| dc.description.abstract | 
To support the advancement of modern civilisation, our institutions of higher learning must produce
the right pool of professionals, who can develop innovative software. However, the teaching and 
learning of the first programming language (CS1) remains a great challenge for most educators and 
novice computer students. Indicators such as failure and attrition rates, and CS1 student engagement,
continue to show that conventional pedagogy does not adequately meet the needs of some beginning
CS students. For its ease in introducing novices to programming, Scratch—a visual programming 
environment following the constructionism philosophy of Seymour Papert—is now employed even 
in some higher education CS1 classes with mixed evidence of its impact. Scratch captures the 
constructionist agenda by its slogan: “Imagine, Program, Share.”
Therefore, this study explored the impart of using a constructionist Scratch programming pedagogy 
on higher education CS1 students’ achievements. This study also sought to compare the impacts of 
the two CS1 modes: the conventional class - involving textual programming language, lectures and 
labs, and the constructionist Scratch inquiry-based programming class. It further aims to discover if 
gender, academic level, age, prior programming, and visual artistic abilities moderate the effects of 
programming pedagogy on students’ achievements. 
To realize the study’s aims, the study employed a quasi-experimental pretest-posttest nonequivalent 
groups design, involving four intact CS1 classes of polytechnic students (N = 418) in north-central 
Nigeria. The investigation was conducted in phases: a pilot (n = 236) and main (n=182) studies lasting 
two academic sessions, with each study comprising one experimental and one control group. In each 
session, learning in both modes lasted for six weeks. In both studies, purposive sampling was
employed to select institutions, and selected institutions were randomly assigned to treatment groups. 
Instruments employed included CS1 Student Profile Questionnaire (CSPROQ) and Introductory Programming Achievement Test (IPAT). To strengthen the research design, I employed Coarsened 
Exact Matching (CEM) algorithm—after conducting a priori power analysis—to generate matched 
random samples of cases from both studies. Thus, research data employed in the analysis include: 
from the pilot, 41 cases in each treatment group; from the main study, 42 cases in each treatment 
group. Descriptive and inferential statistics were employed to find answers to research questions and 
test the research hypothesis. Data from both studies satisfied the requirements for statistical tests 
employed, i.e., t-test and ANCOVA. The alpha level used in testing hypotheses was p = 0.05. The 
dependent variable is the IPAT post-test score, while the independent variables are treatment, gender, 
age, academic achievement level, prior programming, and prior visual art. The covariate was the 
IPAT pretest score. Statistical analyses were conducted using SPSS version 23.
The t-test results from both pilot and main studies indicated that, both programming pedagogies had 
significant effects on student IPAT scores, although the effect of the constructionist Scratch
intervention was higher. 
Results from the one-way ANCOVA analysis of both pilot and main study data—while controlling 
for students’ IPAT pretest scores—yielded the same outcome: There was significant main effect of 
treatment on students’ IPAT posttest scores, although the impact was moderate. Controlling for pre test scores, analysis of the main studies data yielded no significant main effects of: gender, age,
academic level, prior programming and prior visual artistic ability. The result from the main study 
also reveals no interaction effect of treatment, gender, academic level, age, prior programming, and 
prior artistic ability.
While the quality of CS1 students’ performance in each session varies as their IPAT achievements
show, yet the results of this research revealed a consistent pattern: Students in the constructionist 
Scratch class outperformed those in the conventional class, although the impart was moderate. 
This finding implies college students without prior programming experience can perform better in a 
class following a constructionist Scratch programming pedagogy. The study recommends the use of 
Scratch, following a constructionist pedagogy with first-year students in colleges, especially those 
without prior background in programming | 
en |