Examination of teachers' in-class practices in context of computational thinking skills: A Q method analysis

The aim of the study is to examine teachers' classroom practices in the context of computational thinking skills. Q methodology, in which quantitative and qualitative processes used together, used in the research process. In classroom practices of teachers with the Q method; whether the teachers participating in the study were gathered under different groups and what the collected factors mean, and their thoughts on the sub-dimensions of computational thinking skills were examined. The study group of the research is consisted of 48 elementary school teachers. The socioeconomic level of the schools where the teachers in the study group work, the years they worked (seniority) and the gender variables were collected, and these variables taken into account in the analysis process. Since the study coincided with Covid-19, the data collected online. Within the scope of the research, "PQ Method 2.35" software was used in the data analysis process, and principal component analysis was used in the data analysis process. The data collected through the Q string were transferred to the PQ Method program. After transferring all the data, the analysis process was started. During the analysis process, factor loading values were calculated first and the critical significance limit value was determined as (0.52). Factor results of 48 participants were given in the study. As a result of principal component and rotation analysis, it was determined that 48 participants were gathered under 7 factors. As a result of this research, it was determined that the teachers approached the computational thinking skill positively, but they did not fully use the sub-dimensions that make up the computational thinking skill in their classroom practices. It has been observed that abstraction, which is seen as the most important sub-dimension of computational thinking skills in studies, is not used consciously by teachers in their classroom practices. As a result of the research, no difference was found in terms of seniority of the participants, socioeconomic levels of the schools they work in and gender variables.