Article Preview
TopIntroduction
On 11 March 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) declared the COVID-19 outbreak as a global pandemic, but no one was prepared. Many universities were forced to move classes online within a week. Unfortunately, not all hands-on learning activities could be fully replicated online, for instance programming (He, 2020). In many past studies, programming has been reported to be hard and challenging. Novice learners are reported to be weak in logical algorithms, problem-solving and basic programming concepts (Bain & Barnes, 2014; Lahtinen, Ala-Mutka, & Jarvinen, 2005; Mingoc & Sala, 2019), and advanced learners are reported to be weak in abstract programming concepts such as repetition, recursive loop, parameters and pointers (Lahtinen et al., 2005; Piteira & Costa, 2013; Settle, Vihavainen, & Sorva, 2014). Male students tend to have more interest, self-efficacy, motivation and proficiency in programming (Ayalew, Tshukudu, & Lefoane, 2018; Baser, 2013; Özyurt & Özyurt, 2015). However, some studies defy these claims (Burnett et al., 2010; Murphy et al., 2006). Other studies have reported that students with a prior programming background have a better performance in programming (Chen, Haduong, Brennan, Sonnert, & Sadler, 2019; McCord & Jeldes, 2019). However, one study has found no correlation between prior programming knowledge and performance (Ayalew et al., 2018).
Although a recent study has revealed that students performed equally well in online programming classes (He, 2020), the emergency online education had a great impact on student self-efficacy, motivation and performance (Di Pietro, Biagi, Costa, Karpiński, & Massa, 2020; Zhang et al., 2020). Student performance suffered from a setback in terms of learning loss, lower pass rates and more learning difficulties (Aguilera-hermida, 2020; Di Pietro et al., 2020; Kelly, 2020; Lytle, Lundy, Reynolds, & Ladd, 2020; Shim & Lee, 2020; Tang et al., 2020; Zhang et al., 2020). Some studies have reported no changes however (Aguilera-hermida, 2020) or a positive learning outcome (Azlan et al., 2020; Zhang et al., 2020). These varied findings could be due to the difference in approaches used, e.g. online learning is suitable for mass lectures and small seminars, but not for workshops or practical fieldworks (Lytle et al., 2020).
The emergency online education caused a decrease in student learning motivation and engagement (Aguilera-hermida, 2020; Azlan et al., 2020; Bourion-Bédès et al., 2020; Di Pietro et al., 2020; Kelly, 2020). For example, students are less motivated to participate in online learning activities, discussions or peer learning at home during the lockdown (Aguilera-hermida, 2020; Jabbar, Gauci, & Anstead, 2021; Zhang et al., 2020). Apart from confusion and worries, students must have faced different types of challenges at home. Three major complaints were not being able to concentrate, distractions in their surroundings and unreliable internet connectivity (Adedoyin & Soykan, 2020; Aguilera-hermida, 2020; Azlan et al., 2020; Bourion-Bédès et al., 2020; Lytle et al., 2020; Mishra, Gupta, & Shree, 2020; Shim & Lee, 2020; Zhang et al., 2020). Studies have revealed that students miss the in-person social interactions with their peers and instructors to maintain a healthy mental and emotional well-being (Aguilera-hermida, 2020; Di Pietro et al., 2020; Kelly, 2020; Lytle et al., 2020; Shim & Lee, 2020). Hence, many students would still prefer the conventional classroom teaching to online education (Aguilera-hermida, 2020; Azlan et al., 2020; Zhang et al., 2020).