using Scratch in the educational process this year
I am worried that using Scratch might negatively affect my academic performance Using Scratch did not negatively affect my academic performance
Behavioral I am willing to spend extra time on schoolwork if it involves using Scratch I have spent extra time on schoolwork this year because it involved using Scratch
I might get distracted when I am supposed to be working on schoolwork involving Scratch I was less likely to get distracted when I was working on schoolwork involving Scratch

The validity of these instruments was ensured through a pilot study and expert reviews, adhering to established psychometric standards.

3.3 Participants and Procedure

The study’s participants comprised first- and third-grade students, selected through a purposive sampling method to represent typical students in the initial stages of primary education. Prior to the introduction of the Scratch curriculum, informed consent was obtained from the parents or guardians of all participating students. The study was conducted over a full academic year, allowing for pre- and post-intervention assessments using the SEI, observations during Scratch sessions, and end-of-semester focus group discussions to gather qualitative insights into the students’ experiences and engagement levels.

3.4 Data Analysis

Data were analyzed using statistical techniques appropriate for the study’s design and objectives. A paired t-test was employed to compare pre- and post-intervention SEI scores, assessing the impact of the Scratch curriculum on student engagement. Regression analysis was used to explore the influence of various factors on engagement levels. All analyses were conducted in compliance with ethical standards for educational research, ensuring the anonymity and confidentiality of student data.

4 Results

4.1 Results from the SEI

The research engaged a diverse population of students from three first-grade classrooms and two third-grade classrooms at the ADAN and Navoiy secondary general education organizations. Altogether, a total of 170 students were involved, ensuring a wide range of responses for a robust analysis. The participant pool was balanced in terms of gender, and students represented diverse socioeconomic backgrounds. The age range of the first-grade participants was between 6 and 7 years, whereas the third-grade students were between 8 and 9 years.

Data were collected through multiple means to gain a comprehensive understanding of the impact of Scratch on student engagement.

The SEI was employed to measure the cognitive, emotional, and behavioral engagement of both first- and third-grade students. The instrument was administered twice during the academic year: at the start (pretest) and at the end (posttest). Each component of the SEI was scored on a scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree), with higher scores indicating greater engagement.

The average pretest and posttest scores, along with the results of calculating the standard deviation values, are shown in the following Table 2:

Table 2

Results of SEI

SEI factors First-Grade Pretest Average (SD) First-Grade Posttest Average (SD) Third-Grade Pretest Average (SD) Third-Grade Posttest Average (SD)
Cognitive Engagement 3.3 (±0.2) 4.0 (±0.3) 3.7 (±0.2) 4.4 (±0.2)
Emotional Engagement 3.4 (±0.3) 4.3 (±0.1) 3.8 (±0.1) 4.5 (±0.1)
Behavioral Engagement 3.2 (±0.2) 4.1 (±0.1) 3.6 (±0.2) 4.5 (±0.1)

The paired t-tests demonstrated that the increases in scores from pretest to posttest were statistically significant in all cases, with p-values less than 0.05. This indicates that the introduction of Scratch in the classroom significantly enhanced cognitive, emotional, and behavioral engagement across both grades.

Furthermore, the standard deviations suggest that there was a relatively small amount of variation in scores within each grade and time point. This strengthens the reliability of the mean score improvements and underpins the significant impact Scratch had on student engagement.

The data in the table represents the average (mean) scores and the standard deviations (SD) of the first- and third-grade students’ responses on the SEI pretest and posttest for cognitive, emotional, and behavioral engagement. The scores likely range from 1 to 5, with higher scores indicating higher levels of engagement.

Cognitive engagement: In the first grade, the average cognitive engagement score increased from 3.3 to 4.0, demonstrating an improvement in cognitive engagement over the academic year. Similarly, in the third grade, the average cognitive engagement score increased from 3.7 to 4.4. The small standard deviations in both grades suggest that the students’ scores did not vary widely from the average, indicating a general improvement in cognitive engagement.

Emotional engagement: The average emotional engagement scores also increased in both grades. In the first grade, the score rose from 3.4 to 4.3, while in the third grade, the score increased from 3.8 to 4.5. Again, the small standard deviations suggest that most students’ scores were close to the average, indicating a rise in emotional engagement as a result of the intervention.

Behavioral engagement: Similar trends were observed in behavioral engagement. The average score for the first grade increased from 3.2 to 4.1, while for the third grade, it increased from 3.6 to 4.5. The small standard deviations indicate that the scores were close to the average, suggesting a significant increase in behavioral engagement across the student body.

In conclusion, the data indicate that using Scratch in the classroom has had a positive impact on cognitive, emotional, and behavioral engagement in both first- and third-grade students. The low standard deviations suggest that these improvements were consistent across most students, further supporting the effectiveness of Scratch in enhancing student engagement.

4.2 The Impact of Scratch Project to the Academic Performance

Before getting to know Scratch, the students’ basic programming skills were assessed. This included a practice assignment where students were asked to solve certain problems using whatever programming knowledge they had. Students were introduced to the Scratch programming environment. This included several lessons in which students were taught the basics of Scratch and gradually introduced to more advanced concepts. During the implementation phase, student performance was regularly assessed. These were small tasks or tests designed to measure students’ understanding of the concepts they were learning and their ability to apply those concepts in Scratch. Post-test assessments were conducted every trimester. It was similar in structure and complexity to a pre-assessment to accurately measure the improvement in students’ programming skills (Table 3).

Table 3

Trimester-wise Pretest and Posttest Average Scores (with Standard Deviations) for First and Third Grades

Trimester First Grade Third Grade
Pretest Average (SD) Posttest Average (SD) Pretest Average (SD) Posttest Average (SD)
1 53.5 (±7.4) 61.9 (±7.3) 57.3 (±5.8) 65.1 (±4.7)
2 65.0 (±5.3) 73.7 (±4.3) 69.1 (±4.2) 76.9 (±4.1)
3 71.6 (±4.1) 78.1 (±2.9) 75.5 (±4.0) 81.2 (±3.9)
4 78.3 (±3.4) 80.3 (±2.2) 78.8 (±4.5) 84.5 (±3.2)

Data provided are pre-test and post-test mean scores and standard deviations (SD) for first- and third-grade students over the four trimesters. The scores reflect students’ programming skills measured before (pre-test) and after (post-test) using Scratch.

In the first trimester, first-grade students have an average pretest score of 53.5 with an SD of 7.4, suggesting that initially, the students’ programming skills vary around an average level. After using Scratch, the average posttest score rises to 61.9, with an SD of 7.3, indicating a marked improvement in programming skills.

The trend of improvement is also seen in the third-grade students, whose average pretest score of 57.3 (SD = 5.8) rises to an average posttest score of 65.1 (SD = 4.7) in the first trimester. This trend continues across all four trimesters for both first and third grades, indicating a positive impact of Scratch on students’ programming skills. The increase in average scores and the decrease in SDs suggest that not only did the students improve their skills, but they also became more consistent in their performances.

By the final trimester, both first- and third-grade students display further improved posttest scores (80.3 for first grade and 84.5 for third grade), with even lower standard deviations (2.2 for first grade and 3.2 for third grade), demonstrating consistent mastery of programming skills gained through Scratch over time.

In summary, these data indicate that using Scratch in teaching programming significantly enhances students’ programming skills across different grade levels over time. The decrease in standard deviation values shows that the variance in the students’ performance also decreases over time, which implies more consistent learning outcomes.

4.3 Insights from Teacher Observations

Teacher observation data was collected using a checklist that focused on how effectively students interacted with the Scratch program. This checklist included items related to student attention, participation, interaction with software, problem-solving ability, and creativity in programming tasks (Table 4).

Table 4

Teacher Observation Scores on Student Engagement with Scratch Program for 1st and 3rd Grades

Teacher Observation First-grade average (SD) Third grade average (SD)
Attention 4.0 (±0.5) 4.5 (±0.4)
Participation 4.1 (±0.5) 4.6 (±0.4)
Software Interaction 3.9 (±0.6) 4.4 (±0.5)
Problem-Solving 3.8 (±0.6) 4.3 (±0.5)
Creativity 4.2 (±0.5) 4.7 (±0.4)

Each of these categories was rated on a scale from 1 to 5, where 1 is “very poor” and 5 is “excellent.”

Analysis and interpretation of such data are as follows: The observational data from teachers, as reflected in the checklist, indicate a strong engagement of students with the Scratch program across both grades. In both the first and third grades, students scored highly on attention and participation, with averages of 4.0 and 4.1, respectively, for first grade and 4.5 and 4.6, respectively, for third grade. This suggests that students were actively engaged and attentive during Scratch programming activities.

The average score for software interaction is 3.9 for first grade and 4.4 for third grade, indicating that students were able to interact well with the Scratch software, with a slightly higher ability observed in the third graders.

Problem-solving, a key aspect of programming, had average scores of 3.8 for first grade and 4.3 for third grade, demonstrating that students were progressively improving their problem-solving skills through the use of Scratch.

Finally, students in both grades showcased high creativity levels, with first graders scoring an average of 4.2 and third graders averaging 4.7. This suggests that the Scratch program facilitates and encourages creative thinking in programming tasks among primary students.

The standard deviations are relatively small in all cases, indicating that the ratings by the teachers were generally consistent, further validating the positive impact of the Scratch program.

5 Discussion

The findings from this study provide compelling evidence in support of our initial research questions and align with the existing literature on the use of Scratch and similar platforms in primary school education. Our primary research question focused on understanding the impact of the Scratch program on student engagement. Both the quantitative data from the SEI and the qualitative data from focus group discussions support a positive impact of Scratch on student engagement in both the first and third grades.

The quantitative analysis demonstrated an increase in cognitive, emotional, and behavioral engagement scores after the implementation of the Scratch program. The pretest and posttest results showed a consistent pattern of improvement, which was echoed in the teachers’ observations. Moreover, these findings correlate with the increased academic performance observed across the four trimesters of the study, indicating that enhanced engagement might be contributing to better learning outcomes.

The qualitative data provided deeper insights into the increased engagement, with teachers highlighting the usefulness of Scratch in enhancing students’ attention, participation, software interaction, problem-solving, and creativity. These findings align well with the existing literature, which posits that practical and interactive platforms like Scratch can facilitate a more active and engaging learning experience, thereby improving key skills like problem-solving and creativity (Brennan & Resnick, 2012; Resnick, Maloney, Hernandex, & Kafai, 2009).

The study also found that the use of Scratch stimulated improved academic performance in programming teaching, demonstrated through increased scores over the academic year. This result confirms previous research suggesting that Scratch can effectively support learning in computer science education, providing a beneficial and student-friendly introduction to key programming concepts (Zhang & Nouri, 2019).

However, it should be noted that while the results indicate a positive impact of the Scratch program, some teachers suggested room for improvement in catering to students with varying skill levels. Future studies might explore ways to differentiate Scratch activities to challenge students at different proficiency levels and investigate long-term impacts on students’ computational thinking skills.

In summary, the present study reinforces and extends the existing literature, confirming that the use of the Scratch program in primary education can enhance student engagement, stimulate creativity, and improve academic performance in programming.

Comparative analysis of our study with past research offers valuable insights into the nuanced impacts of Scratch and similar platforms in the field of primary education. Consistent with previous studies (Brennan & Resnick, 2012), our research found that Scratch positively influences student engagement and academic performance.

In terms of engagement, our quantitative data, complemented by qualitative teacher observations, revealed significant improvement in cognitive, emotional, and behavioral engagement. These results mirror findings by Piedade and Dorotea (2022), who noted that Scratch fosters motivation and engagement among learners. Similarly, our findings parallel a study by Roque, Dasgupta, and Costanza-Chock (2016), which highlighted how Scratch encourages creative thinking, a theme echoed in our qualitative data. However, our study further expanded on these dimensions by offering a graded comparison between first and third graders, providing new insights into the varying effects of Scratch at different educational stages.

In terms of academic performance, our study found a notable improvement in scores after the implementation of Scratch in teaching programming. This aligns with (Resnick et al., 2009), who found Scratch to be an effective tool for learning basic programming concepts. Yet, our study offers additional granularity by tracking performance over four trimesters, thereby demonstrating the sustained impact of Scratch over a longer period.

Despite these similarities, differences emerge when considering the instructional approach and the depth of qualitative data. While earlier studies (Benton, Hoyles, & Kalas, 2017) have often used Scratch as part of a broader curriculum or after-school activities, our study focused on Scratch as the primary tool in formal programming education.

In summary, our study reaffirms the positive impact of Scratch found in previous studies, while offering a more detailed understanding of its influence across different grade levels and in the context of formal education. It also sheds light on potential areas of enhancement, thereby contributing to the continued refinement of the application of Scratch in primary education.

The findings from this study bear significant implications for teaching practice and student learning, particularly in the domain of informatics education within the primary school context.

First, the demonstrated effectiveness of Scratch in fostering student engagement underscores its utility as an instructional tool. By promoting cognitive, emotional, and behavioral engagement, Scratch can motivate students and make learning more enjoyable, which is critical in facilitating effective learning. Thus, teachers should consider incorporating Scratch into their lesson plans as a means of enhancing student interaction with the material and fostering a more active learning environment.

The noted improvement in academic performance associated with Scratch use further emphasizes its potential as a teaching tool in informatics education. As the data suggest, Scratch not only engages students but also enhances their understanding and application of programming concepts, which is a key learning outcome in informatics education. Thus, Scratch can be an effective tool in promoting foundational programming skills, supporting the curriculum and potentially leading to better student outcomes in later stages of education (Papavlasopoulou, Giannakos, & Jaccheri, 2019).

Furthermore, the study’s findings suggest that Scratch can help cultivate essential twenty-first-century skills such as problem-solving and creativity, as observed in the teacher’s observations. Given the increasing importance of these skills in today’s digital age, their development should be an integral part of contemporary education. By integrating Scratch into the curriculum, teachers can provide students with an opportunity to practice and hone these skills.

However, the qualitative data also point to the need for differentiation in Scratch activities to cater to students with varying skill levels, which is a critical aspect of effective teaching. Hence, while using Scratch, teachers should strive to customize and adapt activities to meet the diverse needs and abilities of their students, ensuring an inclusive learning environment that promotes success for all learners (Belessova, Ibashova, Bosova, & Shaimerdenova, 2023).

In summary, the study’s findings highlight the substantial benefits of incorporating Scratch into informatics teaching practice in primary schools. They suggest that Scratch can play a crucial role in not only enhancing student engagement and academic performance but also promoting vital skills, offering important insights for educators in this field.

While our study presents several important findings, we recognize the inherent limitations and their potential influences on the results.

First, our research was conducted within two educational organizations, ADAN and Navoiy schools, and the sample size of 170 students may not fully represent the diversity of the broader population of primary students. Therefore, the findings of our study may not be generalizable to all settings, particularly in regions with different socio-economic, cultural, or educational systems.

Second, the study relied heavily on quantitative measures for assessing student engagement and academic performance. Although these measures are widely accepted and were complemented by qualitative observations, they may not capture the full complexity and nuances of student experiences with Scratch. It is also possible that the improved post-test scores might be influenced by a familiarity effect, where students perform better simply due to repeated exposure to the testing format.

Additionally, our study design didn’t include a control group that didn’t use Scratch. This means we can’t conclusively state that the observed improvements were solely due to the use of Scratch and not influenced by other factors like normal academic progression, teaching quality, or external resources used by students.

Lastly, our research spanned over three academic years, and the long duration might have introduced other factors that could have affected the results, such as changes in teaching staff, student dynamics, or even upgrades to the Scratch platform.

While acknowledging these limitations, we believe our study offers valuable insights into the potential of Scratch as a tool in primary informatics education. Future research should aim to address these limitations, potentially incorporating larger, more diverse samples, using control groups, and employing mixed-method approaches to capture a more comprehensive picture of the impact of Scratch in education.

6 Conclusion

In conclusion, this research provides compelling evidence of the value of integrating the Scratch programming environment into primary school informatics education. The findings demonstrate a significant positive impact on both student engagement and academic performance, suggesting Scratch can play a crucial role in facilitating an active learning environment and promoting a deeper understanding of informatics subjects.

The study further indicates that students in both first and third grades not only interacted meaningfully with the programming tasks but also demonstrated improved problem-solving and creativity skills as observed by teachers.

However, it’s essential to acknowledge the study’s limitations, primarily the sample size and the absence of a control group. These limitations present avenues for future research, where a larger, more diverse sample can be studied, and the influence of Scratch can be compared against other similar educational platforms.

Lastly, this study suggests that incorporating innovative, interactive digital tools like Scratch into the classroom could potentially transform teaching practices, driving a more student-centered approach. Therefore, it is recommended that educators and stakeholders consider such platforms in curriculum design and teacher training programs.

This research contributes to the burgeoning field of educational technology, particularly in the context of early informatics education. It underscores the potential of platforms like Scratch to nurture twenty-first-century skills, foster student engagement, and enhance academic performance. Future research could build upon these findings, examining the long-term impact of Scratch on students’ learning trajectories and exploring its effects in different educational contexts and demographics.

  1. Funding information: This research was funded by Ministry of Education and Science of the Republic of Kazakhstan, Science Committee, grant financing project “Development of an information and educational environment in primary school on the courses ‘Scratch’ and ‘Robotics’ in the conditions of Smart-education” (IRN AR09260464) and intra-university funding by South Kazakhstan State Pedagogical University, grant financing project “The use of explanatory dictionaries in pictures on Scratch and robotics in primary school” (IRN VF0009).

  2. Conflict of interest: The authors state no conflict of interest.

  3. Informed consent: Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

  4. Data availability statement: Data are contained within the article.

References

Appleton, J. J., Christenson, S. L., & Furlong, M. J. (2008). Student engagement with school: Critical conceptual and methodological issues of the construct. Psychology in the Schools, 45, 369–386. doi: 10.1002/pits.20303.Suche in Google Scholar

Appleton, J. J., Christenson, S. L., Kim, D., & Reschly, A. L. (2006). Measuring cognitive and psychological engagement: Validation of the student engagement instrument. Journal of School Psychology, 44, 427–445. doi: 10.1016/j.jsp.2006.04.002.Suche in Google Scholar

Belessova, D., Ibashova, A., Bosova, L., & Shaimerdenova, G. (2023). Digital learning ecosystem: Current state, prospects, and hurdles. Open Education Studies, 5(1), 20220179. doi: 10.1515/edu-2022-0179.Suche in Google Scholar

Benton, L., Hoyles, C., & Kalas, I. (2017). Bridging primary programming and mathematics: Some findings of design research in England. Digital Experiences in Mathematics Education, 3, 115–138. doi: 10.1007/s40751-017-0028-x.Suche in Google Scholar

Brennan, K., & Resnick, M. (2012, April 13–17). New Frameworks for Studying and Assessing the Development of Computational Thinking. Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Vancouver, Canada.Suche in Google Scholar

Brown, M., Dehoney, J., & Millichap, N. (2015). The next generation digital learning environment: A report on research. EDUCAUSE Learning Initiative, 11, 1–11.Suche in Google Scholar

Calvert, J., & Abadia, R. (2020). Impact of immersing university and high school students in educational linear narratives using virtual reality technology. Computers & Education, 159, 104005. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2020.104005.Suche in Google Scholar

Campbell, O. O., & Atagana, H. I. (2022). Impact of a Scratch programming intervention on student engagement in a Nigerian polytechnic first-year class: Verdict from the observers. Heliyon, 8, E09191. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e09191.Suche in Google Scholar

Chang, C. K. (2014). Effects of using Alice and Scratch in an introductory programming course for corrective instruction. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 51, 185–204. doi: 10.2190/EC.51.2.c.Suche in Google Scholar

Cope, B., & Kalantzis M. (2009). Multiliteracies: New literacies, new learning. Pedagogies: An International Journal, 4, 164–195.10.1080/15544800903076044Suche in Google Scholar

Dash, S. (2019). Google classroom as a learning management system to teach biochemistry in a medical school. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, 47, 404–407. doi: 10.1002/bmb.21246.Suche in Google Scholar

de Almeida, M. E. B., Almeida, R., Rocha, C., & Ferreira, R. (2021, September 23–24). Impact Evaluation: Scratch in Basic Education. International Symposium on Computers in Education (SIIE), Malaga, Spain. doi: 10.1109/SIIE53363.2021.9583643.Suche in Google Scholar

de Almeida, M. E. B., Teixeira, A. R. A., & Almeida, R. (2019, April 9–11). Work in Progress: Improving Learning Performance using Programming Methodology. IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON), American University in Dubai, Dubai, UAE.10.1109/EDUCON.2019.8725206Suche in Google Scholar

Dodge, D. (2023). Top 12 Kids Coding Languages. Coda Kid. Retrieved June 01, 2023 from https://codakid.com/top-7-kids-coding-languages-of-2018/.Suche in Google Scholar

Fagerlund, J., Hakkinen, P., Vesisenaho, M., & Viiri, J. (2021). Computational thinking in programming with Scratch in primary schools: A systematic review. Computer Applications in Engineering Education, 29, 12–28. doi: 10.1002/cae.22255.Suche in Google Scholar

Ferrer-Mico, T., Prats-Fernandez, M. A., & Redo-Sanzhez, A. (2012). Impact of Scratch programming on students’ understanding of their own learning process. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 46, 1219–1223. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.05.278.Suche in Google Scholar

Gussenova, S. S., Babaev, D. B., & Smagulov, E. Z. (2020). The concept of information and educational environment in the context of updated education. Bulletin of the National Academy of Sciences of the Republic of Kazakhstan, 5, 253–258.10.32014/2020.2518-1467.166Suche in Google Scholar

Hagge, J. (2017). Scratching beyond the surface of literacy: Programming for early adolescent gifted students. Gifted Child Today, 40(3), 154–162. doi: 10.1177/1076217517707233.Suche in Google Scholar

Haleem, A., Javaid, M., Qadri, M. A., & Suman, R. (2022). Understanding the role of digital technologies in education: A review. Sustainable Operations and Computers, 3, 275–285. doi: 10.1016/j.susoc.2022.05.004.Suche in Google Scholar

Irma, K. (2019). Formation of innovation educational environment at high school. Bulletin of Science and Practice, 4, 405–409.10.33619/2414-2948/41/58Suche in Google Scholar

Iyamuremye, A., Nsabayezu, E., & Habimana, J. C. (2022). Secondary school teacher’s conception and reflection of computer programming with Scratch. Discover Education, 1, 6. doi: 10.1007/s44217-022-00006-x.Suche in Google Scholar

Joshi, M. S. (2022). Holistic design of online degree programmes in higher education – A case study from Finland. International Journal of Educational Management, 36, 32–48. doi: 10.1108/IJEM-12-2020-0588.Suche in Google Scholar

Kuhail, M. A., ElSayary, A., Farooq, S., & Alghamdi, A. (2022). Exploring immersive learning experiences: A survey. Informatics, 9, 75. doi: 10.3390/informatics9040075.Suche in Google Scholar

Li, J., & Xue, E. (2023). Dynamic interaction between student learning behaviour and learning environment: Meta-analysis of student engagement and its influencing factors. Behavioral Sciences, 13, 59. doi: 10.3390/bs13010059.Suche in Google Scholar

Mhlongo, A., Mbatha, K., Ramatsetse, B., & Dlamini, R. (2023). Challenges, opportunities, and prospects of adopting and using smart digital technologies in learning environments: An iterative review. Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis, 9, E16348. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e16348.Suche in Google Scholar

Nicolay, G., Erazo, S., Esteve-Gonzalez, V., & Vaca, B. (2015). Teaching and learning in digital worlds: Strategies and issues in higher education. In B. Gisbert (Eds.), Teaching and Learning in digital worlds: Strategies and issues in higher education (pp. 129–137). Spain: Publicacions Universitat Rovira i Virgili.Suche in Google Scholar

Papavlasopoulou, S., Giannakos, M. N., & Jaccheri, L. (2019). Exploring children’s learning experience in constructionism-based coding activities through design-based research. Computers in Human Behavior, 99, 415–427. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2019.01.008.Suche in Google Scholar

Piedade, J., & Dorotea, N. (2022). Effects of Scratch-based activities on 4th-grade students’ computational thinking skills. Informatics in Education, 19. doi: 10.15388/infedu.2023.19.Suche in Google Scholar

Resnick, M., Maloney, J., Hernandex, M. A., & Kafai, Y. B. (2009). Scratch: Programming for everyone. Communications of the ACM, 52(11), 60–67.10.1145/1592761.1592779Suche in Google Scholar

Roque, R., Dasgupta, S., & Costanza-Chock, S. (2016). Children’s civic engagement in the Scratch online Community. Social Sciences, 5, 55. doi: 10.3390/socsci5040055.Suche in Google Scholar

Scratch. (2023). Retrieved October 01, 2023 from https://scratch.mit.edu/about.Suche in Google Scholar

Semple, L., & Currie, G. (2022). It opened up a whole new world: An innovative interprofessional learning activity for students caring for children and families. International Journal of Educational Research Open, 3, 100106. doi: 10.1016/j.ijedro.2021.100106.Suche in Google Scholar

Seraj, M., Katterfeldt, E. S., Bub, K., Autexier, S., & Drechsler, R. (2019, November 13). Scratch and Google Blockly: How Girls’ Programming Skills and Attitudes are Influenced. 19th Koli Calling International Conference on Computing Education Research, Finland. doi: 10.1145/3364510.3364515.Suche in Google Scholar

Tapia-Fonllem, C., Fraijo-Sing, B., Corral-Verdugo, V., Garza-Teran, G., & Moreno-Barahona, M. (2020). School environments and elementary school children’s well-being in Northwestern Mexico. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 510. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00510.Suche in Google Scholar

U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Technology. (2017). Reimaging the role of technology in Education: 2017 National Education Technology Plan Update, 105.Suche in Google Scholar

Uluay, G. (2022). Programming experiences of pre-service elementary school teachers with scratch. International Journal of Eurasian Education and Culture, 17, 965–993.10.35826/ijoecc.453Suche in Google Scholar

Zhang, L., & Nouri, J. (2019). A systematic review of learning computational thinking through Scratch in K-9. Computers & Education, 141, 103607. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103607.Suche in Google Scholar

Received: 2023-12-04
Revised: 2024-02-14
Accepted: 2024-02-19
Published Online: 2024-03-15

© 2024 the author(s), published by De Gruyter

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Artikel in diesem Heft

  1. Special Issue: Building Bridges in STEAM Education in the 21st Century - Part II
  2. The Flipped Classroom Optimized Through Gamification and Team-Based Learning
  3. Method and New Doctorate Graduates in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics of the European Innovation Scoreboard as a Measure of Innovation Management in Subdisciplines of Management and Quality Studies
  4. Impact of Gamified Problem Sheets in Seppo on Self-Regulation Skills
  5. Special Issue: Disruptive Innovations in Education - Part I
  6. School-Based Education Program to Solve Bullying Cases in Primary Schools
  7. The Project Trauma-Informed Practice for Workers in Public Service Settings: New Strategies for the Same Old Objective
  8. Regular Articles
  9. Limits of Metacognitive Prompts for Confidence Judgments in an Interactive Learning Environment
  10. “Why are These Problems Still Unresolved?” Those Pending Problems, and Neglected Contradictions in Online Classroom in the Post-COVID-19 Era
  11. Potential Elitism in Selection to Bilingual Studies: A Case Study in Higher Education
  12. Predicting Time to Graduation of Open University Students: An Educational Data Mining Study
  13. Risks in Identifying Gifted Students in Mathematics: Case Studies
  14. Technology Integration in Teacher Education Practices in Two Southern African Universities
  15. Comparing Emergency Remote Learning with Traditional Learning in Primary Education: Primary School Student Perspectives
  16. Pedagogical Technologies and Cognitive Development in Secondary Education
  17. Sense of Belonging as a Predictor of Intentions to Drop Out Among Black and White Distance Learning Students at a South African University
  18. Gender Sensitivity of Teacher Education Curricula in the Republic of Croatia
  19. A Case Study of Biology Teaching Practices in Croatian Primary Schools
  20. The Impact of “Scratch” on Student Engagement and Academic Performance in Primary Schools
  21. Examining the Structural Relationships Between Pre-Service Science Teachers’ Intention to Teach and Perceptions of the Nature of Science and Attitudes
  22. Validation of the Undesirable Behavior Strategies Questionnaire: Physical Educators’ Strategies within the Classroom Ecology
  23. Economics Education, Decision-Making, and Entrepreneurial Intention: A Mediation Analysis of Financial Literacy
  24. Deconstructing Teacher Engagement Techniques for Pre-service Teachers through Explicitly Teaching and Applying “Noticing” in Video Observations
  25. Influencing Factors of Work–Life Balance Among Female Managers in Chinese Higher Education Institutions: A Delphi Study
  26. Examining the Interrelationships Among Curiosity, Creativity, and Academic Motivation Using Students in High Schools: A Multivariate Analysis Approach
  27. Teaching Research Methodologies in Education: Teachers’ Pedagogical Practices in Portugal
  28. Normrank Correlations for Testing Associations and for Use in Latent Variable Models
  29. The More, the Merrier; the More Ideas, the Better Feeling”: Examining the Role of Creativity in Regulating Emotions among EFL Teachers
  30. Principals’ Demographic Qualities and the Misuse of School Material Capital in Secondary Schools
  31. Enhancing DevOps Engineering Education Through System-Based Learning Approach
  32. Uncertain Causality Analysis of Critical Success Factors of Special Education Mathematics Teaching
  33. Novel Totto-Chan by Tetsuko Kuroyanagi: A Study of Philosophy of Progressivism and Humanism and Relevance to the Merdeka Curriculum in Indonesia
  34. Global Education and Critical Thinking: A Necessary Symbiosis to Educate for Critical Global Citizenship
  35. The Mediating Effect of Optimism and Resourcefulness on the Relationship between Hardiness and Cyber Delinquent Among Adolescent Students
  36. Enhancing Social Skills Development in Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder: An Evaluation of the “Power of Camp Inclusion” Program
  37. The Influence of Student Learning, Student Expectation and Quality of Instructor on Student Perceived Satisfaction and Student Academic Performance: Under Online, Hybrid and Physical Classrooms
  38. Household Size and Access to Education in Rural Burundi: The Case of Mutaho Commune
  39. The Impact of the Madrasati Platform Experience on Acquiring Mathematical Concepts and Improving Learning Motivation from the Point of View of Mathematics Teachers
  40. The Ideal Path: Acquiring Education and Gaining Respect for Parents from the Perspective of Arab-Bedouin Students
  41. Exploring Mentor Teachers’ Experiences and Practices in Japan: Formative Intervention for Self-Directed Development of Novice Teachers
  42. Research Trends and Patterns on Emotional Intelligence in Education: A Bibliometric and Knowledge Mapping During 2012–2021
  43. Openness to Change and Academic Freedom in Jordanian Universities
  44. Digital Methods to Promote Inclusive and Effective Learning in Schools: A Mixed Methods Research Study
  45. Translation Competence in Translator Training Programs at Saudi Universities: Empirical Study
  46. Self-directed Learning Behavior among Communication Arts Students in a HyFlex Learning Environment at a Government University in Thailand
  47. Unveiling Connections between Stress, Anxiety, Depression, and Delinquency Proneness: Analysing the General Strain Theory
  48. The Expression of Gratitude in English and Arabic Doctoral Dissertation Acknowledgements
  49. Subtexts of Most Read Articles on Social Sciences Citation Index: Trends in Educational Issues
  50. Experiences of Adult Learners Engaged in Blended Learning beyond COVID-19 in Ghana
  51. The Influence of STEM-Based Digital Learning on 6C Skills of Elementary School Students
  52. Gender and Family Stereotypes in a Photograph: Research Using the Eye-Tracking Method
  53. ChatGPT in Teaching Linear Algebra: Strides Forward, Steps to Go
  54. Partnership Quality, Student’s Satisfaction, and Loyalty: A Study at Higher Education Legal Entities in Indonesia
  55. SEA’s Science Teacher Voices Through the Modified World Café
  56. Construction of Entrepreneurship Coaching Index: Based on a Survey of Art Design Students in Higher Vocational Colleges in Guangdong, China
  57. The Effect of Audio-Assisted Reading on Incidental Learning of Present Perfect by EFL Learners
  58. Comprehensive Approach to Training English Communicative Competence in Chemistry
  59. The Collaboration of Teaching at The Right Level Approach with Problem-Based Learning Model
  60. Effectiveness of a Pop-Up Story-Based Program for Developing Environmental Awareness and Sustainability Concepts among First-Grade Elementary Students
  61. Effect of Computer Simulation Integrated with Jigsaw Learning Strategy on Students’ Attitudes towards Learning Chemistry
  62. Unveiling the Distinctive Impact of Vocational Schools Link and Match Collaboration with Industries for Holistic Workforce Readiness
  63. Students’ Perceptions of PBL Usefulness
  64. Assessing the Outcomes of Digital Soil Science Curricula for Agricultural Undergraduates in the Global South
  65. The Relationship between Epistemological Beliefs and Assessment Conceptions among Pre-Service Teachers
  66. Review Articles
  67. Fostering Creativity in Higher Education Institution: A Systematic Review (2018–2022)
  68. The Effects of Online Continuing Education for Healthcare Professionals: A Systematic Scoping Review
  69. The Impact of Job Satisfaction on Teacher Mental Health: A Call to Action for Educational Policymakers
  70. Developing Multilingual Competence in Future Educators: Approaches, Challenges, and Best Practices
  71. Using Virtual Reality to Enhance Twenty-First-Century Skills in Elementary School Students: A Systematic Literature Review
  72. State-of-the-Art of STEAM Education in Science Classrooms: A Systematic Literature Review
  73. Integration of Project-Based Learning in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics to Improve Students’ Biology Practical Skills in Higher Education: A Systematic Review
  74. Teaching Work and Inequality in Argentina: Heterogeneity and Dynamism in Educational Research
  75. Case Study
  76. Teachers’ Perceptions of a Chatbot’s Role in School-based Professional Learning
Heruntergeladen am 14.12.2025 von https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/edu-2022-0228/html?srsltid=AfmBOopwGutcVScxsBmWaEk8Nw9wlH6U7LN5e7KGMJ7E0rOa7IHTbCYk
Button zum nach oben scrollen