Gender Differences in Computational Thinking Skills Among Elementary School Students

Rusdial Marta; Toto Nusantara; Adi Atmoko; Sri Rahayuningsih

doi:10.35445/alishlah.v17i2.7524

Gender Differences in Computational Thinking Skills Among Elementary School Students

Rusdial Marta, Toto Nusantara, Adi Atmoko, Sri Rahayuningsih

Abstract

This study explores gender-based differences in the mastery of Computational Thinking (CT) skills among elementary school students, emphasizing the influence of social, cultural, and educational factors. Understanding these disparities is essential for promoting inclusive and equitable 21st-century skill development in early education. A descriptive qualitative design was utilized, involving 40 fourth-grade students (20 male, 20 female) from two elementary schools in Bangkinang: SD Negeri 006 Langgini and SD Negeri 004 Langgini. Data were collected through in-depth interviews, classroom observations, and documentation. Thematic analysis was conducted to identify patterns and factors contributing to gender differences in CT competencies. Findings revealed distinct gender-based variations in CT components—decomposition, pattern recognition, abstraction, and algorithmic thinking. Male students displayed higher self-confidence and active participation in technology-oriented tasks, particularly in decomposition and abstraction. In contrast, female students demonstrated more cautious, structured thinking and excelled in collaborative algorithm design. These differences were influenced by external factors, including gender stereotypes, teacher interactions, and familial support, shaping students’ engagement with CT tasks. The observed gender differences are not innate but are shaped by contextual influences. The study underscores the need for educators to adopt gender-sensitive pedagogical strategies to ensure equitable CT learning experiences. Social and educational environments significantly shape CT skill development across genders. Implementing inclusive, gender-responsive teaching methods is essential to support equal opportunities for all students in acquiring foundational digital competencies.

Keywords

Computational Thinking; Gender; Elementary School

Full Text:

PDF

References

Berland, L. K., & Lee, V. R. (2020). Computational thinking in elementary classrooms: A comparative study of the effectiveness of integrated and standalone curricula. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 58(2), 345-367. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633119875163

Bian, L., Leslie, S. J., & Cimpian, A. (2017). Gender stereotypes about intellectual ability emerge early and influence children’s interests. Science, 355(6323), 389–391. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aafed5

Binns, I. C. (2017). Exploring gender differences in the understanding of engineering design in elementary students. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research (J-PEER), 7(1), Article 4. https://doi.org/10.7771/2157-9288.1140

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

Brennan, K., & Resnick, M. (2012). New frameworks for studying and assessing the development of computational thinking. In Proceedings of the 2012 Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association (AERA), Vancouver, Canada.

Charles, M., & Bradley, K. (2009). Equal but separate? A cross-national study of gender segregation in higher education. Sociology of Education, 82(4), 349-369. https://doi.org/10.1177/003804070908200404

Cheryan, S., Master, A., & Meltzoff, A. N. (2015). Cultural stereotypes as gatekeepers: Increase in gender inequality in STEM by the early adolescents. Psychological Science, 26(5), 714–723. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797615574092

Cheryan, S., Ziegler, S. A., Montoya, A. K., & Jiang, L. (2017). Why are some STEM fields more gender balanced than others? Psychological Bulletin, 143(1), 1-35. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000052

Coyle, D., & Doherty, A. (2013). Gender and ICT: Problem or opportunity? In P. Jones & D. Stokes (Eds.), Embedding Information and Communications Technology in the Primary Curriculum (pp. 115–130). Routledge.

Coyle, E., & Doherty, M. (2019). Gender and engagement in computational thinking. Journal of Educational Research and Practice, 9(1), 5-16. https://doi.org/10.5590/JERAP.2019.09.01.01

Cunningham, C. M., & Frenette, M. (2018). Gender and access to technology: Understanding the gender gap in digital literacy. Journal of Educational Technology, 40(1), 12-22. https://doi.org/10.1080/0123456789

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

Liu, M. (2014). Gender differences in computer programming: The role of self-efficacy, task value, and prior experience. Computers in Human Behavior, 41, 71–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.09.031

Margolis, J., & Fisher, A. (2002). Unlocking the clubhouse: Women in computing. MIT Press.

Ministry of Education and Culture of the Republic of Indonesia. (2017). Promoting gender equality in STEM education in Indonesia. Ministry of Education and Culture of the Republic of Indonesia.

Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms: Children, computers, and powerful ideas. Basic Books.

Shute, V. J., Sun, C., & Asbell-Clarke, J. (2017). Demystifying computational thinking. Educational Research Review, 22, 142–158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2017.09.003

Voogt, J., Fisser, P., Good, J., Mishra, P., & Yadav, A. (2015). Computational thinking in compulsory education: Towards an agenda for research and practice. Education and Information Technologies, 20(4), 715–728. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-015-9412-6

Voogt, J., Fisser, P., Pareja Roblin, N., Tondeur, J., & van Braak, J. (2015). Technological pedagogical content knowledge–A review of the literature. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 31(5), 485-497. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12146

Wing, J. M. (2006). Computational thinking. Communications of the ACM, 49(3), 33–35. https://doi.org/10.1145/1118178.1118215

DOI: https://doi.org/10.35445/alishlah.v17i2.7524