一、英文部分
1.Abramovich, S. (2015). Mathematical problem posing as a link between algorithmic thinking and conceptual knowledge. Teaching of Mathematics, 18(2), 45-60.
2.Adair, J. G. (1984). The Hawthorne effect: A reconsideration of the methodological artifact. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69(2), 334-345.
3.Afthanorhan, A., Awang, Z., Abd Majid, N., Foziah, H., Ismail, I., Al Halbusi, H. & Tehseen, S. (2021). Gain more insight from common latent factor in structural equation modeling. In Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1793(1), 1-9.
4.Airasian, P. W. & Bart, W. H. (1973). Ordering theory: A new and useful measurement model. Educational Technolgy, 5, 56-60.
5.Alafouzou, A., Lamprinou, D. & Paraskeva, F. (2018). Gamified Project based learning environment for motivation improvement. In ECEL 2018 17th European Conference on e-Learning, 1-10.
6.Anderson, C.W. & Smith, E. L. (1984). Children's preconceptions and content-area textbooks in G.G. Duffy. Comprehension Instruction Perspectives and Suggestions. 187-201.
7.Anderson, J. C. & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103(3), 411-423.
8.Astrachan, O., Hambrusch, S., Peckham, J. & Settle, A. (2009). The present and future of computational thinking. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 41(1), 549-550.
9.Barr, V. & Stephenson, C. (2011). Bringing computational thinking to K-12: What is involved and what is the role of the computer science education community. ACM Inroads, 2(1), 48-54.
10.Bayman, P. & Mayer, R. (1988). Using conceptual models to teach BASIC computer programming. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(3), 291-298.
11.Bentler, P. M. (1982). Confirmatory factor analysis via noniterative estimation: A fast, inexpensive method. Journal of Marketing Research, 19(4), 417-424.
12.Bloom, B. S. (1968). Learning for mastery. Instruction and curriculum. Regional education laboratory for the carolinas and virginia, topical papers and reprints, number 1. Evaluation Comment, 1(2), 1-12.
13.Bloom, B. S. (1971). Mastery Learning and its Implications for Curriculum Development. Boston: Little, Brown.
14.Bloom, B. S. (1974). An Introduction to Mastery Learning Theory. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
15.Brennan, K. & Resnick, M. (2012). New frameworks for studying and assessing the development of computational thinking. Proceedings of the 2012 Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Vancouver, Canada, 1, 1-25.
16.Browne, M. W. (1993). Structured latent curve models. Multivariate Analysis: Future Directions, 2, 171-197.
17.Bundy, A. (2007). Computational thinking is pervasive. Journal of Scientific and Practical Computing, 1(2), 67-69.
18.Business Insider. (2016). The 21 most Promising Jobs of the Future, retrieved February 13 from https://www.businessinsider.com/best-jobs-future-growth.
19.Calao, L. A., Moreno-León, J., Correa, H. E. & Robles, G. (2015). Developing mathematical thinking with scratch. In European Conference on Technology Enhanced Learning, 17-27.
20.Cansu, S. K. & Cansu, F. K. (2019). An overview of computational thinking. International Journal of Computer Science Education in Schools, 3(1), 17-30.
21.Cardona, J. P., Alvarez, F., Velazquez, C., Dominguez, G. & Muñoz, J. (2021). Evaluation of remedial intervention with Mastery Learning approach for dyslexic children. In 2021 4th International Conference on Inclusive Technology and Education, 43-46.
22.Carl, W. (2014). The First-Person Point of View. Walter De Gruyter, 147.
23.Çelikbilek, Y. & Tüylü, A. N. A. (2019). Prioritizing the components of e-learning systems by using fuzzy DEMATEL and ANP. Interactive Learning Environments, 30(2), 322-343.
24.Chao, P. Y. (2016). Exploring students' computational practice, design and performance of problem-solving through a visual programming environment. Computers & Education, 95, 202-215.
25.Chen, J. K. & Chen, I. S. (2010). Using a novel conjunctive MCDM approach based on DEMATEL, fuzzy ANP, and TOPSIS as an innovation support system for Taiwanese higher education. Expert Systems with Applications, 37(3), 1981-1990.
26.Chen, Y. C., Tsui, P. L. & Lee, C. S. (2021). Is mathematics required for cooking? An interdisciplinary approach to integrating computational thinking in a culinary and restaurant management course. Mathematics, 9(18), 2219-2233.
27.Chen, Y. H., Lee, W. C., Tseng, C. H., Deng, L.Y. Chang, C. Y. & Lee, L. H. (2020). Cognitive learning performance assessment and analysis with CSCL applied on the NetGuru platform and CSPL applied on the TAoD platform for the network experiment class. Journal of Supercomputing, 76(1), 16-46.
28.Città, G., Gentile, M., Allegra, M., Arrigo, M., Conti, D., Ottaviano, S., Reale, F. & Sciortino, M. (2019). The effects of mental rotation on computational thinking. Computers & Education, 141, 103613-103623.
29.Computer Science Teachers’ Association, & International Society for Technology in Education. (2011). Computational thinking: Leadership toolkit, retrieved February 13 from https://cdn.iste.org/www-root/2020-10/ISTE_CT_Leadership_Toolkit_booklet.pdf.
30.Cooper, S. & Dann, W. (2015). Programming: A key component of computational thinking in CS courses for non-majors. ACM Inroads, 6(1), 50-54.
31.Demirtas, E. A. & Üstün, Ö. (2008). An integrated multiobjective decision making process for supplier selection and order allocation. Omega, 36(1), 76-90.
32.Denning, P. J. (2009). The profession of IT beyond computational thinking. Communications of the ACM, 52(6), 28-30.
33.Dewey, J. (1933). How We Think. Buffalo, New York: Prometheus Books.
34.Dierbach, C. (2012). Introduction to Computer Science using Python: A Computational Problem-Solving Focus. Hoboken: Wiley Publishing.
35.Dinçer, H., Hacıoğlu, Ü. & Yüksel, S. (2020). Balanced scorecard-based performance assessment of Turkish banking sector with the analytic network process (ANP). International Journal of Decision Sciences & Applications, 1(1), 1-12.
36.Dinçer, S. (2018). Are preservice teachers really literate enough to integrate technology in their classroom practice? Determining the technology literacy level of preservice teachers. Education and Information Technologies, 23(6), 2699-2718.
37.Durak, H. Y. (2018). 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
38.Durak, H. Y. (2020). The effects of using different tools in programming teaching of secondary school students on engagement, computational thinking and teflective thinking skills for problem solving. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 25, 179-195.
39.Eskandari, D., Gharabagh, M. J., Barkhordari, A., Gharari, N., Panahi, D., Gholami, A. & Teimori-Boghsani, G. (2021). Development of a scale for assessing the organization's safety performance based fuzzy ANP. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 69, 104342.
40.Farias, L. M. S., Santos, L. C., Gohr, C. F. & Rocha, L. O. (2019). An ANP-based approach for lean and green performance assessment. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 143, 77-89.
41.Feng, C. & Ma, R. (2020). Identification of the factors that influence service innovation in manufacturing enterprises by using the fuzzy DEMATEL method. Journal of Cleaner Production, 253, 120002-120013.
42.Fontela, E. & Gabus, A. (1976). The DEMATEL Observer. Geneva: Battelle Institute, Geneva Research Center.
43.Fornell, C. & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39-50.
44.Fox, N. S., Brennan, J. S. & Chasen, S. T. (2008). Clinical estimation of fetal weight and the Hawthorne effect. European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology, 141(2), 111-114.
45.Fraillon, J., Ainley, J., Schulz, W., Duckworth, D. & Friedman, T. (2019). Computer and information literacy framework. IEA International Computer and Information Literacy Study 2018 Assessment Framework, 13-23.
46.Futschek, G. (2006). Algorithmic thinking: The key for understanding computer science. International Conference on Informatics in Secondary Schools-Evolution and Perspectives, 4226, 159-168.
47.Gabus, A. & Fontela, E. (1973). Perceptions of the World Problematique: Communication Procedure, Communicating with Those Bearing Collective Responsibility. Geneva: Battelle Institute, Geneva Research Center.
48.García-Peñalvo, F. J. & Mendes, A. J. (2018). Exploring the computational thinking effects in pre-university education. Computers in Human Behavior, 80, 407-411.
49.Gencer, C. & Gürpinar, D. (2007). Analytic network process in supplier selection: A case study in an electronic firm. Applied Mathematical Modelling, 31(11), 2475-2486.
50.Gharakhani, D. (2016). Identification and prioritization of influential factors for the knowledge management success using DEMATEL method. Journal of Industrial Strategic Management, 1 (1), 51-64.
51.Grover, S. & Pea, R. (2013). Computational thinking in K-12: A review of the state of the field. Educational Researcher, 42(1), 38-43.
52.Gülbahar, Y. & Kalelioğlu, F. (2014). The effects of teaching programming via scratch on problem solving skills: A discussion from learners’ perspective. Informatics in Education, 13(1), 33-50.
53.Guttman, N. B. (1994). On the sensitivity of sample L moments to sample size. Journal of Climate, 7(6), 1026-1029.
54.Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L. & Black, W. C. (1998). Multivariate data analysis prentice hall. Upper Saddle River, NJ, 730.
55.Hall, W. & Pesenti, J. (2017). Growing the artificial intelligence industry in the UK. Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport and Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy. Part of the Industrial Strategy UK and the Commonwealth.
56.Hamalainen, R. P., Salo, A. A. & Poysti, K. (1992). Observations about consensus seeking in a multiple criteria environment. Proceedings of the Twenty-Fifth Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 4, 190-198.
57.Haseski, H. I., Ilic, U. & Tugtekin, U. (2018). Defining a new 21st century skill-computational thinking: Concepts and trends. International Education Studies, 11(4), 29-42.
58.Haßler, B., Major, L. & Hennessy, S. (2016). Tablet use in schools: A critical review of the evidence for learning outcomes. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 32(2), 139-156.
59.Henseler, j., Hubona, G. & Ray, P. A. (2016). Using PLS path modeling in new technology research: Updated guidelines. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 116(1), 2-20.
60.Henseler, J., Ringle, C.M. & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43, 115-135.
61.Heppner, P. P. & Krauskopf, C. J. (1987). The integration of personal problem solving processes within counseling counsel. Psychologist, 15, 371-447.
62.Heppner, P. P. & Reeder, L. (1983). The relationship between problem-solving self-appraisal and psychological adjustment. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 9(4), 415-427.
63.Heppner, P. P., Baumgardner, A. H. & Jakson, J. (1985). Depression and attributional style: Are they related? Cognitive Therapy and Research, 9, 105-113.
64.Hiebert, J. & Lefevre, P. (1986). Conceptual and procedural knowledge in mathematics: An introductory analysis. Conceptual and Procedural Knowledge: The Case of Mathematics, 1-27.
65.Hsu, C. C. & Lee, Y. S. (2014). Exploring the critical factors influencing the quality of blog interfaces using the decision-making trial and evaluation laboratory (DEMATEL) method. Behaviour and Information Technology, 33 (2), 184-194.
66.Hsu, C. W. & Hu, A. H. (2009). Applying hazardous substance management to supplier selection using analytic network process. Journal of Cleaner Production, 17(2), 255-264.
67.Hsu, I. C., Shih, Y. J. & Pai, F. Y. (2020). Applying the modified Delphi method and DANP to determine the critical selection criteria for local middle and top management in multinational enterprises. Mathematics, 8(9), 1396-1416.
68.Hu, C. (2011). Computational thinking: What it might meanand what we might do about it. Proceedings of the 16th Annual Joint Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education, 223-227.
69.Hwang, G. J. (2010). Development of a project-based cooperative learning environment for computer programming courses. International Journal of Innovation and Learning, 8(3), 256-266.
70.International Data Corporation (2021). Leveraging Microsoft Learning Partners for Innovation and Impact, retrieved February 13 from https://query.prod.cms.rt.microsoft.com/cms/api/am/binary/RE4MEck.
71.James, H. B. & Robert, B. B. (1976). Mastery learning. Review of Research in Education, 4, 3-49.
72.Jane, L. (2001). The relationship between social problem solving and bullying behaviour among male and female adult prisoners. Aggresive Behavior, 27, 297-312.
73.Jeong, H., Hmelo-Silver, C. E. & Jo, K. (2019). Ten years of computer-supported collaborative learning: A meta-analysis of CSCL in STEM education during 2005-2014. Educational Research Review, 28, 100284-100300.
74.Jeong, J. S. & Gonzalez-Gomez, D. (2020). Adapting to PSTs’ pedagogical changes in sustainable mathematics education through flipped E-Learning: Ranking its criteria with MCDA/F-DEMATEL. Mathematics, 8(5), 858-902.
75.Jiang, H., Lin, Y., Luo, X. & Shao, T. (2022). Understanding the selection of cross-border import e-commerce platforms through the DANP and TOPSIS Techniques: A multi-study analysis. Journal of Global Information Technology Management, 25(1), 26-53.
76.Johnson, D. W. & Johnson, R. T. (1994). Learning Together and Alone: Cooperative, Competitive, and Individualistic Learning. Massachusetts: Allyn and Bacon.
77.Kagaari, J. R. K. (2007). Evaluation of the effects of vocational choice and practical training on students' employability. Journal of European Industrial Training, 31(6), 449-471.
78.Kalelioğlu, F. (2015). A new way of teaching programming skills to K-12 students: Code.org. Computers in Human Behavior, 52, 200-210.
79.Kalelioğlu, F. & 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.
80.Kamaike, M. (2001). Design elements in the passenger car development: The classification and the influence analysis in case of recreational vehicle. Japanese Society for the Science of Design, 48 (1), 29-38.
81.Katai, Z. (2015). The challenge of promoting algorithmic thinking of both sciences- and humanities-oriented learners. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 31(4), 287-299.
82.Kavianpour, A. & Kavianpour, S. (2016). The first course of programming: Python, Matlab, or C? Paper presented at 2016 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, 1-15.
83.Kazimoglu, C., Kiernan, M., Bacon, L. & MacKinnon, L. (2012). Learning programming at the computational thinking level via digital game-play. Procedia Computer Science, 9, 522-531.
84.Keller, J. M. (1979). Motivation and instructional design: A theoretical perspective. Journal of Instructional Development, 26-34.
85.Kert, S. B., Erkoç, M. F. & Yeni, S. (2020). The effect of robotics on six graders’ academic achievement, computational thinking skills and conceptual knowledge levels. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 38, 100714.
86.Kılıç, S., Gökoğlu, S. & Öztürk, M. (2020). A valid and reliable scale for developing programming-oriented computational thinking. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 59(2), 257-286.
87.Knuth, D. E. (1980). Algorithms in Modern Mathematics and Computer Science Stanford Department of Computer Science, Report No. STAN-CS-80-786.
88.Kock, N. (2014). Advanced mediating effects tests, multi-group analyses, and measurementmodel assessments in PLS-based SEM. International Journal of e-Collaboration, 10(1), 1-13.
89.Kong, S. C., Abelson, H. & Lai, M. (2019). Introduction to computational thinking education. Computational Thinking Education, 1, 1-10.
90.Korkmaz, Ö. (2019). Adapting computational thinking scale (CTS) for chinese high school students and their thinking scale skills level. Participatory Educational Research, 6(1), 10-26.
91.Korkmaz, Ö., Çakir, R. & Özden, M. Y. (2017). A validity and reliability study of the computational thinking scales (CTS). Computers in Human Behavior, 72, 558-569.
92.Kumar, A. & Dash, M. K. (2016). Using DEMATEL to construct influential network relation map of consumer decision-making in e-marketplace. International Journal of Business Information Systems, 21 (1), 48-72.
93.Kuo, S. Y. & Chen, S. C. (2015). Transportation policy making using MCDM model: The case of hualien. Transportation Planning Journal, 44(1), 25-44.
94.Lawson, M. J. (2003) Problem Solving. International Handbook of Educational Research in the Asia-Pacific Region. Springer International Handbooks of Education, 11, 511-524.
95.Li, M., Li, Y., Peng, Q., Wang, J. & Yu, C. (2021). Evaluating community question-answering websites using interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy DANP and TODIM methods. Applied Soft Computing, 99, 106918-106934.
96.Li, X. K., Wang, X. M. & Lei, L. (2019). The application of an ANP-Fuzzy comprehensive evaluation model to assess lean construction management performance. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 27(2), 356-384.
97.Li, Y., Schoenfeld, A. H., diSessa, A. A., Graesser, A. C., Benson, L. C., English, L. D. & Duschl, R. A. (2020). Computational thinking is more about thinking than computing. Journal for STEM Education Research, 3, 1-18.
98.Liao, Y. K. & Bright, G. (1991). Effects of computer-assisted instruction and computer programming on cognitive outcomes: A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 7(3), 251-268.
99.Lin, C. T., Chang, S. J. & Chen, Y. H. (2022). Cognitive learning assessment based on FAHP and RSM: A case study of introduction to network course. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 59(8), 1543-1578.
100.Lin, C., Lee, C., Wang, S. & Chen, Y. (2018). Using the DEMATEL method to explore the critical factors that influence visitors to purchase museum cultural products. Journal of Testing and Evaluation, 46(5), 2045-2055.
101.Lin, W. R, Wang, Y. H. & Hung, Y. M. (2020). Analyzing the factors influencing adoption intention of internet banking: Applying DEMATEL-ANP-SEM approach. PLOS ONE, 15(2), e0227852.
102.Lingoes, J. C. (1963). Multiple scalogram analysis: A set-theoretic model for analyzing dichotomous items. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 23(3), 501-524.
103.Linn, M. C. (1985). The cognitive consequences of programming instructionin classrooms. Educational Researcher, 14(5), 14-29.
104.Liu, Y., Tong, Y. & Yang, Y. (2018). The application of mind mapping into college computer programming teaching. Procedia Computer Science, 129, 66-70.
105.Lockwood, E. E., DeJarnette, A., Asay, A. & Thomas, M. (2016). Algorithmic thinking: an initial characterization of computational thinking in mathematics. North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, 1588-1595.
106.Loksa, D., Ko, A. J., Jernigan, W., Oleson, A., Mendez, C. J. & Burnett, M. M. (2016). Programming, problem solving, and self-awareness: Effects of explicit guidance. Proceedings of the 2016 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems, 1449-1461.
107.Lu, M. T., Hu, S. K., Huang, L. H. & Tzeng, G. H. (2015). Evaluating the implementation of business-to-business m-commerce by smes based on a new hybrid MADM model. Management Decision, 53 (2), 290-317.
108.Malik, S. I., Tawafak, R. M. & Alfarsi, G. (2021). A model for enhancing algorithmic thinking in programming education using PAAM. International Journal of Interactive Mobile Technologies, 15(9), 37-51.
109.Manna, Z., & Waldinger, R. (1981). Problematic features of programming languages: A situational-calculus approach. Acta Informatica, 16, 371-426.
110.Mannila, L., Dagiene, V., Demo, B., Grgurina, N., Mirolo, C., Rolandsson, L. & Settle, A. (2014). Computational thinking in K-9 education. Proceedings of the Working Group Reports of the 2014 on Innovation & Technology in Computer Science Education Conference, 1-29.
111.Mark, L. (2013). Learning Python: Powerful Object-Oriented Programming. Canada: O’ Reilly Media
112.Mathew, R., Malik, S. I. & Tawafak, R. M. (2019). Teaching problem solving skills using an educational game in a computer programming course. Informatics in Education, 18(2), 359-373.
113.Mavi, R. K., Kazemi, S., Najafabadi, A. F. & Mousaabadi, H. B. (2013). Identification and assessment of logistical factors to evaluate a green supplier using the fuzzy logic DEMATEL method. Polish Journal of Environmental Studies, 22 (2), 445-455.
114.Mayer, R. E. (1992). Thinking, Problem Solving, Cognition. New York: W H Freeman and Company.
115.Mayer, R. E. (1998). Cognitive, metacognitive, and motivational aspects of problem solving. Instructional Science, 26(1-2), 49-63.
116.Mayer, R. E. (2013). Teaching and Learning Computer Programming: Multiple Research Perspectives. Routledge.
117.McDonald, R. P. & Marsh, H. W. (1990). Choosing a multivariate model: Noncentrality and goodness of fit. Psychological Bulletin, 107(2), 247-255.
118.McVeigh-Murphy, A. (2020). The one about algorithmic thinking in computational thinking, retrieved February 13 from https://equip.learning.com/algorithmic-thinking-computational-thinking/.
119.Merrett, F. (2006). Reflections on the Hawthorne effect. Educational Psychology, 26(1), 143-146.
120.Microsoft Technology Associate, introduction to programming using Python, retrieved February 13 from http://certiport.gotop.com.tw/Certiport/MTA.aspx
121.Milne, I. & Rowe, G. (2002). Difficulties in learning and teaching programming—Views of students and tutors. Education and Information Technologies, 7, 55-66.
122.National Research Council. (1999). Being Fluent with Information Technology. Washington, DC: National AcademyPress.
123.National Research Council. (2011). Committee for the Workshops on Computational Thinking: Report of a Workshop on Pedagogical Aspects of Computational Thinking. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
124.Nawaz, R. R., Reza, S. & Sarwar, B. (2016). Prioritization of university choice dimensions using fuzzy DEMATEL. Journal of Applied and Emerging Sciences, 4(2), 169-177.
125.Néri, E. D. R., Woods, D. J. & Fonteles, M. M. F. (2018). Assessment of knowledge, skills and attitudes in the use of information technology to support hospital pharmacists clinical practice: Development and validation of a questionnaire. Journal of Young Pharmacists, 10(4), 439-443.
126.Olhede, S. C. & Wolfe, P. J. (2018). The growing ubiquity of algorithms in society: Implications, impacts and innovations. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A, 376, 20170364-20170379.
127.Oliphant, T. E. (2007). Python for scientific computing. Computing in Science & Engineering, 9(3), 10-20.
128.Oliver, R. (1990). The contextual nzodel: Arz alternative teaching nzodel for introductory computer programnzing. Paper presented at WCCE '90: Informatics at the Secondary Level Stream conference.
129.Oliver, R. (1993). Measuring hierarchical levels of programming knowledge. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 9(3), 299-312.
130.Olsen, F. (2000). Computer scientist says all students should learn to think ‘Algorithmically’, retried February 13 from https://www.chronicle.com/article/computer-scientist-says-all-students-should-learn-to-think-algorithmically-29778/.
131.Önüt, S., Kara, S. S. & Işik, E. (2009). Long term supplier selection using a combined fuzzy MCDM approach: A case study for a telecommunication company. Expert Systems with Applications, 36(2), 3887-3895.
132.Organisation for economic cooperation and development (2010). Learning in the 21st Century: Research, Innovation and Policy, retrieved February 13 from https://www.oecd.org/site/educeri21st/40554299.pdf.
133.Ou Yang, Y. P., Shieh, H. M. & Tzeng, G. H. (2012). A VIKOR technique based on DEMATEL and ANP for information security risk control assessment. Information Sciences, 232, 482-500.
134.Pelkola, T., Rasila, A. & Sangwin, C. (2018). Investigating bloom's learning for mastery in mathematics with online assessment. Informatics in Education, 17(2), 363-380.
135.Peng, Y., Zhang, Y. & Hu, M. (2021). An empirical study for common language features used in Python projects. 2021 IEEE International Conference on Software Analysis, Evolution and Reengineering, 24-35.
136.Petrovic, I. & Kankaras, M. (2020). A hybridized IT2FS-DEMATEL-AHP-TOPSIS multicriteria decision making approach: Case study of selection and evaluation of criteria for determination of air traffic control radar position. Decision Making: Applications in Management and Engineering, 3(1), 146-164.
137.Podsakoff, P. M. & Organ, D. W. (1986). Self-reports in organizational research: Problems and prospects. Journal of Management, 12(4), 531-544.
138.Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y. & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879-903.
139.Polanyi, M. (1958). Personal Knowledge: Towards a Post-Critical Philosophy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
140.Puchalska, B. (2004). Legal education: Professional, academic or vocation? European Journal of Legal Education, 1(2), 15-34.
141.Purser, R. E. & Pasmore, W. A. (1992). Organizing for learning. Research in Organizational Change and Development, 6, 37-114.
142.Rahmat, M., Shahrani, S., Latih, R., Yatim, N. F. M., Zainal, N. F. A. & Rahman, R. A. (2012). Major problems in basic programming that influence student performance. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 59, 287-296.
143.Rashed, M. G. & Ahsan, R. (2012). Python in computational science: Applications and possibilities. International Journal of Computer Applications, 46(20), 26-30.
144.Roberts, M. L. & Wortzel, L., H. (1979) New life-style determinants of women’s food shopping behavior. Journal of Marketing, 43(3), 28-39.
145.Robins, A., Rountree, J. & Rountree, N. (2003). Learning and teaching programming: A review and discussion. Computer Science Education, 13(2), 137-172.
146.Román-González, M., Pérez-González, J. C. & Jiménez-Fernández, C. (2017). Which cognitive abilities underlie computational thinking? Criterion validity of the computational thinking test. Computers in Human Behavior, 72, 678-691.
147.Roy, B., Misra, S. K., Gupta, P. & Goswami, A. (2012). An integrated DEMATEL and AHP approach for personnel estimation. International Journal of Computer Science and Information Technology & Security, 2 (6), 1206-1212.
148.Sanner, M. F. (1999). Python: A programming language for software integration and development. Journal of Molecular Graphics & Modelling, 171, 57-61.
149.Schollmeyer, M. (1996). Concept maps as a heuristic for science curriculum development: Toward improvement in process and product. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27(9), 378-382.
150.Science and technology committee. (2017). Algorithms in Decision-Making Inquiry. Science and Technology Committee, retried February 13 from https://www. parliament. uk/business/committees/committees-az/commons-select/science-and-technology-committee/inquiries/parliament-2015/inquiry9/.
151.Selby, C. C. (2015). Relationships: computational thinking, pedagogy of programming, and bloom’s taxonomy. WiPSCE '15: Proceedings of the Workshop in Primary and Secondary Computing Education, 80-87.
152.Srinath, K. R. (2017). Python–The fastest growing programming language. International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology, 4(12), 354-357.
153.Sumrit, D. & Anuntavoranich, P. (2013). Using DEMATEL method to analyze the causal relations on technological innovation capability evaluation factors in Thai technology-based firms. International Transaction Journal of Engineering, Management, & Applied Sciences & Technologies, 4(2), 81-103.
154.Sun, D., Ouyang, F., Li, Y. & Zhu, C. (2021). Comparing learners’ knowledge, behaviors, and attitudes between two instructional modes of computer programming in secondary education. International Journal of STEM Education, 8, 54.
155.Sun, L., Guo, Z. & Zhou, D. (2022). Developing K-12 students’ programming ability: A systematic literature review. Education and Information Technologies. 1-39.
156.Takeya, M. (1999). Structure Analysis Methods for Instruction. Hachioji, Tokyo: Takushoku University Press.
157.Tamura, H. & Akazawa, K. (2005). Structural modeling and systems analysis of uneasy factors for realizing safe, secure and reliable society. Journal of Telecommunications and Information Technology, 64-72.
158.The Economist. (2017). The World's most Valuable Resource is no Longer Oil, but Data. The Economist: New York, NY, USA.
159.Thornton, S. (1998). Kids Solve the Problem. Istanbul: Gendaş Publishing.
160.Tran, Y. (2018). Computational thinking equity in elementary classrooms: What third-grade students know and can do. Journal of Education Computing Research, 57(1), 3-31.
161.Triantafillidou, A. & Siomkos, G. (2018). The impact of facebook experience on consumers' behavioral brand engagement. Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing, 12(2), 164-192.
162.Tsai, M. J. & Tsai, C. C. (2003a). Student computer achievement, attitude and anxiety: The role of learning strategies. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 28(1), 47-61.
163.Tsai, M. J. & Tsai, C. C. (2003b). Information searching strategies in web-based science learning: The role of internet self-efficacy. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 40(1), 43-50.
164.Tsai, M. J. & Tsai, C. C. (2010). Junior high school students’ internet usage and self-efficacy: A re-examination of the gender gap. Computers & Education, 54(4), 1182-1192.
165.Tsai, M. J. (2002). Do male students often perform better than female students when learning computers? A study of Taiwanese eighth graders’ computer education through strategic and cooperative learning. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 26(1), 67-85.
166.Tsai, M. J. (2009a). The online information searching strategy inventory (OISSI): A quick version and a complete version. Computers & Education, 53(2), 473-483.
167.Tsai, M. J. (2009b). The model of strategic e-learning: Understanding and evaluating students’ e-learning from metacognitive perspectives. Educational Technology & Society, 12(1), 34-48.
168.Tsai, M. J., Hsu, C. Y. & Tsai, C. C. (2012). Investigation of high school students’ online science information searching performance: The role of implicit and explicit strategies. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 21(2), 246-254.
169.Tsai, M. J., Liang, J. C., Hou, H. T. & Tsai, C. C. (2012). University students’ online information searching strategies in different search contexts. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 28(5), 881-895.
170.Tsai, M. J., Liang, J. C., Hou, H. T. & Tsai, C. C. (2015). Males are not as active as females in online discussion: Gender differences in face-to-face and online discussion strategies. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 31(3), 263-277.
171.Tsai, P. H. & Lin, C. T. (2016). Creating a business strategy evaluation model for national museums based on the views of curators. Curator: The Museum Journal, 59 (3), 287-303.
172.Tsai, P. H., Lin, G. Y., Zheng, Y. L., Chen, Y. C., Chen, P. Z. & Su, Z. C. (2020). Exploring the effect of Starbucks' green marketing on consumers' purchase decisions from consumers’ perspective. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 56, 102162.
173.Tsai, W. H. & Chou, W. C. (2009). Selecting management systems for sustainable development in SMEs: A novel hybrid model based on DEMATEL, ANP, and ZOGP. Expert Systems with Applications, 36(2), 1444-1458.
174.Tu, J. J. & Johnson, J. R. (1990). Can computer programming improve problem-solving ability? ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 22(2), 30-33.
175.Tuzkaya, U. R. & Önüt, S. (2008). A fuzzy analytic network process based approach to transportation-mode selection between Turkey and Germany: A case study. Information Sciences, 178(15), 3133-3146.
176.Virding, R., Wikström, C. & Williams, M. (1996). Concurrent Programming in ERLANG. Prentice Hall International Ltd.
177.Volet, S. E. & Lund, C. P. (1994). Metacognitive instruction in introductory computer programming: A better explanatory construct for performance than traditional factors. Journal of Education Computing Research, 10(4), 297-328.
178.Weese, J. L. & Feldhausen, R. (2017). STEM outreach: Assessing computational thinking and problem solving. 2017 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition.
179.Weintrop, D., Beheshti, E., Horn, M., Orton, K., Jona, K., Trouille, L. & Wilensky, U. (2016). Defining computational thinking for mathematics and science classrooms. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 25(1), 127-147.
180.Wilkinson, K. (2006). Students’ computer literacy: Perception versus reality. Delta Pi Epsilon Journal, 48(2), 108-120.
181.William, L. J., Hartman, N. & Cavazotte, F. (2010). Method variance and marker variables: A review and comprehensive CFA marker technique. Organizational Research Methods, 13(3), 477-514.
182.Wing, J. M. (2006). Computational thinking. Communications of the ACM, 49(3), 33-35.
183.Wing, J. M. (2008). Computational thinking and thinking about computing. Philosophical Transactions: Series A, Mathematical, Physical, and Engineering Sciences, 366, 3717-3725.
184.Wolfslehner, B. & Vacik, H. (2008). Evaluating sustainable forest management strategies with the analytic network process in a pressure-state-response framework, Journal of Environmental Management, 88(1), 1-10.
185.Wong, G. K. W. & Cheung, H. Y. (2020). Exploring children’s perceptions of developing twenty-first century skills through computational thinking and programming. Interactive Learning Environments, 28(4), 438-413.
186.World Economic Forum (2016). The Future of Jobs Report 2016, retrieved February 13 from https://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_Future_of_Jobs.pdf.
187.World Economic Forum (2020). The Future of Jobs Report 2020, retrieved February 13 from https://www.weforum.org/reports/the-future-of-jobs-report-2020.
188.Wu, W. W. (2008). Choosing knowledge management strategies by using a combined ANP and DEMATEL approach. Expert Systems with Applications, 35(3), 828-835.
189.Wu, W. W. & Lee, Y. T. (2007). Selecting knowledge management strategies by using the analytic network process. Expert Systems with Applications, 32(3), 841-847.
190.Wu, W. Y., Shih, H. A. & Chan, H. C. (2009). The analytic network process for partner selection criteria in strategic alliances. Expert Systems with Applications, 36(3), 4646-4653.
191.Yadav, A., Hong, H. & Stephenson, C. (2016). Computational thinking for all: Pedagogical approaches to embedding 21st century problem solving in K-12 classrooms. TechTrends, 60, 565-568.
192.Yadav, A., Krist, C., Good, J. & Caeli, E. N. (2018). Computational thinking in elementary classrooms: Measuring teacher understanding of computational ideas for teaching science. Computer Science Education, 28(4), 371-400.
193.Yadav, A., Mayfield, C., Zhou, N., Hambrusch, S. & Korb, J. T. (2014). Computational thinking in elementary and secondary teacher education. ACM Transactions on Computing Education (TOCE), 14(1), 1-16.
194.Yağcı, M. (2019). A valid and reliable tool for examining computational thinking skills. Education and Information Technologies, 24, 929-951.
195.Yang, J. L. & Tzeng, G. H. (2011). An integrated MCDM technique combined with DEMATEL for a novel cluster-weighted with ANP method. Expert Systems with Applications, 38 (3), 1417-1424.

二、中文部分
1.王保進(2010)。校務評鑑對學生學習成效機制自我評鑑之作業方向。評鑑雙月刊，27，7-13。
2.卓樹樣、胡豐榮與許天維(2004)。在LFT計分下之評量理論。測驗統計簡訊，60，1-20。
3.林寶山(1980)。個別化教學之理論與實際：凱勒教學模式之研究。台北市：五南圖書出版股份有限公司。
4.林寶山(1998)。教學原理與技巧。台北：五南圖書出版股份有限公司。
5.胡豐榮(2001)。SS分析去的基本特性與數學性質介紹。測驗統計簡訊，43，17-32。
6.范玉順(2020)。大數據時代：企業雲端智慧化管理策略。台北市：崧燁文化事業有限公司。
7.國家教育研究院(2013)。校長培力成效探析：引導學模式，2022年2月13日，取自國家教育研究電子報網站：https://epaper.naer.edu.tw/edm.php?grp_no=2&edm_no=165&content_no=2923。
8.張吉成、饒達欽(2010)。技職教育職業證照化發展之反省。教育資料與研究雙月刊，93，15-30。
9.張芳全(2004)。教育、經濟、人口、健康對平均餘命指標因果關係探索。思與言：人文與社會科學期刊，42(2)，183-228。
10.張俊彥、翁玉華(2000)。我國高一學生的問題解決能力與其科學過程技能之相關性研究。科學教育學刊，8(1)，35-55。
11.張紹勳（2012）。模糊多準則評估法及統計。台北市：五南圖書出版股份有限公司。
12.教育部(2013)。人才培育白皮書，2022年2月13日，取自教育部綜合規劃司網站：https://join.gov.tw/policies/detail/f401fd94-6c89-4b01-9d38-b749ba47e5ff。
13.教育部(2019)。為夢想加值，大學的第一堂程式設計課-全國大學程式設計教學交流會，2022年2月13日，取自高等教育司網站：https://depart.moe.edu.tw/ed2200/News_Content.aspx?n=90774906111B0527&sms=F0EAFEB716DE7FFA&s=6B01102A15B52158。
14.教育部(2021)。2022年2月13日，運算思維推動計畫，取自資訊及科技教育司網站：https://compthinking.csie.ntnu.edu.tw/。
15.陳秀溶、王國華與蔡顯麞(2021)。以專家知識結構為基礎發展學習進程及評估－以國三「直線運動」單元為例。中等教育，72(2)，54-74。
16.彭台光、高月慈與林鉦棽(2006)。管理研究中的共同方法變異：問題本質、影響、測試和補救。管理學報，23(1)，77-98。
17.經濟部(2020)。電腦及資訊服務業營業額迭創歷史新高，今年上看4,000億元。產業經濟統計簡訊，360，1-4。
18.劉湘川(2003)。混合型語義結構分析之研究。測驗統計年刊，11，1-16。
19.謝浩明、李冠頡(2011)。應用新型多評準決策方法於生活通勤型自行車道系統評估改善之研究-以桃園縣為例。都市交通，26(1)，24-38。
20.嚴文位(2013)。以DEMATEL分析法探討消費者網路轉售前因之關鍵指標。全球管理與經濟，9(2)，1-19。

三、日文部分
1.竹谷 誠(1987)。評定尺度デ-タの意味分析法。日本行動計量學會誌，14(2)，10-17。
2.竹谷 誠（1991）。新‧テテ卜理論。東京：早稻田大學出版部。