___

• Albion, Peter R. (2016, 29 Sept - 2 Oct) If this is the second coming of coding will there be rapture or rejection? In: Australian Council for Computers in Education 2016 Conference (ACCE 2016), Brisbane, Australia.
• Altun, A., and Mazman, S. G. (2012). Programlamaya ilişkin öz yeterlilik algısı ölçeğinin Türkçe formumun geçerlilik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Eğitimde ve Psikolojide Ölçme ve Değerlendirme Dergisi, 3(2), 297-308.
• Azevedo, R. (2015). Defining and measuring engagement and learning in science: Conceptual, theoretical, methodological, and analytical issues. Educational Psychologist, 50(1), 84-94.
• Balanskat, A., and Engelhardt, K. (2014). Computing our future: Computer programming and coding-Priorities, school curricula and initiatives across Europe. European Schoolnet.
• Bembenutty, H., and Zimmerman, B. J. (2003, April). The relation of motivational beliefs and self-regulatory processes to homework completion and academic achievement. Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.
• Bloom, B. S. (1976). Human Characteristics and School Learning. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill
• Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2009). Veri analizi el kitabı. Ankara: Pegem Akademi Yayıncılık.
• Einhorn, S. (2011). Microworlds, computational thinking, and 21st century learning. Logo Computer System Inc, White Paper. Retrieved from http://www.microworlds.com/ on 06.10.2016.
• Fairchild, A. J., Horst, S. J., Finney, S. J., and Barron, K. E. (2005). Evaluating existing and new validity evidence for the Academic Motivation Scale. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 30(3), 331-358.
• Fessakis, G., Gouli, E., and Mavroudi, E. (2013). Problem solving by 5–6 years old kindergarten children in a computer programming environment: A case study. Computers & Education, 63, 87-97.
• Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., and Paris, A. H. (2004). School Engagement: Potential of the concept. State of tehe Evidence. Rewiev of Educational Research. 7(4), 59-109.
• Grover, S., and Pea, R. (2013). Computational thinking in K-12: a review of the state of the field. Educational Researcher, 42(1), 38-43.
• Hansen, J. B., and Toso, S. J. (2007). Gifted dropouts: personality, family, social, and school factors. Gifted Child Today, 30(4), 30-41.
• Harper, S. R., and Quaye, S. J. (2009). Beyond sameness, with engagement and outcomes for all. In S. R. Harper, and S. J. Quaye (Eds.), Student engagement in higher education (pp. 1-15). New York and London, NY and London: Routledge.
• Havenga, M., and Mentz, E. (2009, June). The school subject information technology: a South African perspective. In Proceedings of the 2009 Annual Conference of the Southern African Computer Lecturers' Association (pp. 76-80). ACM.
• Hongwarittorrn, N., and Krairit, D. (2010, April). Effects of program visualization (jeliot3) on students' performance and attitudes towards java programming. In The spring 8th International conference on Computing, Communication and Control Technologies (pp. 6-9). Orlando, FL, USA.
• Jenkins, T. (2002). On the difficulty of learning to program. In Proceedings of the 3rd Annual Conference of the LTSN Centre for Information and Computer Sciences, 4(2002), 53‐58.
• Jones, R. D. (2008). Strengthening student engagement. author and senior consultant, ınternational center for leadership in education. Retrieved from http://www.leadered.com/pdf/Strengthen%20Student%20Engagement%20whit e%20paper.pdf.
• Kalelioğlu, F., and Gülbahar, Y. (2014). The effects of teaching programming via scratch on problem solving skills: A discussion from learners’ perspective. Informatics in Education, 13(1), 33-50.
• Kalelioğlu, F. (2015). A new way of teaching programming skills to K-12 students: Code. org. Computers in Human Behavior, 52, 200-210.
• Kim, K. Y., Song, J. B., and Lee, T. W. (2009). Effect of digital storytelling based programming education on motivation and achievement of students in elementary school. Journal of the Korea Society of Computer and Information, 14(1), 47-55.
• Kirk, S., Gallagher, J. J., and Anastasiow, N. (2000). Educating exceptional children (9th ed.). Boston, MA: Houghton-Mifflin.
• Koorsse, M., Cilliers, C., and Calitz, A. (2015). Programming assistance tools to support the learning of IT programming in South African secondary schools. Computers & Education, 82, 162-178.
• Lau, W. W., and Yuen, A. H. (2011). Modelling programming performance: Beyond the influence of learner characteristics. Computers & Education, 57(1), 1202- 1213.
• Law, K. M., Lee, V. C., and Yu, Y. T. (2010). Learning motivation in e-learning facilitated computer programming courses. Computers & Education, 55(1), 218- 228.
• Lee, Y. J. (2011). Scratch: Multimedia programming environment for young gifted learners. Gifted Child Today, 34(2), 26-31.
• Lye, S. Y., and Koh, J. H. L. (2014). Review on teaching and learning of computational thinking through programming: What is next for K-12?. Computers in Human Behavior, 41, 51-61.
• Manovich, L. (2013). Media after software. Journal of Visual Culture, 12(1), 30-37.
• Middleton, J., and Spanish, P. (1999). Motivation for achievement in mathematics: Findings, generalizations and criticism of the research. IRME Online,30(1), 65- 88.
• Miles, M. B., and Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis. London: Sage.
• Moreno-León, J., Robles, G., and Román-González, M. (2016). Examining the relationship between socialization and improved software development skills in the scratch code learning environment. J. UCS, 22(12), 1533-1557.
• National Research Council (2003). Engaging schools: fostering high school students' motivation to learn. Washington, DC, USA: National Academies Press.
• National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. National Academies Press.
• Partnershipfor 21st Century Skills (P21). (2007). Partnership for 21st Century Skills.
• Retrieved from http://www.p21.org/about-us/p21-framework/60.
• Poftak, A. (1998). Technology and gifted education: A talk with Carol Wilson. Technology & Learning, 19(4), 14-14.
• Popat, S., and Starkey, L. (2019). Learning to code or coding to learn? A systematic review. Computers & Education, 128, 365-376.
• Reis, S. M., and Renzulli, J. S. (2009). Myth 1: The gifted and talented constitute one single homogeneous group and giftedness is a way of being that stays in the person over time and experiences. The Gifted Child Quarterly, 53(4), 233-235.
• Renzulli, J. S., and Park, S. (2000). Gifted dropouts: The who and the why.Gifted Child Quarterly, 44(4), 261-271.
• Renzulli, J. S., and Reis, S. M. (1997). The schoolwide enrichment model: A how-to guide for educational excellence. Creative Learning Press, Inc., PO Box 320, Mansfield, CT 06250.
• Resnick, M., Maloney, J., Monroy-Hernández, A., Rusk, N., Eastmond, E., Brennan, K., …Kafai, Y. (2009). Scratch: programming for all. Communications of the ACM, 52(11), 60–67.
• Rushkoff, D. (2010). Program or be programmed: Ten commands for a digital age. New York, NY: O/R Books.
• Ryan, R. M., and Deci, E. L. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1), 54–67.
• Senemoğlu, N. (2009). Gelişim öğrenme ve öğretim kuramdan uygulamaya. Ankara: Nobel Yayınevi.
• Sönmez, V. (1997). Sosyal bilgiler öğretimi ve öğretmen kılavuzu. Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık.
• Shin, S., Park, P., and Bae, Y. (2013). The effects of an information-technology gifted program on friendship using scratch programming language and clutter. International Journal of Computer and Communication Engineering, 2(3), 246-249.
• Siegle, D. (2009). Developing student programming and problem-solving skills with Visual Basic. Gifted Child Today, 32(4), 24–29
• Swan, K. (2001). Virtual interaction: Design factors affecting student satisfaction and perceived learning in asynchronous online courses. Distance Education, 22(2),306- 331.
• Tomlinson, C. A. (2002). The parallel curriculum: A design to develop high potential and challenge high-ability learners. London: Corwin Press.
• Tomlinson, C. A., Kaplan, S. N., Renzulli, J. S., Purcell, J. H., Leppien, J. H., Burns, D. E., and Imbeau, M. B. (2008). The paralel curriculum: A design to develop learner potential and challenge advanced learners. London: SAGE.
• Topalli, D., and Cagiltay, N. E. (2018). Improving programming skills in engineering education through problem-based game projects with Scratch. Computers & Education, 120, 64-74.
• Wagner, E. D. (1998, August). Interaction strategies for online training designs. Proceedings of the Annual Conference on Distance Teaching and Learning (pp. 417-420), Madison, WI.
• Wang, H. Y., Huang, I., and Hwang, G. J. (2014). Effects of an Integrated Scratch and project-based learning approach on the learning achievements of gifted students in computer courses. Retrieved from http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/login.jsp?tp=&arnumber=6913329&url=http%3A %2F%2Fieeexplore.ieee.org%2Fxpls%2Fabs_all.jsp%3Farnumber%3D6913329.
• Wilson, A. Connolly, T.M. Hainey, T., and Moffat, D. (2011, October). Evaluation of Introducing Programming toYounger School Children Using a Computer Game Construction Application,Proceedings of 5th European Conference on Gamesbased Learning (ECGBL), Athens, Greece.
• Wing, J. M. (2006). Computational thinking. Communications of the ACM, 49(3), 33-35.
• VanTassel-Baska, J. (1988). Curriculum design issues in developing a curriculum for the gifted. In: J. Van Tassel-Baska, J. Feldhusen, K. Seeley, G. Wheatly, L.Silverman and W. Foster (Eds), Comprehensive curriculum for the gifted learners, (pp. 55-76). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
• Valasek, T. (2001). Student persistence in web-based courses: Identifying a profile for success. New Jersey, NJ: Raritan Valley Community College Center for the Advancement of Innovative Teaching and Learning. ERIC Document No. 466276.
• Yen, C.-Z., Wu, P.-H., and Lin, C.-F. (2012). Analysis of expert's and novice's thinking process. Engaging Learners through Emerging Technologies, Communication in Computer and Information Science, 302, 122-134.
• Yıldırım, A., ve Şimşek, H. (2013). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri. Ankara: Seçkin.
• Yin, R.K. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods. London: SAGE.
• Yildiz-Durak, H. (2018a). Digital story design activities used for teaching programming effect on learning of programming concepts, programming self‐ efficacy, and participation and analysis of student experiences. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning. 34(6), 740-752.
• Yildiz-Durak, H. (2018b). Flipped learning readiness in teaching programming in middle schools: Modelling its relation to various variables. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning. 34(6), 939-959.
• Yildiz-Durak, H. (2018c). The effects of using different tools in programming teaching of secondary school students on engagement, computational thinking and reflective thinking skills for problem solving. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 1-17. doi: 10.1007/s10758-018-9391-y.
• Yildiz-Durak, H., and Güyer, T. (2018). Design and development of an instructional program for teaching programming processes to gifted students using scratch. In J. Cannaday (Ed.) Curriculum development for gifted education programs (pp. 61-99). Hershey: IGI Global.