Exploring the impact of micro:bit on pre-service teachers’ professional development
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.37134/jrpptte.vol15.1.9.2025Keywords:
Block-based programming, micro:bit, pre-service teachers, professional developmentAbstract
Many countries are integrating programming into their official curricula, recognizing its increasing importance. However, changing curricula alone is not enough. Essential are qualified and motivated teachers who can select and implement suitable learning environments. It can be assumed that the experiences gained by pre-service teachers (PSTs) during their own learning significantly influence the way they design their lessons later. Contributing to improving the quality of PSTs education, we developed workshops introducing block-based programming with micro:bit. This paper focuses on the theoretical foundation, practical implementation, and evaluation of the workshops. We investigate how PSTs benefit from our workshops. We examine the impact across four dimensions: problem-solving skills, motivation, collaboration and teamwork, and learning through discovery. We used a mixed-method approach to gather data from the PSTs: An online questionnaire combining questions with Likert-scaled answer options and open questions was used. The results indicate a strong positive trend in these four dimensions, suggesting that the micro:bit can enhance the personal and professional development of PSTs in programming.
Downloads
References
Alexander, C., Ishikawa, S., Silverstein, M., Jacobson, M., Fiksdahl-King, I., & Angel, S. (1977). A pattern language: Towns, buildings, construction. Oxford University Press. https://arl.human.cornell.edu/linked%20docs/Alexander_A_Pattern_Language.pdf
Bati, K. (2021). A systematic literature review regarding computational thinking and programming in early childhood education. Education and Information Technologies, 27(2), 2059–2082. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10700-2
Grover, S., & Pea, R. (2013). Computational thinking in K–12: A review of the state of the field. Educational Researcher, 42(1), 38-43. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X12463051
Hartley, K., Rubegni, E., Underwood, L., Finney, J., Ball, T., Hodges, S., De Halleux, P., Devine, J., Anderson, E., & Moskal, M. (2024). Meet MicroCode: A live and portable programming tool for the BBC micro:bit. IDC '24: Proceedings of the 23rd Annual ACM Interaction Design and Children Conference, 24(1), 355-370. https://doi.org/10.1145/3628516.3656995
Hsu, T. -C., Chang, S. -C., & Hung, Y. -T. (2018). How to learn and how to teach computational thinking: Suggestions based on a review of the literature. Computers & Education, 126, 296-310. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.07.004
Kaufmann, O. T., & Stenseth, B. (2021). Programming in mathematics education. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 52(7), 1029-1048. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2020.1736349
Lu, S. -Y., Lo, C. -C., & Syu, J. -Y. (2021). Project-based learning oriented STEAM: The case of micro–bit paper-cutting lamp. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 32(5), 2553–2575. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-021-09714-1
Micro:bit Educational Foundation. (n.d.). Micro:Bit. https://www.microbit.org/
Nettskjema-UiO. (n.d). Nettskjema. https://nettskjema.no/
Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training. (2019). Curriculum for Mathematics Year 1–10 (MAT01-05) (MAT01-05). https://data.udir.no/kl06/v201906/laereplaner-lk20/MAT01-05.pdf?lang=eng
Papert, S. A. (1980). Mindstorms: Children, computers, and powerful ideas. Basic Books, Inc. https://dl.acm.org/doi/pdf/10.5555/1095592
Popat, S., & Starkey, L. (2019). Learning to code or coding to learn? A systematic review. Computers & Education, 128, 365-376. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.10.005
Rahul Simha. (2016). Balancing symbolic and computational thinking: Reinforcing engineering math via programming. In Spring 2016 Mid-Atlantic ASEE Conference. American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE).
Sacristán, A. I., Santacruz-R., M., Buteau, C., Mgombelo, J., & Muller, E. (2022). Future teachers’ appropriation of computer programming as a mathematical instrument and a resource for teaching. In Proceedings of the 13th ERME Topic Conference (ETC13) on Mathematics Education in the Digital Age (MEDA3) (256-263). Centre for Teaching and Learning Mathematics at the University of British Columbia (CTmathU). https://ctuniversitymath.ca/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/future-teachers-appropriation-of-computer-programming-as-a-mathematical-instrument-and-a-resource-for-teaching.pdf
Sjödahl, A., & Eckert, A. (2023). Abstracting and decomposing in a visual programming environment. International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction, 36, 100573. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcci.2023.100573
Weintrop, D., Beheshti, E., Horn, M. S., Orton, K., Jona, K., Trouille, L., & Wilensky, U. (2015). Defining computational thinking for Mathematics and Science classrooms. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 25, 127–147. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-015-9581-5
Wing, J. M. (2006). Computational thinking. Communications of the ACM, 49(3), 33-35. https://doi.org/10.1145/1118178.1118215
Wong, G. K. W., & Cheung, H. Y. (2020). Exploring children’s perceptions of developing twenty-first century skills through computational thinking and programming. Interactive Learning Environments, 28(4), 438-450. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2018.1534245
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Asif Mushtaq, Klaus-Peter Eichler, Moritz Seibold
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
