Page 79 - JURNAL PENYELIDIKAN AKADEMIK

J u r n a l P e n y e l i d i k a n A k a d e m i k I P G M J i l i d 5 / 2 0 2 0 | 72

described above. The assessment of CT RBT training could be formalized. As
suggested by Brennan and Reinseck (2012), assessment can be in the form of project
portfolio analysis and artifact-based interviews.

Portfolio analysis can focus on the products from the use of Scratch and
Microsoft Makecode tools. Dr Scratch is an online analytical tool
(http://www.drscratch.org/) that evaluates Scratch projects from different
computational areas. Scratch project can be uploaded to this website or just use the
url of online project for analysis. Figure 12 shows an evaluation example of a Scratch
project. A score and the level of project is given. Analysis also includes the different
level of CT skills apply in the project. Kastner-Hauler, Sabitzer and Tengler (2020) has
proposed a simple classification and scoring system for CT levels to evaluate tasks
performed using BBC Micro:bit. An example of the scoring for CT skills is shows in
Figure 13. Such scoring system can be used to evaluate Microsoft Makecode Micro:bit
robotic projects produced during CT RBT training.

Figure 12: An Example of Scratch Project Evaluation using Dr. Scratch

Artifact-based interview is used to explore more through interviewing the
participants to assess the development of CT skills while doing Scratch/Micro:bit
robotic projects. It uses the following interview protocols:

Figure 13: A CT Scoring Example using Kastner-Hauler, Sabitzer and Tengler
(2020) Classification and Scoring System