A Learning Model for Software Coding

Education
Geun-Hyung Kim
Game Engineering Major, Dong-eui University, Republic of Korea
Review Article
Purpose: In this study, we review the creative problem-based learning model (CPBL), flipped
pISSN 2288-8675 · eISSN 2508-9145
learning, creativity, and the relationship between creativity and software coding.
J Probl Based Learn 2019;6(2):67-75
Methods: Following a literature review and development and implementation of a learning [Link]
model suited to the field of software coding, students (n=31) were surveyed for their percep-
tions of their experiences with the model.
Results: From the survey, we conclude that collaborative learning and additional self-directed
Received: August 27, 2019
practices in classrooms help students more deeply appreciate program concepts. However, most
Revised: October 22, 2019
students still thought software coding too difficult to declare self-confidence on creative pro-
Accepted: October 27, 2019
gramming a code over one semester.
Conclusion: Today, knowing how to code software is indispensable and in a growing range, Corresponding author:
coding skills are highly valued. Software coding education has been the subject of several stud- Geun-Hyung Kim
ies, since it is considered that the learning activities can contribute to the cultivation of stu- Game Engineering Major, Dong-eui
dents who are able to solve problems and to adapt to new circumstances or problems. The de- University, 176 Eomgwang-no,
sign of learning events is student-centered with the instructor taking a facilitative role in guid- Busanjin-gu, Busan 47340, Korea
ing student learning. Tel: +82-10-3453-6553
Fax: +82-51-890-2265
Keywords: Creative problem-based learning; collaborative learning; self-directed learning; E-mail: geunkim@[Link]
flipped learning; software coding education

INTRODUCTION
With the advent of convergence information, communication and digital technologies, a hy-
per-connected society means greater connectivity; the internet is embracing everything with
person-to-person, person-to-machine and machine-to-machine connectivity. There will be an
explosive increase in the amount of information and knowledge that is shared and accumulated.
Technological convergence will now be more complex and mutable than in the fourth industrial
revolution era, thus the extent of increases in levels of diversity and creativity that can cope with
unexpected situations and solve complex problems will be significant. In other words, it will be
essential to acquire new knowledge in classrooms and to be able to creatively solve novel prob-
lems through application of newly acquired concepts and knowledge.
Comprehensive three-dimensional thinking aspiring to excellence, greater adaptability, open-
ness and communication ability will be indispensable; the economic structures in the fourth in-
dustrial revolution era will evolve to the ‘inspiration’ economy from the ‘perspiration’ economy. Copyright 2019 International Society
for Problem-Based Learning
So, it is essential to make good use of what we have learned rather than learning a lot. Based on This is an Open Access article distributed
power to think on one’s own, we should be able to personally identify new problems and suggest under the terms of the Creative Commons
Attribution Non-Commercial License
our own solutions to those problems: ‘Know-why based creativity’ may be a source of future so- ([Link]
cial competitiveness. by-nc/4.0/) which permits unrestricted
non-commercial use, distribution, and
In developed countries such as the United States and the United Kingdom, software coding reproduction in any medium, provided the
education encompassing concepts and principles for programming languages and algorithms to original work is properly cited.

cultivate students’ logical thinking ability, self-directed problem definition and solving ability,

[Link] 67
 Geun-Hyung Kim • A Learning Model For Software Coding Education

collaboration ability and creativity, is becoming compulsory. The four different facets. The 4Ps represent the nature of creative per-
valuable skill in software programming is essential to prepare for sons, processes they use, products or outcomes of their efforts, the
the fourth industrial revolution and to develop abilities in logical press, or environment that supports or hinders a person’s creativity.
thinking and communication. The aim of software coding educa- Many studies have defined creativity in terms of individual cogni-
tion should not simply focus on grammatical elements of program- tive ability or personality, manifestations of creativity processes,
ming language but on language to improve creativity, problem products of creativity, and the ecology harmonizing with social
definition and solving, self-direction and cooperation abilities. contexts and circumstances (Lim, 2015). Table 1 shows the con-
Those students with sufficient programming abilities will be able cept of creativity according to creativity categories.
to solve problems in daily life given their creative ideas and future From Table 1, we conclude that an appropriate learning model
computer technologies. for promoting creativity should be based on the ecology of creativ-
Software coding education should stimulate students to find ity where four categories interact as in a flipped learning model in-
imaginative solutions to problems when effective teaching strate- volving a creativity-friendly environment, creative problem-based
gies and novel learning resources are present: We provide sugges- and collaborative learning that are based on processes of creativity.
tions for a flipped learning model that aims to enhance students’ For humans, creativity is needed in every conceivable task. It is at
creativity, self-directed and collaborative learning abilities to solve the root of every idea or concept and applies to new ways of solving
real problems of daily life. To begin we review the concepts and problems. Most investigations of creativity have taken one of two
features of creativity, then describe the proposed model and dis- directions (Kaufman & Beghetto, 2009). The first, eminent cre-
cuss its effectiveness. ativity (called “Big-C creativity”) is a breakthrough but rare type of
thinking that may come from a creative genius. The other relates to
CONCEPTS AND FEATURES OF personal creativity (called “Little-c creativity”) that an average per-
CREATIVITY son may use daily to enhance and enrich lives (creating new recipes,
new fusions of two cuisines or coming up with new ways to in-
Creativity is the ability to define and solve problems and recog- crease production efficiency) (Richards, 1990). Beghetto and
nize new possibilities and opportunities. It is a core competence Kaufman (2007) found limitations in this approach, noting the in-
involving flexibility to deal with greater diversity and uncertainty in terpersonal and developmental nature of creativity. Their model
future society; it has been the subject of discussion in every field of consists of four Cs adding Mini-c and Pro-c to represent the devel-
society since Guilford’s presentation on divergent thinking in the opmental steps of creativity. Mini-c is the personally novel and
1950s. He associated the concept with creativity that featured flu- meaningful interpretation of experiences, actions and events con-
ency, flexibility, originality, and elaboration (Sergey, 2017). structing personal knowledge and understanding in a particular so-
With the advent of Guilford’s model of intellect, key instruments ciocultural context. Pro-c, attained by the developmental and ef-
to measure divergent thinking or creativity were investigated by the fortful progression beyond Little-c, represents the professional-lev-
early 1970s. Those interested in understanding creativity generated el expertise in any creative area. They discussed several transition
many definitions, disagreed over its nature and its many facets; paths (Beghetto & Kaufman, 2007; Kaufman & Beghetto, 2009)
Rhodes (1961) suggested 4Ps: Person, process, product, and press where everyone begins in Mini-c and can reach Pro-c through the
(Park, 2014). A person may exhibit his/her creativity in one of formal apprenticeship in academic institutions or reach Little-c

Table 1. The concept of creativity by creativity categories.

Category Concept
Person What personal characteristic is apt to produce creativity?
It covers personality, intellect, temperament, traits, self-concept etc.
Process How do people develop new ideas and produce creative products?
It applies to motivation, perception, learning, thinking, and communicating.
Product Looking at the outputs of creativity
What is created when a creative idea becomes embodied in tangible form?
Press Environment, and how this can influence creativity
The relationship between human beings and their environment
Ecology of creativity The perspective of overall interaction of previous four categories for manifesting creativity

68 [Link]
 Geun-Hyung Kim • A Learning Model For Software Coding Education

through tinkering – cultivating creativity in a domain through cre- need to be taken into account. In order words, when the individu-
ative experiments even without well-structured mentorship. Some- als master specific skills in the creative process but do not know
one, who has reached Little-c, may often reach Pro-c through an in- how to combine them when working on a task, creativity educa-
formal apprenticeship like working with an older, more experi- tion may not be effective.
enced colleague or mentor.
Creative Problem Solving
Creative Process Edward & Monika (1994) defined Creative Problem Solving
The creative process relates to the sequence of thoughts and ac- (CPS) as a framework that encourages whole-brain, itera-
tions that catalyze novel adaptive products (Todd, 2001). Under- tive-thinking as the most effective process; problem definition,
standing the creative process is very useful for establishing a learning idea generation, idea synthesis, idea evaluation, and solution im-
model for creativity education. Wallas suggested the four-stage plementation.
model to describe the creative process model; preparation, incuba- Figure 1 illustrates the cyclic, iterative nature of the creative
tion, illumination and verification (Wallas, 1926). Guilford, howev- problem-solving process and associated mindsets. Since each
er, was not satisfied with this process model which did not mention mindset has its own value and is suited for particular tasks and in-
mental operations that actually occur, in terms of comprehensive volvement in problem solving processes, the whole-brain teams or
understanding of creative process. He continued to identify certain individuals, practicing whole-brain modes of information process-
abilities that might be involved in creativity; an ability to analyze ing, are indispensable for solving a problem creatively.
problems, a capacity to produce many ideas, an ability to handle Edward & Monica (1994) argued that activities related to imagi-
complexity and an ability to evaluate the idea (Todd, 2001). native thinking and interpersonal thinking must be part of the engi-
Specifying the sub-processes in the creative process has been neering curriculum so individuals can develop their potential in all
progressed during the past half-century. The preparation stage in- four quadrants of the brain. CPS can be used to strengthen the pro-
volves preliminary analyzing the problem, defining and setting up ductivity, the quality of teamwork, and the thinking and communi-
the problem, and preparing our brain for a trip to create something cation skills of students and instructors in all quadrants. It can be
new. To investigate a problem accurately and to prepare our brain also used to deal with everyday problems as well as long-term chal-
for creation, it will have to draw on education, analytical skills, and lenges and opportunities (Treffinger, 2003). The CPS framework
problem-solving using relevant knowledge. During the incubation involves the four main components; understanding the challenge,
stage, all conscious activities, relating to the creation that we had generating ideas, preparing for action, and planning your approach.
initially set our mind to do, are stopped and unconscious mental
explorations on the problem continue. The unconscious mind dis- Creativity Education
cerns between useless ideas and promising ideas and rejects the Creativity education consists of three categories: “teaching about
vast majority of useless ideas. The illumination stage happens creativity”, “teaching for creativity” and “teaching creatively”.
when the promising idea moves on to conscious awareness like the “Teaching about creativity” is about the concept and characteris-
ah-ha moment. The illumination can be compared to a flash, a tics of creativity. “Teaching for creativity” involves a teaching plan
sudden enlightenment and is often proceeded by an intimation that enables students to cultivate and demonstrate potential cre-
that an idea is happening (Todd, 2001). After deriving an idea, the
individuals consciously verify whether the idea is worth pursuing
Analysis
in the verification stage. The verification stage involves evaluating,
refining, and developing one’s idea. Wallas noted that a person can revision revision
go back to the early stages of the creative process in the creative
problem solving (Wallas, 1926). When an idea is proven to be de-
Implement Evaluation Design
fective during the verification stage, one may deliberate on how to
resolve this flaw.
Todd (2001) noted that variations of a creative process depend revision revision
on the domain or the characteristics of the individual and should
be considered in both theoretical and empirical work. The stages Development
involved in creativity and the methods that enable these to be used
together, may vary with the nature of the problem-solving task and Figure 1. The creativity problem-solving process model.

[Link] 69
 Geun-Hyung Kim • A Learning Model For Software Coding Education

ativity and to derive creative outcomes. “Teaching creatively” teaching models to software coding does not work; there is a need
means delivering learning processes in a creative way. Figure 2 to customize learning processes to allow different students to learn
shows the educational activities and entities in terms of three cate- in different ways and at their own pace. The formative assessment
gories of creativity education. with appropriate feedback rather than reliance on the summative
These three categories, not mutually exclusive, cultivate innova- assessment lessens the learning pressure on students.
tive teaching/learning strategies and improvement in the learning Increasing problem solving and analytical skills enables students
model involving problem-solving and self-directed learning should to grow intellectually and to think creatively (Tori, 2017), improv-
be considered; acquisition of new knowledge and talent will ing capacity for logical thinking and reasoning. It is the iterative ex-
emerge for utilization in particular situations involving either indi- perience of software coding, that increases algorithmic thinking,
vidual and/or group tasks. Learning activities should be stu- problem solving, and logical thinking; it can provide various op-
dent-centered rather than instructor-centered; Table 2 shows the portunities for developing students’ computational thinking ability.
instructor’s roles in creativity education. Verification items measuring effectiveness of software coding edu-
cation according to three categories are depicted in Table 3.
Software coding education and Problem Solving Students who resolve their own errors when developing soft-
Software coding-centric curricula, based on the concepts and ware programs learn also how to solve the problems of daily life be-
principles of program languages and algorithms, aims to improve cause the focus is on cultivating students’ cognitive, logical think-
problem-solving skills consisting of logical and procedural thinking ing and reflective skills. This provides a sense of accomplishment
abilities. Software coding is the enabler that allows students to learn and confidence that is transferable to other courses.
new ways of communication and expression but this is a complex
skill to master (Jenkins, 2002). Applying conventional learning and Problem-based Learning Model

Educational activities

Teaching for
creativity
Teaching Learning
(creatively)

Teachr, students Students

Teaching
about creativity
Defines and understands of creativity Creativity
Right belief system for creativity

Figure 2. The educational activites and entities in terms of three views of creativity education.

Table 2. The instructor’s roles and impact on improving creativity.

The instructor’s role Impact on creativity
Accepting various opinions of students Encouraging student’s diverse creative thinking
Observing and empathy of individual students Encouraging student’s confidence
Finding problems to stimulate students Self-thinking and problem-solving abilities
Passionate learning on a given topic Presenting a role model to students and stimulating creative thinking
Providing an environment to recognize weaknesses of peer ideas and to Stimulating colleagues to improve their ideas
ask how to overcome them
Ability to lead presentations and thinking Improving student’s self-confidence
Ability to induce curiosity and challenge Motivating student’s creative thinking

70 [Link]
 Geun-Hyung Kim • A Learning Model For Software Coding Education

A learning model includes a conceptual framework that de- aspect of professional practices (Lohman, 2000).
scribes methods for organizing learning experiences to achieve A model that advocates real-world problems for students’ devel-
specific mental and physical learning outcomes; this serves as a opment and application of logical thinking skills is PBL (Prob-
guide for instructors in creating learning activities (Sugiyanto, lem-based Learning). Students organize prior knowledge and seek
2007). The intent is to make student’s learning outcomes as effec- new information for solving problems with critical thinking, and
tive as possible because they can make sense of ill-structured situa- build their suite of new concepts knowledge. This model requires
tions that they regularly confront in their workplace now and in the students to apply lessons learned from several disciplines and to
future. An important role is that of problem solver, an important adapt the concepts to new situations in a very practical way (Stro-
bel & Barmeveld, 2009). According to Strobel (2009), a PBL
model is significantly more effective than traditional instruction
Table 3. The verification items to measure software coding edu-
cation effectiveness. model in terms of producing competent students and promoting
long-term retention of ways of building knowledge and skills ac-
Verification items of Coding education
Category quired during ongoing learning experiences.
effectiveness (impact order)
Creative problem-solving ability Problem-solving ability (3) In addition, by placing students in the active role of problem
Logical thinking ability (1) solvers confronted with real-world problems in this type of instruc-
Divergent thinking ability (2) tion, students work with and alongside each other in their class-
Self-assurance and independence (4) rooms and communities. The main idea behind PBL is presenta-
Computer Science ability Programming ability (2) tion of problems, queries or puzzles, that engage students’ curiosity,
Understanding of computer science
and technology (4) introduce or motivate learning, and enable students to pose solu-
Algorithm development ability (1) tions; the starting point for PBL process is shown in Figure 3.
Reasoning ability (3) Similar to creativity processes, PBL, in general, consists of three
Learning elements Academic achievement (1) phases; problem analysis phase, self-directed learning phase, and a
Self-directed learning ability (2) subsequent reporting phase (Yew & Goh, 2016). Yew and Goh in-
Inducing motivation or curiosity (3) vestigated the effectiveness of the PBL process. Previous studies
Concentration (5) showed collaborative verbal interactions around learning in the
Potential development capability (4)
classroom can give rise to their subsequent learning achievements.

Present the
problem

Identify
Share results
the problem

Create problem
Evaluate results Improve statement
the solution

Identify the
Make and test the resources to solve
best solution the problem

Brainstorm
Self-directed
ideas based on
learning
prior knowledge

Figure 3. The problem-based learning process model.

[Link] 71
 Geun-Hyung Kim • A Learning Model For Software Coding Education

Expert facilitators guide students’ discussion and assist in the pro- cilitators of students’ more self-directed learning. After in-class ac-
cess of developing their collective knowledge, with open-ended tivity, students reflect on the feedback they receive and use the
metacognitive questions. feedback to further their learning.
The learning issues generated by students and the availability of Flipped learning has some pros and cons. The main advantage is
learning resources identified in the problem analysis phase deter- that students can learn at their own pace, cultivate personalized
mine self-directed learning activities to some extent. Another study learning experiences, the ability for student-centered learning and
found that students, who study beyond the learning issues during collaborative learning and this model encourages student’s engage-
self-directed learning phase, can achieve better academic achieve- ment. However, it requires student active participation and collab-
ments (Dolmans, 1994; Van den Hurk, 2002; Yew & Goh, 2016). oration and all students may not complete the pre-class session. It
Ultimately, process variables such as the extent of the problem rele- may be more effective for students who have meta cognitive skills
vance, tutor expertise, student’s prior knowledge, the extent of that are about knowing ourselves such that how to learn and what
identification of personal learning needs, group activity, and time learning style suit us very well. self-discipline is indispensable for
spent on self-directed learning all influence academic achievement. the flipped learning. Thus, flipped learning is suitable for university
In particular, the quality of learning issues generated in the prob- students.
lem analysis phase, influences group activity that in turn affects the Despite disadvantages of the flipped learning model, flipped
time spent on self-directed learning. The more time spent on learning seems to be a very effective, hands-on approach for diving
self-directed learning, the greater the potential for acquisition of deeper into the learning material, improving student outcomes,
new knowledge. In terms of learning activities, previous studies helping where needed but enabling greater student involvement in
mainly considered self-directed learning and collaborative learning their own learning processes. “Flipping the class” is an iterative pro-
that are essential in the learning process. However, formal investi- cess, so as instructors implement these practices, they can reflect
gation to ascertain the extent to which activities or phases of PBL on what works well or what needs to be enhanced (Flipped Class-
process impact students’ learning achievement has not been done room, 2019).
(Yew & Goh, 2016).
DEVELOPMENT OF SOFTWARE
Concepts and Features of Flipped Learning CODING LEARNING MODEL
Flipped learning is a pedagogical approach in which the conven-
tional notion of classroom-based learning is reversed; instructors Within a computer programming course about C++ language in
provide online learning materials or related materials to students the fall semester of 2018, 31 students were enrolled. Using flipped
before class to prepare in-class time dedicated to deepen under- learning, students can acquire basic knowledge, concepts, or sim-
standing through interactive exercises, projects, or discussion with ple program codes that help some conceptual understanding be-
peers based on the learning materials and problem-solving activi- fore the class and then they have enough time during in-class time
ties facilitated by instructors (Flipped learning, 2019). The concept to profoundly expand on pre-class learning as a result of particular
stemmed from a model of ‘peer instruction’ developed by Eric Ma- activities. We adopted collaborative learning and CPBL in the
zur. He encouraged student engagement in deeper cognitive think- classroom for basic problem-solving and then application to com-
ing via peer instruction and instructor’s challenges in the classroom. plex problems in order to cultivate individual creativity through
This model was expanded to include technological elements such self-direction in problem finding and resolution. It seems that col-
as web course management tools by Baker (2000) who developed laborating with and learning from other students may be just what
the ‘flip’ concept and enunciated the role of instructors as facilitator, is needed to give the likelihood of creative outcomes a boost.
adviser, coach or ‘guide on the side’. Subsequently, flipped learning Collaborative learning, in this study, aims at learning how to pro-
provided an inclusive learning environment in which personalized gram a code practically and creatively through discussion with oth-
coaching and mentoring were the norm (Flipped learning, 2019). ers but reaching their own solution, deriving an algorithm, and
The learning processes intentionally cause a shift to a student-cen- programming a code with other students. Instructors selected and
tered model in which students explore given topics in greater depth presented problems that students should solve individually or in
and get meaningful learning opportunities. Another intent is to collaboration with their colleagues. Each group consisted of four or
move students away from passive learning to active learning involv- five students. Instructors had all students of each group summarize
ing collaborative activity and peer learning within PBL. In this con- results of discussion including pseudo codes or flow-charts ex-
text, instructors are no longer knowledge transferors but rather fa- pressing algorithms. Students wrote an individual report on the re-

72 [Link]
 Geun-Hyung Kim • A Learning Model For Software Coding Education

quired function descriptions and program codes. Following report considered carefully how to learn more effectively by monitoring
submission, students evaluated the reports of up to five other stu- self-directed learning and managing it. Student activities included
dents. With this peer assessment, students investigated the proce- the following:
dures other students proposed and looked for different or better i) identifying a problem, describing a problem, and defining a learn-
approaches than their own. Then, instructors evaluated students’ ing plan–current understanding and analysis of overall goal (s)
program codes for resolution of presented problem and gave quiz- ii) decomposing a problem into sub-problems that are manageable
zes to check whether each student understood basic concepts. Fi- iii) identifying resources to solve the problem including what stu-
nally, instructor had students present their own result. In Figure 4, dents have already learned
we depict overall educational practice activities in our proposed iv) brainstorming ideas to find a conclusion for a specific problem
flipped learning model involving elements of PBL. v) making and testing the best solution, and evaluating results
Educational processes may be influenced by individual differ- vi) articulation of problems and solutions
ences such as aptitude, passion, or curiosity about something new. vii) reflecting on how students learned more effectively, and self-as-
Some students may experience difficulties in understanding basic sessment of what students achieved
concepts, while others can easily or creatively apply what they viii) self-assessment of learning by developing strategies for testing
learned to solve new problems. In this study, learners, who were as- new programming knowledge and making use of supplied
signed to small groups, began interacting with an instructor or self-assessment tools
peers to build up knowledge based on relevant materials. They also ix) practicing active listening and other communication skills to
learned where to go to seek out more to solve a large real-world share their own solutions, to clarify elements of solutions, and
problem, using the CPBL model. improve solutions.
To encourage creativity, we provided adequate problems to act The activities of collaborative learning and CPBL models in the
as a driving force for developing meta cognitive skills; students context of flipped learning are shown in Figure 4. Collaborative

PreClass InClass
Instructive video lectures
Introduction
Supplementary materials
Verification quiz
Q&A
Lesson topic review 15 min
Q&A (15%)
Team composition

Main Class
Identify basic issues
Individual programming
Identify serious issues 70 min
Team based problem solving (70%)

Peer learning

PostClass Cooperative learning

Self reflection Derive output

Figure 4. The educational prac-
Review reports tice activities adopt flipped-
Summary
Program assignment learning model including creative
Sharing key topics and output 5 min problem-based learning activities
Peer review and collaborative learning activi-
Wrapping up question
(5%)
Q&A ties.

[Link] 73
 Geun-Hyung Kim • A Learning Model For Software Coding Education

learning includes peer-review on the individual report. room can help students more deeply appreciate the concepts of
programming language. However, most students still think soft-
Findings ware coding too difficult to declare self-confidence on creative pro-
Given our belief that students’ perceptions and attitudes towards gramming a code over one semester.
the learning model may have a noticeable effect on learning, we
used an open-ended questionnaire using a typical five-level Likert CONCLUSION
items from “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree”. We sought stu-
dents’ perceptions of experiences with collaborative learning mod- In this study, we proposed a learning model for software coding
el and CPBL models and the general impact of flipped learning. education combining flipped learning and collaborative learning
An open-ended section of the questionnaire included some models with CPBL and investigated its perceived effectiveness on
items which gave students the opportunity to provide further in- the cultivation of creativity through activities in software coding
formation, on their negative or positive perceptions of the learn- education for students majoring in game engineering. Since mod-
ing approaches”, “Can flipped learning be applied in other class- ern generation students are accustomed to learning new knowl-
es?”, “Do you have any other comments, criticisms or sugges- edge using applications with the information communication
tions?” Table 4 provides an overview of responses. technology (ICT), instructors, in modern classrooms, are no lon-
To investigate the effectiveness of the proposed learning model, ger the only major source of knowledge, but have become facilita-
additional questions were posed. The questions and responses are tors of student learning.
depicted in Figures 5 and 6. From the survey, we conclude that col- The proposed learning model was designed to provide custom-
laborative learning and additional self-directed practices in class- ized learning content so that students could engage in self-directed

Table 4. The students’ positive and negative comments on proposed learning model.
Students’ responses
positive comments “I can review what I learned from the assignment each week and found out what I did not understand in this course.”
“It was hard because there were many problems to be solved, but it was helpful to understand program language.”
“It was great to have a lot of time to coding programs based on various problems.
“Informative, easy to learn and understand”
“Peer review was a great way to get to know peers’ program codes and solutions.
negative comments “It was hard to catch up the class without pre-class activities for preparation on in-class activities.”
“It would be easy to understand if you gave a lot of examples in real life.”
“Sometimes, I did not have the time to watch all lecture videos and study the issues at home, because I did other homework all
day.”
“I could not get any benefits of peer review.

(%) (%)
60 60
52
50 48 50

40 35 40
29
30 30

20 20
13
10
10 10
3 3 3 3
0 0
1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5
Figure 5. Response of “Collaborative learning in a group helped Figure 6. Response of “Additional self-directed practices helped
you understand the concepts of program in depth.” (Responses: you understand the concepts of program in depth.” (Responses:
31, average: 4.09) 31, average: 4.0)

74 [Link]
 Geun-Hyung Kim • A Learning Model For Software Coding Education

learning at their own pace; each student received the appropriate The Four C Model of Creativity. Review of General Psychology,
feedback after formative evaluations of problem-solving ability and 13(1), 1–12.
creativity in response to various problems. Lim, H. (2015). Verifying the Structural Relationship among Cre-
Our survey in this study showed feedback on student percep- ativity and Integrity, Metacognition, Mastery-Approach Goal,
tions of self-directed practices, potential to improve creativity and Communication Skills, and Autonomous Education Climate at
understanding of basic concepts and principles of programming the College Level. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Ewha
languages. The timeline was too short for us to investigate the ef- Womans University, Seoul, Korea: Retrieved from [Link]
fectiveness of the proposed learning model in detail. [Link]/handle/[Link]/213274
In future work, we intend to continue this study in order to col- Lohman, M. C., & Finkelstein, M. (2000). Designing groups in
lect more data about the proposed learning model and its effec- problem-based learning to promote problem-solving skill and
tiveness; an objective evaluation method should be developed if self-directedness. Instructional Science, 28(4), 291–308.
we are to verify the effectiveness of the proposed learning model. Park, S.-H. (2014). Creativity Education and Creative Instructor:
Various creative problems with different difficulty levels should be Core Concepts and Survey Results. The Journal of Education Ad-
provided to students to cultivate the likelihood of students’ ministration, 32(4), 193–227.
self-confidence. Richards, R. (1990). Everyday creativity, eminent creativity, and
health: “Afterview” for CRJ issues on creativity and health. Cre-
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ativity Research Journal, 3(4), 300–326.
Rhodes, M. (1961). An analysis of creativity. The Phi Delta Kappan,
This work was supported by the Halla/Newcastle PBL Center. 42(7), 305–310.
I would like to record my gratitude to Professor Margaret Mcmil- Sergey, M. (2017). Joy Paul Guilford - One of the founders of the
lan, who has generously reviewed my pages and edited the struc- Psychology of Creativity. Retrieved from [Link]
ture of this manuscript, offering detailed and invaluable comments. com/en/joy-paul-guilford-one-of-the-founders-of-the-psycholo-
gy-of-creativity
REFERENCES Strobel, J., & Van Barneveld, A. (2009). When is PBL More Effec-
tive? A Meta-synthesis of Meta-analyses Comparing PBL to Con-
Baker, J. W. (2000). The “Classroom Flip”: Using Web Course Man- ventional Classrooms. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based
agement Tools to Become the Guide on the Side. Paper presented Learning, 3(1), 44–58.
at the 11th International Conference on College Teaching and Sugiyanto. (2007). Professional Instructor Education and Training
Learning; Jacksonville, Florida Module (PLPG): Innovative Learning Models.
Beghetto, R. A., & Kaufman, J. C. (2007). Toward a broader concep- Todd, I. L. (2001). Models of the Creative Process: Past, Present and
tion of creativity: A case of mini-c creativity. Psychology of Aes- Future. Creative Research Journal. 13(3-4), 295–308.
thetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 1(2), 73–79. Tori, P. (2017). Importance of Coding in Early Education. Retrieved
Dolmans, D. H. J. M., Schmidt, H. G., & Gijselaers, W. H. (1994). from [Link]
The relationship between student-generated learning issues and ing-in-early-education/
self-study in problem-based learning. Instructional Science, 22(4), Treffinger, D. J., Isaksen, S. G., & Dorval, K. B. (2003). Creative
251–267. Problem Solving (CPS Version 6.1TM) A Contemporary Frame-
Edward, L., & Monika, L. (1994). Creative Problem Solving. IEEE work for Managing Change. Retrieved from [Link]
Potentials, 13(5), 4–9. [Link]/~clearning/images/freePDFs/[Link]
Flipped Classroom. Quick-Start Guide: Flipped Classroom. Re- Van den Hurk, M. M., Wolfhagen, I. A. P., Dolmans, D., & Van der
trieved February 20, 2019, from [Link] Vleuten, C. P. M. (2002). The impact of student-generated learn-
edu/flipped-classroom/ ing issues on individual study time and academic achievement.
Flipped learning. Flipped learning. Retrieved January 15, 2019, from Medical Education, 33(11), 808–814.
[Link] Wallas, G. (1926). The art of thought. New York: Harcourt, Brace
ing-0 and Company.
Jenkins, T. (2002). On the Difficulty of Learning to Program. Paper Yew, E. H. J., & Goh, K. (2016). Problem-Based Learning: An Over-
presented at the 3rd LTSN-ICS Conference; 53–58. view of its Process and Impact on Learning. Health Professions
Kaufman, J. C., & Beghetto, R. A. (2009). Beyond Big and Little: Education, 2(2), 75–79.

[Link] 75