Development of OOPify as a Visual Block Programming Environment for OOP Learning and Group-Level Practical Performance

Naufal Oktavian; Yogi Prasetyo; Muhammad Rafi Valliansyah; Lala Septem Riza

doi:10.61255/decoding.v4i3.1634

Authors

Naufal Oktavian Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia
Yogi Prasetyo Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia
Muhammad Rafi Valliansyah Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia
Lala Septem Riza Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.61255/decoding.v4i3.1634

Keywords:

Visual block programming, Multimedia learning, Object-Oriented Programming, Practical performance, Psychomotor skills

Abstract

Purpose – Object-Oriented Programming (OOP) is challenging for students because its abstract concepts are difficult to translate into practical programming solutions. This study developed OOPify, a visual block-based learning environment for OOP practical activities, and examined changes in students’ conceptual understanding and group-level practical performance.
Methods – The study employed a Research and Development approach using the ADDIE model and a one-group pretest–posttest design. Participants were 34 vocational high school students in West Java, Indonesia. Data were collected through OOP conceptual understanding tests, group-level practical performance observations, expert validation, and student response questionnaires.
Findings – OOPify was rated feasible (82.5%) by one expert. The Wilcoxon Signed-Rank Test indicated a significant improvement in OOP conceptual understanding (p < .001), with 70.59% of students achieving moderate-to-high N-Gain and an average N-Gain of 0.50. Group-level practical performance, covering psychomotor, cognitive, and collaborative indicators, averaged 85.22% across Meetings 2 and 3. However, these results represent preliminary observational evidence because formal inter-rater reliability was not assessed.
Research implications – Visual block-based learning environments may support OOP learning by reducing syntactic complexity and allowing students to focus on concepts and problem-solving. Generalizability is limited by the single-school context and absence of a control group.
Originality – This study integrates visual block programming, OOP practical activities, and group-level practical performance within a single learning environment.

Abstract views: 33 ,

PDF downloads: 26

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Q. A. Batiha, N. A. Abd Majid, N. Sahari, and N. Mohd Ali, “Analysis of the learning object-oriented programming factors,” International Journal of Electrical and Computer Engineering, vol. 13, no. 5, pp. 5599–5606, 2023, doi: 10.11591/ijece.v13i5.pp5599-5606.

N. Khudhur, Nurmaya, Y. Hayashi, and T. Hirashima, “Conceptual representation of the source-code to support the learning of object-oriented programming concepts,” International Journal of Information and Education Technology, vol. 13, no. 12, pp. 1858–1867, 2023, doi: 10.18178/ijiet.2023.13.12.1999.

Efan, Krismadinata, J. Jama, and R. Mulya, “A systematic literature review of teaching and learning on object-oriented programming course,” International Journal of Information and Education Technology, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 302–312, 2023, doi: 10.18178/ijiet.2023.13.2.1808.

N. Ragonis and R. Shmallo, “The Application of Higher-Order Cognitive Thinking Skills to Promote Students’ Understanding of the Use of static in Object-Oriented Programming,” Informatics in Education, vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 331–352, 2022, doi: 10.15388/infedu.2022.10.

A. Heinonen, B. Lehtelä, A. Hellas, and F. Fagerholm, “Synthesizing research on programmers' mental models of programs, tasks and concepts: A systematic literature review,” Information and Software Technology, vol. 164, p. 107300, 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.infsof.2023.107300.

K. H. Wai et al., “Code Writing Problems for Basic Object-Oriented Programming Study in Java Programming Learning Assistant System,” in Proc. IEEE 12th Global Conference on Consumer Electronics (GCCE), Nara, Japan, 2023, pp. 5–6, doi: 10.1109/GCCE59613.2023.10315469.

A. Tsichouridis, S. Xinogalos, and A. Ampatzoglou, “Educational programming environments for enhancing conceptual design in the object-oriented paradigm: A systematic mapping study,” Journal of Educational Computing Research, vol. 62, no. 1, pp. 290–322, 2024, doi: 10.1177/07356331231203251.

A. A. Jamal, A. N. M. Rose, M. Mohamad, A. H. Zakaria, A. Rozaimee, M. K. Awang, and A. R. Mamat, "Psychomotor assessment rubric for computer science courses: Preliminary observation," in Proc. Int. Conf. Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, Terengganu, Malaysia, 2017, pp. 133–143.

F. J. Borrego-Balsalobre, A. Martínez-Moreno, V. Morales-Baños, and A. Díaz-Suárez, “Influence of the Psychomotor Profile in the Improvement of Learning in Early Childhood Education,” International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, vol. 18, no. 23, p. 12655, 2021, doi: 10.3390/ijerph182312655.

A. Barenji and B. Montreuil, “Intelligent tutoring platform for improving psychomotor skills in STEM workforce education: XR enhanced ITP,” Interactive Learning Environments, vol. 34, no. 5, pp. 2826–2845, 2026, doi: 10.1080/10494820.2025.2554998.

Y. Hu, C.-H. Chen, and C.-Y. Su, “Exploring the Effectiveness and Moderators of Block-Based Visual Programming on Student Learning: A Meta-Analysis,” Journal of Educational Computing Research, vol. 58, no. 8, pp. 1467–1493, 2021, doi: 10.1177/0735633120945935.

J. A. Rodríguez-Martínez, J. A. González-Calero, and J. M. Sáez-López, “Computational thinking and mathematics using Scratch: An experiment with sixth-grade students,” Interactive Learning Environments, vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 316–327, 2020, doi: 10.1080/10494820.2019.1612448.

W.-C. Hsu and J. Gainsburg, “Hybrid and non-hybrid block-based programming languages in an introductory college computer science course,” Journal of Educational Computing Research, vol. 59, no. 5, pp. 817–843, 2021, doi: 10.1177/073563312098510.

Ş. Saygıner, “The effects of block-based visual and text-based programming training on students' achievement, logical thinking skills, and motivation,” Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, vol. 39, no. 2, 2023, doi: 10.1111/jcal.12771.

Q. Yu, K. Yu, and B. Li, “Effects of Block-Based Visual Programming on K–12 Students’ Learning Outcomes,” Journal of Educational Computing Research, vol. 63, no. 1, pp. 64–98, 2025.

Y. Lin and D. Weintrop, “The landscape of block-based programming: Characteristics of block-based environments and how they support the transition to text-based programming,” Journal of Computer Languages, vol. 67, p. 101075, 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.cola.2021.101075.

X. J. L. Chin, C. K. Seow, Y. Cai, Y. Zhu, M. Wang, and Q. Cao, “Enhancing student learning and engagement with object-oriented block-based programming tool,” International Journal of Information and Education Technology, vol. 14, no. 7, pp. 910–919, 2024.

K. M. V. Gumonan, C. L. S. Romana, and C. Pantaleon, “Object-Oriented Programming Teaching Methods and Instructional Strategy in Selected Higher Education Institutions in the Philippines,” in Proc. 8th International Conference on Digital Technology in Education (ICDTE), 2024, pp. 212–220, doi: 10.1145/3696230.3696255.

S. Speth, “Teaching Object-Oriented Programming with the Objects-first Approach – An Experience Report,” SEUH 2023, doi: 10.18420/seuh2023_04.

Y. Qu, F. Li, X. Dou, C. Feng, and B. Li, “Research on Object-Oriented Programming Teaching Evaluation Method Based on Few-Shot Prompt Learning,” Journal of Internet Technology, vol. 26, no. 7, pp. 893–900, 2025.

L. E. Gutiérrez, C. A. Guerrero, and H. A. López-Ospina, “Ranking of problems and solutions in the teaching and learning of object-oriented programming,” Education and Information Technologies, vol. 27, pp. 7205–7239, 2022, doi: 10.1007/s10639-022-10929-5.

S. López-Pernas and M. Saqr, “Bringing Synchrony and Clarity to Complex Multi-Channel Data: A Learning Analytics Study in Programming Education,” IEEE Access, vol. 9, pp. 159422–159436, 2021, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3134844.

K. S. Huda, L. A. Alfitri, R. Hamzah, and L. S. Riza, “Learning Evaluation Using Block Programming on Object-Oriented Programming Materials to Improve Cognitive Skills,” Indonesian Journal of E-Learning and Multimedia (IJOEM), vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 223–236, 2025, doi: 10.58723/ijoem.v4i3.473.

S. Arikunto, Dasar-Dasar Evaluasi Pendidikan, 3rd ed. Jakarta, Indonesia: Bumi Aksara, 2021.

R. L. Ebel and D. A. Frisbie, Essentials of Educational Measurement, 5th ed. Englewood Cliffs, NJ, USA: Prentice-Hall, 1991.

L. W. Trowbridge, R. W. Bybee, and R. B. Sund, Becoming a Secondary School Science Teacher, 3rd ed. Columbus, OH, USA: Charles E. Merrill Publishing Company, 1981.

J. Nielsen, Usability Engineering. Boston, MA, USA: Academic Press, 1993.

Riduwan, Skala Pengukuran Variabel-Variabel Penelitian. Bandung, Indonesia: Alfabeta, 2023.

Riduwan, Skala Pengukuran Variabel-Variabel Penelitian. Bandung, Indonesia: Alfabeta, 2012.

R. R. Hake, “Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: A six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses,” American Journal of Physics, vol. 66, no. 1, pp. 64–74, Jan. 1998, doi: 10.1119/1.18809

F. Bailie, B. Marion, and D. Whitfield, “How rubrics that measure outcomes can complete the assessment loop,” Journal of Computing Sciences in Colleges, vol. 25, no. 6, pp. 15–25, 2010.

D. Sun, C. K. Looi, Y. Li, C. Zhu, C. Zhu, and M. Cheng, “Block-based versus text-based programming: A comparison of learners' programming behaviors, computational thinking skills and attitudes toward programming,” Educational Technology Research and Development, vol. 72, pp. 1067–1089, 2024, doi: 10.1007/s11423-023-10328-8.

Y. Kim, J. Kim, and W. Lee, “Effect of Block-Based Python Programming Environment on Programming Learning,” Applied Sciences, vol. 13, no. 19, p. 10898, 2023, doi: 10.3390/app131910898.

D. Roșu, F. Cojanu, P.-F. Vișan, N. Samarescu, M. A. Ene, R.-I. Muntean, and V. E. Ursu, “Structured Program for Developing the Psychomotor Skills of Institutionalized Children with Special Educational Needs,” Children, vol. 11, no. 1, p. 102, 2024, doi: 10.3390/children11010102.

T. Diaz-Leyva and O. Chamorro-Atalaya, “Analysis of learning difficulties in object oriented programming in systems engineering students at UNTELS,” Advances in Science, Technology and Engineering Systems Journal, vol. 5, no. 6, pp. 1704–1709, 2020, doi: 10.25046/aj0506203.

V. Lian, E. Varoy, and N. Giacaman, “Learning object-oriented programming concepts through visual analogies,” IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 78–92, 2022, doi: 10.1109/TLT.2022.3154805.

J. Cárdenas-Cobo, C. Vidal-Silva, and N. Máquez, “Dataset on programming competencies development using Scratch and a recommender system in a non-WEIRD primary school context,” Data, vol. 10, no. 6, p. 86, 2025, doi: 10.3390/data10060086.

H. Suriyaarachchi, P. Denny, and S. Nanayakkara, “Scratch and Sense: Using real-time sensor data to motivate students learning Scratch,” in Proc. 53rd ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (SIGCSE 2022), 2022, pp. 983–989, doi: 10.1145/3478431.3499316.

T. Talan, Y. Doğan, Y. Kalinkara, and V. Batdi, “To block or not to block? A meta-analysis of effectiveness of block-based programming,” Research in Science & Technological Education, pp. 1–20, 2025, doi: 10.1080/02635143.2025.2593936.

O. Erol and N. S. Çırak, “The effect of a programming tool Scratch on the problem-solving skills of middle school students,” Education and Information Technologies, vol. 27, pp. 4065–4086, 2022, doi: 10.1007/s10639-021-10776-w.

J. Cárdenas-Cobo, A. Puris, P. Novoa-Hernández, Á. Parra-Jiménez, J. Moreno-León, and D. Benavides, “Using Scratch to Improve Learning Programming in College Students: A Positive Experience from a Non-WEIRD Country,” Electronics, vol. 10, no. 10, p. 1180, 2021, doi: 10.3390/electronics10101180.

A. Espinal, C. Vieira, and V. Guerrero-Bequis, “Student ability and difficulties with transfer from a block-based programming language into other programming languages: a case study in Colombia,” Computer Science Education, vol. 33, no. 4, pp. 567–599, 2023, doi: 10.1080/08993408.2022.2079867.