This study delved into the impact of educational robotics, virtual coding, and unplugged coding on the problem-solving, computational thinking (CT), and coding skills of English as a Foreign Language (EFL) learners. Employing a pretest-posttest experimental design, the study encompassed 351 EFL students distributed across four groups to compare the effects of educational robotics, virtual coding, unplugged coding, and traditional learning environments. Quantitative data were gathered through assessments, while qualitative insights were derived from questionnaires and interviews. The findings revealed that educational robotics had a significant impact, leading to notable improvements in problem-solving skills (F (3, 346) = 1453.247, p < .001, Partial Eta Squared = .926), substantial enhancements in CT (F (3, 346) = 1656.464, p < .001, Adjusted R Squared = .934), and a significant increase in coding proficiency posttest scores (F (3, 346) = 449.011, p < .001). Moreover, qualitative results underscored the pedagogical advantages of integrating coding and robotics in language learning, aligning with multimedia learning theory, cognitive load theory, and nonlinear dynamic language learning motivation theory. The study emphasizes the potential of incorporating educational robotics and coding in EFL settings to enhance crucial 21st-century skills.
AhnJ.SungW.BlackJ. B. (2022). Unplugged debugging activities for developing young learners’ debugging skills. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 36(3), 421–437. https://doi.org/10.1080/02568543.2021.1981503
2.
AmriS.BudiyantoC. W.FenyvesiK.YuanaR. A.WidiastutiI. (2022). Educational robotics: Evaluating the role of computational thinking in attaining 21st century skills. Open Education Studies, 4(1), 322–338. https://doi.org/10.1515/edu-2022-0174
3.
BahariA. (2019). FonF practice model from theory to practice: CALL via focus on form approach and nonlinear dynamic motivation to develop listening and speaking proficiency. Computers & Education, 130(3), 40–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.11.009
4.
BahariA.HanF.StrzeleckiA. (2025). Integrating CALL and AIALL for an interactive pedagogical model of language learning. Education and Information Technologies, 30, 14305–14333. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-025-13388-w
5.
BahariA.WuS.AyresP. (2023). Improving computer-assisted language learning through the lens of cognitive load. Educational Psychology Review, 35(2), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-023-09764-y
6.
BellT. C.AlexanderJ.FreemanI.GrimleyM. (2009). Computer science unplugged: School students doing real computing without computers. Journal of Applied Computing and Information Technology, 13(1), 20–29.
7.
BersM. U. (2018). Coding as a playground: Programming and computational thinking in the early childhood classroom. Routledge.
BrennanK.ResnickM. (2012). New frameworks for studying and assessing the development of computational thinking. In Proceedings of the AERA annual meeting. AERA.
10.
CanbeldekM.IsikogluN. (2023). Exploring the effects of “productive children: Coding and robotics education program” in early childhood education. Education and Information Technologies, 28(3), 3359–3379. https://doi.org/10.1007/s1063902211315-x
11.
ChenC. H.ChungH. Y. (2024). Fostering computational thinking and problem-solving in programming: Integrating concept maps into robot block-based programming. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 62(1), 186–207. https://doi.org/10.1177/07356331231205052
12.
ChevalierM.GiangC.PiattiA.MondadaF. (2020). Fostering computational thinking through educational robotics: A model for creative computational problem solving. International Journal of STEM Education, 7(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-020-00238-z
13.
EbadiS.EbadijalalM. (2022). The effect of Google Expeditions virtual reality on EFL learners’ willingness to communicate and oral proficiency. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 35(8), 1975–2000. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2020.1854311
14.
GaoX.YangY.DuY.SunD. (2025). Effect of mind mapping-based scaffolding on elementary students’ computational thinking in block-based programming. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 63(1), 236–271. https://doi.org/10.1177/07356331241303067
15.
García-PeñalvoF. J.MendesA. J. (2018). Exploring the computational thinking effects in pre-university education. Computers in Human Behavior, 80, 407–411. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.12.005
16.
GovenderR. G.GovenderD. W. (2025). Unravelling physical manipulatives in the learning of coding: Exploring student perceptions in the nexus of computer programming and robotics. International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 15(3), 605–616. https://doi.org/10.18178/ijiet.2025.15.3.2269
17.
GroverS.PeaR. (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
18.
Gün-TosikE.GüyerT. (2024). The effect of computer science unplugged on abstraction as a sub-component of computational thinking. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 53, 101552. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2024.101552
19.
HsuT. C.ChangC.LiangY. S. (2023). Sequential behavior analysis of interdisciplinary activities in computational thinking and EFL learning with game-based learning. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 16(2), 256–265. https://doi.org/10.1109/TLT.2023.3249749
20.
HsuT. C.ChangC.WongL. H.AwG. P. (2022). Learning performance of different genders’ computational thinking. Sustainability, 14(24), 16514. https://doi.org/10.3390/su142416514
21.
HsuT. C.ChangC.WuL. K.LooiC. K. (2022). Effects of a pair programming educational robot-based approach on students’ interdisciplinary learning of computational thinking and language learning. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 888215. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.888215
22.
HsuT. C.LiangY. S. (2021). Simultaneously improving computational thinking and foreign language learning: Interdisciplinary media with plugged and unplugged approaches. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 59(6), 1184–1207. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633121992480
23.
KerimbayevN.NurymN.AkramovaA.AbdykarimovaS. (2023). Educational Robotics: Development of computational thinking in collaborative online learning. Education and Information Technologies, 28(11), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-11806-5
24.
KongS. C.LaiM. (2022). Validating a computational thinking concepts test for primary education using item response theory: An analysis of students’ responses. Computers & Education, 187, 104562. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104562
25.
LeeH. Y.WuT. T.LinC. J.WangW. S.HuangY. M. (2024). Integrating Computational thinking into scaffolding learning: An innovative approach to enhance Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics hands-on learning. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 62(2), 211–247. https://doi.org/10.1177/07356331231211916
26.
LiF.WangX.HeX.ChengL.WangY. (2022). The effectiveness of unplugged activities and programming exercises in computational thinking education: A meta-analysis. Education and Information Technologies, 27(6), 7993–8013. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-10915-x
27.
LinC. J.MubarokH. (2024). Promoting young learners’ computational thinking with AI-based robots and the ICAP model in blended learning contexts. Interactive Learning Environments, 32(10), 7242–7256. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2024.2308101
28.
LinY.LiaoH.WengS.DongW. (2024). Comparing the effects of plugged-in and unplugged activities on computational thinking development in young children. Education and Information Technologies, 29(8), 9541–9574. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-12181-x
29.
MasonS. L.RichP. J. (2020). Development and analysis of the elementary student coding attitudes survey. Computers & Education, 153, 103898. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103898
MelroA.TarlingG.FujitaT.Kleine StaarmanJ. (2023). What else can be learned when coding? A configurative literature review of learning opportunities through computational thinking. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 61(4), 901–924. https://doi.org/10.1177/07356331221133822
33.
PapertS. (1980). Children, computers, and powerful ideas (Vol. 10, pp. 978–983). Harvester.
34.
PolatE.YilmazR. M. (2022). Unplugged versus plugged-in: Examining basic programming achievement and computational thinking of 6th-grade students. Education and Information Technologies, 27(7), 9145–9179. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-10992-y
QuJ. R.FokP. K. (2022). Cultivating students’ computational thinking through student–robot interactions in robotics education. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 32(4), 1983–2002. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-021-09677-3
37.
ResnickM.MaloneyJ.Monroy-HernandezA.RuskN.EastmondE.BrennanK.MillnerA.RosenbaumE.SilverJ.SilvermanB.KafaiY. (2009). Scratch: Programming for all. Communications of the ACM, 52(11), 60–67. https://doi.org/10.1145/1592761.15927
38.
RiessmanC. K. (2008). Narrative methods for the human sciences. Sage.
39.
Román-GonzálezM.Pérez-GonzálezJ. C.Jiménez-FernándezC. (2017). Which cognitive abilities underlie computational thinking? Criterion validity of the computational thinking test. Computers in Human Behavior, 72, 678–691. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.08.047
40.
SaadA.ZainudinS. (2024). A review of teaching and learning approach in implementing Project-Based Learning (PBL) with Computational Thinking (CT). Interactive Learning Environments, 32(10), 7622–7646. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2024.2328280
TranT. T. (2023). Online-merge-offline model for distance learning in English language education: A case study. Vietnam Journal of Education, 215–226. https://doi.org/10.52296/vje.2023.251
Yilmaz InceE.KocM. (2021). The consequences of robotics programming education on computational thinking skills: An intervention of the Young Engineer’s Workshop (YEW). Computer Applications in Engineering Education, 29(1), 191–208. https://doi.org/10.1002/cae.22321
45.
YinS. X.Hoe-Lian GohD.QuekC. L. (2024). Collaborative learning in K-12 computational thinking education: A systematic review. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 62(6), 1440–1474. https://doi.org/10.1177/07356331241249956
46.
ZhaoL.LiuX.WangC.SuY. S. (2022). Effect of different mind mapping approaches on primary school students’ computational thinking skills during visual programming learning. Computers & Education, 181, 104445. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104445
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
