A Comparison of the Programming-Oriented Computational Thinking Skills of Engineering and Nonengineering Students at Turkish Universities

IF 2.2 3区工程技术 Q3 COMPUTER SCIENCE, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS

Computer Applications in Engineering Education Pub Date : 2025-08-01 DOI:10.1002/cae.70069

Nihal Menzi Çetin

{"title":"A Comparison of the Programming-Oriented Computational Thinking Skills of Engineering and Nonengineering Students at Turkish Universities","authors":"Nihal Menzi Çetin","doi":"10.1002/cae.70069","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <p>This study examines the programming-oriented computational thinking (PoCT) skills of engineering and nonengineering faculty students, comparing them in terms of grade level and the three subdimensions of PoCT: Conceptual knowledge, algorithmic thinking, and evaluation. Additionally, the study investigates the extent to which students' PoCT skill levels can be predicted by programming language self-efficacy and design thinking skill through hierarchical regression analysis. The data of 571 computer science students from two types of faculties in Turkish universities were analysed. The findings revealed that engineering students had superior computational thinking skills to their nonengineering counterparts, as well as a slightly higher predictive power of programming self-efficacy and design thinking on computational thinking. These results offer valuable insights and strategies for developing instructional practices that address the disadvantages faced by nonengineering disciplines.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":50643,"journal":{"name":"Computer Applications in Engineering Education","volume":"33 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Computer Applications in Engineering Education","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cae.70069","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study examines the programming-oriented computational thinking (PoCT) skills of engineering and nonengineering faculty students, comparing them in terms of grade level and the three subdimensions of PoCT: Conceptual knowledge, algorithmic thinking, and evaluation. Additionally, the study investigates the extent to which students' PoCT skill levels can be predicted by programming language self-efficacy and design thinking skill through hierarchical regression analysis. The data of 571 computer science students from two types of faculties in Turkish universities were analysed. The findings revealed that engineering students had superior computational thinking skills to their nonengineering counterparts, as well as a slightly higher predictive power of programming self-efficacy and design thinking on computational thinking. These results offer valuable insights and strategies for developing instructional practices that address the disadvantages faced by nonengineering disciplines.

查看原文本刊更多论文

土耳其大学工科与非工科学生面向程序设计的计算思维能力比较

本研究考察了工科和非工科学生的面向程序设计的计算思维（PoCT）技能，比较了他们的年级水平和PoCT的三个子维度：概念知识、算法思维和评价。此外，本研究还通过层次回归分析探讨了程序设计语言自我效能感和设计思维技能对学生PoCT技能水平的预测程度。分析了来自土耳其大学两类院系的571名计算机科学专业学生的数据。结果显示，工科学生的计算思维能力优于非工科学生，并且编程自我效能感和设计思维对计算思维的预测能力略高。这些结果为开发解决非工程学科所面临的缺点的教学实践提供了有价值的见解和策略。

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分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Computer Applications in Engineering Education 工程技术-工程：综合

CiteScore

7.20

自引率

10.30%

发文量

100

审稿时长

6-12 weeks

期刊介绍： Computer Applications in Engineering Education provides a forum for publishing peer-reviewed timely information on the innovative uses of computers, Internet, and software tools in engineering education. Besides new courses and software tools, the CAE journal covers areas that support the integration of technology-based modules in the engineering curriculum and promotes discussion of the assessment and dissemination issues associated with these new implementation methods.