How are primary school computer science curricular reforms contributing to equity? Impact on student learning, perception of the discipline, and gender gaps

El-Hamamsy, Laila; Bruno, Barbara; Audrin, Catherine; Chevalier, Morgane; Avry, Sunny; Zufferey, Jessica Dehler; Mondada, Francesco

doi:10.1186/s40594-023-00438-3

International Journal of STEM Education

Table 13 Unstandardised factor loadings and regression slopes for the perception SEM (n = 2116, November 2021)

From: How are primary school computer science curricular reforms contributing to equity? Impact on student learning, perception of the discipline, and gender gaps

		Estimate	Std. Err.	Z	p	R²
Factor loadings
Discipline perception	Tablets	0.83	0.11	7.37	0.000	0.41
	Robots	0.76	0.10	7.85	0.000	0.37
	CS	1.98	0.70	2.82	0.005	0.81
CS	CS interest	0.17	0.05	3.25	0.001	0.25
	CS utility	0.16	0.05	3.19	0.001	0.25
	CS self-efficacy	0.20	0.06	3.31	0.001	0.28
Role models	Role models—teacher	0.17	0.01	15.60	0.000	0.13
	Role models—mother	0.23	0.01	25.37	0.000	0.28
	Role models—father	0.30	0.01	32.03	0.000	0.36
	Role models—student	0.13	0.01	15.47	0.000	0.11
	Role models—nobody	\(-0.24\)	0.01	\(-22.85\)	0.000	0.41
Tablets	Tablets interest	0.25	0.03	7.97	0.000	0.22
	Tablets utility	0.30	0.03	9.29	0.000	0.37
	Tablets self-efficacy	0.24	0.03	8.96	0.000	0.31
Robots	Robots interest	0.44	0.04	10.70	0.000	0.33
	Robots utility	0.36	0.04	9.36	0.000	0.29
	Robots self-efficacy	0.49	0.04	11.34	0.000	0.42
Regression slopes
Discipline perception	Role models	0.15	0.05	2.94	0.003
CS	Role models	0.30	0.12	2.41	0.016
CS	Number of CS education periods	\(-0.01\)	0.01	\(-0.62\)	0.536
Role models	Number of CS education periods	\(-0.01\)	0.01	\(-1.18\)	0.238
	Number of ICT instruction periods	\(-0.00\)	0.00	\(-0.13\)	0.896
	Number of robotics instruction periods	0.03	0.02	1.22	0.224
Tablets	Number of ICT instruction Periods	\(-0.00\)	0.00	\(-0.80\)	0.426
Robots	Number of robotics instruction periods	0.00	0.01	0.06	0.949
CS interest	Gender (boys = 0 girls = 1)	\(-0.20\)	0.03	\(-5.75\)	0.000
	Grade	\(-0.02\)	0.02	\(-1.12\)	0.262
	General self-efficacy	0.09	0.03	3.29	0.001
CS utility	Gender (boys = 0 girls = 1)	\(-0.05\)	0.03	\(-1.60\)	0.110
	Grade	0.09	0.02	5.49	0.000
	General self-efficacy	0.09	0.02	3.99	0.000
CS self-efficacy	Gender (boys = 0 girls = 1)	\(-0.01\)	0.04	\(-0.33\)	0.741
	Grade	0.01	0.02	0.74	0.459
	General self-efficacy	0.15	0.03	5.19	0.000
Role nodels—teacher	Gender (boys = 0 girls = 1)	0.06	0.02	2.98	0.003
Role nodels—teacher	Grade	\(-0.04\)	0.01	\(-3.78\)	0.000
Role models—mother	Gender (boys = 0 girls = 1)	0.01	0.02	0.35	0.723
Role models—mother	Grade	\(-0.06\)	0.01	\(-5.84\)	0.000
Role models—father	Gender (boys = 0 girls = 1)	\(-0.06\)	0.02	\(-2.84\)	0.005
Role models—father	Grade	\(-0.01\)	0.01	\(-1.07\)	0.286
Role models—student	Gender (boys = 0 girls = 1)	0.00	0.02	0.04	0.971
Role models—student	Grade	\(-0.00\)	0.01	\(-0.56\)	0.572
Role models—nobody	Gender (boys = 0 girls = 1)	0.01	0.02	0.43	0.667
Role models—nobody	Grade	\(-0.03\)	0.01	\(-3.70\)	0.000
Tablets interest	Gender (boys = 0 girls = 1)	\(-0.09\)	0.03	\(-2.70\)	0.007
	Grade	\(-0.04\)	0.02	\(-2.45\)	0.014
	General self-efficacy	\(-0.00\)	0.02	\(-0.07\)	0.946
Tablets utility	Gender (boys = 0 girls = 1)	\(-0.05\)	0.03	\(-1.66\)	0.097
	Grade	0.03	0.01	2.33	0.020
	General self-efficacy	0.08	0.02	3.91	0.000
Tablets self-efficacy	Gender (boys = 0 girls = 1)	\(-0.07\)	0.03	\(-2.55\)	0.011
	Grade	\(-0.01\)	0.01	\(-1.07\)	0.283
	General self-efficacy	0.06	0.02	3.29	0.001
Robots interest	Gender (boys = 0 girls = 1)	\(-0.32\)	0.04	\(-7.32\)	0.000
	Grade	0.03	0.02	1.44	0.151
	General self-efficacy	0.09	0.03	2.50	0.012
Robots utility	Gender (boys = 0 girls = 1)	\(-0.19\)	0.04	\(-4.95\)	0.000
	Grade	0.07	0.02	3.78	0.000
	General self-efficacy	0.16	0.03	4.98	0.000
Robots self-efficacy	Gender (boys = 0 girls = 1)	\(-0.25\)	0.04	\(-5.90\)	0.000
	Grade	0.02	0.02	0.71	0.477
	General self-efficacy	0.19	0.03	5.52	0.000

Back to article page