Anticipating students' preferences: Investigating factors influencing the choice between block-code and source-code programming


  • Muhammad Anwar Abdul Halim Information Technology Department, Bentong Community College, Bentong, Pahang, Malaysia.
  • Dr. Sharmili Binti Mohamed Rafi Business Operations Department, Bentong Community College, Bentong, Pahang, Malaysia.
  • Engku Mohamad Engku Abdullah Faculty of Economics & Management, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Selangor, Malaysia.
  • Mohamad Hafizi Masdar Information Technology Department, Bentong Community College, Bentong, Pahang, Malaysia.
  • Michael Dolinsky Faculty of Mathematics and Programming Technologies, Francisk Skorina Gomel State University, Belarus.
  • Daniel Makini Getuno Faculty of Education and Community Studies, Egerton University, Kenya.



Block-code programming, source-code programming, technology acceptance model (TAM), theory of planned behaviour (TPB), community college


This study explores behavioral factors influencing students' choice between block-code programming (BCP) and source-code programming (SCP) among Community College students in Malaysia. Two hundred and twenty-six IT certificate students participated, answering questions based on the Technology Acceptance Model and Theory of Planned Behavior using a Likert scale survey. Analysis using structural equation modeling revealed that attitudes towards technology and behavior strongly influenced students' preference for BCP over SCP. However, further investigation into how these behaviors impact programming learning is needed. The study's findings emphasize the importance of perceived usefulness, ease of use, and subjective norms in students' preference for BCP. With substantial R2 effect sizes (0.864), the study underscores the significant influence of perceived usefulness (PU), perceived ease of use (PEU), and subjective norms (SN) on BCP adoption behavior. The implications of these findings extend to policymakers and educators, providing valuable insights for refining computing education standards. Moreover, the study lays the groundwork for future research, offering a deeper understanding of block-code programming's role in the digital education transition.


Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Engku Mohamad Engku Abdullah, Faculty of Economics & Management, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Selangor, Malaysia.

PHD Candidiate at Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia

Mohamad Hafizi Masdar, Information Technology Department, Bentong Community College, Bentong, Pahang, Malaysia.

Lecturer at Bentong Community College


Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Process, 50, 179–211.

Ajzen, I. (2011). The theory of planned behavior: Reactions and reflections. Psychology and Health, 26(9), 1113–1127.

Andersen, R., Mørch, A.I., & Litherland, K. T. (2022). Collaborative learning with block-based programming : Investigating human-centered artificial intelligence in education. Behaviour & Information Technology, 41(9), 1830–1847.

Aslam, R., Najmonnisa, K., & Ushaque, A. (2020). Technology integration and teachers’ professional knowledge with reference to International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE)-standard: A causal study. Journal of Education and Educational Development, 3(2), 222–249.

Bai, H., Leseman, P. P. M., Moerbeek, M., Kroesbergen, E. H., & Mulder, H. (2021). Serial order effect in divergent thinking in five-to six-year-olds: Individual differences as related to executive functions. Journal of Intelligence, 9(2).

Buabeng-Andoh, C. (2018). Predicting students’ intention to adopt mobile learning. Journal of Research in Innovative Teaching & Learning, 11(2), 178–191.

Budiastuti, P., Khairudin, M., Santosa, B., & Rahmatullah, B. (2023). The use of personal learning environment to support an online collaborative strategy in vocational education pedagogy course. International Journal of Interactive Mobile Technologies, 17(2).

Cheah, C. S. (2020). Factors contributing to the difficulties in teaching and learning of computer programming: A literature review. Contemporary Educational Technology, 12(2), 1–14.

Fornell, C. and Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50.

Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 35(8), 982–1003.

Dziak, M. (2020). Technology acceptance model (TAM). Salem Press Encyclopedia of Science, 29, 7–8.

Glas, M., Vielberth, M., Reittinger, T., Böhm, F., & Pernul, G. (2023). Improving cybersecurity skill development through visual programming. Information and Computer Security, 31(3), 316–330.

Griffith, A. (2010). SPSS for dummies (2nd Edition). Wiley Publishing Inc.

Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2017). A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM). Sage.

Hair Jr, J. F., Sarstedt, M., Hopkins, L., & Kuppelwiser, V.G. (2014). Partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM): An emerging tool in business research. European Business Review, 26(2), 106-121.

Hair, J. F., Risher, J. J., Sarstedt, M., & Ringle, C. M. (2019). When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM. European Business Review, 31(1), 2–24.

Hasbullah, N. H., Rahmatullah, B., Rasli, R. M., Khairudin, M., & Downing, K. (2022). Google Meet usage for continuity and sustainability of online education during pandemic. Journal of ICT in Education, 9(2), 46-60.

Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2014). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(1), 115–135.

Jamilah, H., Saira Banu, O. K., Zafirah, M. A., & Ummu Salmah, M. H. (2022). Improving college students’ learning performance in computer programming: The case of using the Polya Model. Central Asia and the Caucasus, 23(1), 3052–3070.

Jiang, B., Zhao, W., Zhang, N., & Qiu, F. (2022). Programming trajectories analytics in block-based programming language learning. Interactive Learning Environments, 30(1), 113–126.

Kelley, K., Clark, B., Brown, V., & Sitzia, J. (2003). Good practice in the conduct and reporting of survey research. International Journal for Quality in Health Care, 15(3), 261–266.

Kim, S., Choe, I., & Kaufman, J. C. (2019). The development and evaluation of the effect of creative problem-solving program on young children’s creativity and character. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 33(September).

Kossakowski, P. G. (2023). Visual programming as modern and effective structural design technology—Analysis of opportunities, challenges, and future developments based on the use of dynamo. Applied Sciences (Switzerland), 13(16).

Krejcie, R., V.Morgan, & W., D. (1970). Determining sample size for research activities. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 30, 607-610.

MIT Media Lab (n.d.). Lifelong Kindergarten. Retrieved January 16, 2024, from

Mohamad, A. I., Rahmatullah, B., Ibrahim, L. F. M., Saari, E. M., & Downing, K. J. (2022). Exploring parents perception of online learning through a systematic literature review. Borneo International Journal, 5(1), 8-15.

Mohamad Kasim, F. S., Rahmatullah, B., Rahmatullah Khan, H. K., Rosli, A. N., Che Lah, N. H., Hidayanto, A. N., & Matthíasdóttir, Á. (2023). The effectiveness of online supervision for postgraduate students: A systematic literature review. ASEAN Journal of Teaching & Learning in Higher Education, 15(2).

Moraiti, I., Fotoglou, A., & Drigas, A. (2022). Coding with block programming languages in educational robotics and mobiles, improve problem solving, creativity & critical thinking skills. International Journal of Interactive Mobile Technologies, 16(20), 59–78.

MyPolyCC. (n.d.). Home. Retrieved February 16, 2024, from

Namli, N. A., & Aybek, B. (2022). An investigation of the effect of block-based programming and unplugged coding activities on fifth graders’ computational thinking skills, self-efficacy and academic performance. Contemporary Educational Technology, 14(1), 1–16.

Olipas, C. N. (2022). A phenomenological study on the feelings, challenges and difficulties experienced by information technology students in learning computer programming. Path of Science, 8(7), 2001–2006.

Quah, W. B., Mohd Banua, N., & Zulkifle, Z. (2023). Pembelajaran berasaskan permainan bagi kursus asas pengaturcaraan: Ketahui sikap dan minat pelajar : Game-based learning for basic programming courses: Discover students’ attitudes and interests. Journal of ICT in Education, 10(1), 14–25.

Roslin, A. R., Rahmatullah, B., Zain, N. Z. M., Purnama, S., & Yas, Q. M. (2022). Online learning for vocational education: Uncovering emerging themes on perceptions and experiences. Journal of Vocational Education Studies, 5(1), 1-15.

Shahrizal, A. Z. S. A., Rahmatullah, B., Ab Majid, M. H., Samuri, S. M., Hidayanto, A. N., Yas, Q. M., & Malim, T. (2022). A systematic literature review on the use of podcasts in education among university students. ASEAN Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 14(1), 222-236.

Sudin, I. A. A., Rahmatullah, B., Abdullah, M. F. W., Tamrin, K. F., Khairudin, M., & Yahya, S. R. (2022). A systematic literature review study on university students' exposure to 3D printing as preparation for industry. Journal of ICT in Education, 9(1), 48-60.

Sentance, S., Waite, J., & Kallia, M. (2019). Teaching computer programming with PRIMM: A sociocultural perspective. Computer Science Education, 29(2–3), 136–176.

Sun, L., & Zhou, L. (2023). Does text-based programming improve K-12 students’ CT skills? Evidence from a meta-analysis and synthesis of qualitative data in educational contexts. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 49(September), 8–13.




How to Cite

Abdul Halim, M. A., Mohamed Rafi, S., Engku Abdullah, E. M., Masdar, M. H., Dolinsky, M., & Getuno, D. M. (2024). Anticipating students’ preferences: Investigating factors influencing the choice between block-code and source-code programming. Journal of ICT in Education, 11(1), 65–80.