ONLINE JOURNAL FOR TVET PRACTITIONERS VOL. 8 NO.

1 (2023) 75-88

© Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia Publisher’s Office

Online Journal for

OJ-TP TVET
Practitioners
http://publisher.uthm.edu.my/ojs/index.php/ojtp
e-ISSN : 2289-7410

A Systematic Review of the Challenges in Teaching

Programming for Primary Schools’ Students
Salmiah binti Salleh Hudin1
Faculty of Technical and Vocational Education,
1

Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia, Batu Pahat, 86400, MALAYSIA

*Corresponding Author

DOI: https://doi.org/10.30880/ojtp.2023.08.01.008
Received 8 February 2023; Accepted 24 March 2023; Available online 31 March 2023

Abstract: Programming and coding in primary education become solicitude globally today. Governments all over
the world agreed on the importance of education towards workforce empowerment in the future for the country's
development. As primary education is the foundation to produce future human resources, the government decided
to make curricular changes starting with young learners. The schooling system tries to adapt to the rapid changes
caused by The Industrial Revolution 4.0 by introducing programming education at an early stage. The increased
usage of automation, robots, and artificial intelligence in the industry nowadays makes people aware of the
importance of mastering programming and coding skill to survive in their future careers. Through the learning
process of programming and coding, young students start to be exposed to computational skill which involves
critical thinking and imagining creatively. Programming and coding education promote computational thinking for
young learners which includes problem-solving skills like deconstruction, abstraction, pattern recognition, and
algorithms. This paper examines research exploring the challenges faced by teachers, students, facilities, parents,
and the government in the implementation of programming education in primary schools. The exploration was
done through a systematic literature review of 20 articles published between the years 2018 and 2022. The
selection of 20 articles required is based on the PRISMA guidelines to select papers. The findings provide insight
into what has and has not been studied across a range of literature and the alignment with the broader context of
programming education at the primary level. From this study, it can be identified that teachers’ competency,
teachers’ digital pedagogy, students’ readiness, school facilities, parents’ support, and government educational
planning play a very important role to make programming education for young learners successful.

Keywords: Programming in primary school, computational thinking, competency, problem solving, coding,
programming challenges

1. Introduction
A few years back, programming and coding become the main concern in primary education as the world is moving
forward into Industrial Revolution 4.0. The Industrial Revolution 4.0 was established in 2016, beginning with
developed and high-tech industrial nations like Germany and the United States before spreading to Asian nations like
China, South Korea, Singapore, and Malaysia (Lai & Aziz, 2019). The arrival of the Industrial Revolution 4.0 has
significantly altered people’s working habit (Abdelmajied, 2022). Industry 4.0 has the potential to attract people into
smarter networks, which could result in more productive working. Digitization in the manufacturing environment offers
more flexible ways to deliver the right information to the right person at the right time. Current phenomena in the
industrial field that changing is that many companies start to reduce human labor for routine work and replace it with

*Corresponding author: [email protected] 75

2023 UTHM Publisher. All rights reserved.
publisher.uthm.edu.my/ojs/index.php/ojtp
Salleh Hudin., Online Journal for TVET Practitioners Vol.8 No.1 (2023) p.75-88

robots and automation systems. Consequently, the need for talent in the labor market is changing as a result of the
increased usage of automation, robots, and artificial intelligence; some old occupations are disappearing while others
are being developed (Predrag, 2021).
The rapid changing of economic and industrial growth in global level at the same time affecting the landscape of
education globally. In recent years, growing attention has been given to integrating programming education in
elementary school (Allsop, 2019). The Industrial Revolution 4.0 which involves rapid progress in the fields of robot
automation, artificial intelligence, big data, and numerous other new technological developments, is currently posing a
challenge to national education (Badrulhisham et al., 2019). We will not be able to face the Industrial Revolution 4.0
challenges if we still depend on the old education. Stick to the outdated education will only make Malaysia fall far
behind like third countries. Education should be in line with the development of the industry to provide a balance
between education and the industry workforce demand. Unbalanced supply and demand of the human workforce
because of skill needed mismatch can cause unemployment issue.
Education is the main pillar of workforce empowerment in the future for the development of a country. The
primary school students of today will be our future workforce, which will determine whether or not the country's long-
term growth is successful. According to Abdul Khalil et al. (2020), education is the most crucial tool in the
development of the human resources that will help the nation grow in the future. This statement is supported by Ahmad
(2018) that every country in the world views education as fundamental to a nation's growth. As digitalization emerge in
education, primary school students today can be better equipped for the workforce of the future by exposing them to the
technologies they will probably use at work early in their education. Therefore, programming and coding is
increasingly introduced at elementary schools around the world. According to Mannova (2022), The UK established
coding as part of the curriculum in 2014 and England became the first country in the world to mandate teaching coding
to children at primary and secondary schools. Computer programming became a compulsory topic in primary education
in countries such as Finland, England, Estonia, Sweden, New South Wales in Australia, Japan, United Kingdom,
Slovakia, Poland, France, and Croatia (Predrag, 2021).
Digital literacy like programming and coding is important to be taught at early stage of education. Through the
learning process of programming and coding, young learners start to be exposed to the computational skill which
involve critical thinking, imagine creatively, and problem-solving skill. According to Predrag (2021) computational
thinking is a skill that may be developed through the study of computer programming in basic school since it allows
pupils to practice problem-solving methods like deconstruction, abstraction, pattern recognition, and algorithms.
Students can learn the fundamental concepts of computation and information through programming, as well as how
digital systems operate and how to apply this knowledge to become digitally literate at early stage. Computation
thinking managed to enhance one’s capacity for higher order thinking skills and improve problem-solving skills (Ling
et al., 2018). The "4C" competency, which stands for "Critical thinking and problem solving, Communication,
Collaboration, and Creativity and invention," is one that young children can learn through programming and coding and
it may help them develop the computational thinking skill required to deal with challenges in the 21st century.
As programming and coding are important skills and competencies needed in the 21st century, robotics
programming has been introduced in the Malaysian education system (Muhamad Yusof et al., 2021). According to
Maszlee Malik (2019) in an excerpt from the Astro Awani newspaper, the Malaysian Ministry of Education (MoE) has
implemented coding-related learning for primary and secondary school students since 2016. MoE has introduced
coding to primary school students through the Standard Primary School Curriculum (KSSR) while for secondary
schools through the Standard Secondary School Curriculum (KSSM). The effort to introduce this coding has started in
stages where in 2016, it was introduced to Year 6 students through Information and Communication Technology
(TMK) subjects. Under KSSR Revision 2017, starting in 2020 Level 2 students (Year 4, Year 5 and Year 6) will learn
coding in the new subject of Design and Technology (RBT). However, is Malaysia ready for it?
According to the Ministry of Education (MOE), the number of students enrolling in Science, Technology,
Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) courses is declining every year. Programming education is one of the STEM
fields of study. Each year, there is an average reduction of about 6,000 students enrolling STEM (Muhamad Yusof et
al., 2021). This situation will probably make it more difficult for the nation's planning to compete in the digital
economy era in the upcoming era (Mohamad Marzuki et al., 2019). A report by the Ministry of Education in 2020
showed that only 47.18 percent of upper secondary level students across the country chose STEM fields of study. In
fact, the Ministry of Education aims for 60% of students to take STEM courses. Based on the report of “Malaysia
Education Blueprint 2013-2025”, Malaysia is required to make stronger the STEM education to become a fully
developed country that faces challenges and demands of a STEM-driven economy by 2025. While the role of STEM is
closely related to emerging new jobs and the rapidly growing digital industry, the shortage of talent in the field has
raised concerns.
The main focus in implementing these new curricular changes in Malaysian education are the level of readiness
among all the involved stakeholders which are the Ministry of Education, teachers, students, parents, and facilities
provided. Digitalization of education must be effectively regulated by all stakeholders, especially educational
policymakers, as it will create new challenges for both teachers and students. Ling et al. (2018) stated that the teaching

76
 Salleh Hudin., Online Journal for TVET Practitioners Vol.8 No.1 (2023) p.75-88

and learning of programming skills are still given less attention due to challenges, such as teachers’ lack of knowledge
and skill.
The purpose of this systematic literature review is to:
a) Identify who will face the challenges and difficulties in implementing programming education in
primary school.
b) Recognize what are the factors that contribute to the challenges of implementing programming in
primary school.
c) Understand the relationship between computational thinking skill and programming.

2. Methodology
Systematic Literature Review (SLR) approach was used in this study to collect all related publications and
documents that fit the pre-defined inclusion criteria to answer the specific research question. It uses unambiguous and
systematic procedures to minimize the occurrence of bias during searching, identification, appraisal, synthesis, analysis,
and summary of studies. A systematic approach plays an important role in various study circumstances. SLR can
provide a summary of the state of knowledge in any field needed. For this study, SLR approach was applied to locate
articles reporting research about programming in primary school. The articles were derived from few databases such as
Google Scholar, Science Direct, and Eric. In a systematic review, the use of several databases will produce accurate
results and retrieved more articles compared to using one database to summarize the results of various fields of related
research studies.
The keywords used were “Programming for elementary school”, “Programming and coding in primary school” and
“Programming and computational thinking”. While searching for the related articles, the limitation of the articles’
published year has been set up. Only articles that published on year 2018 to 2022 are included. The total number of
articles retrieved from all the databases is 8094. The search result shows the large number of items derived. However,
only 20 articles have been chosen for this article review paper. Therefore, all the articles that are not relevant to the
research questions and goals will be excluded. Table 1 show the distribution of the articles derived from 3 databases.

Table 1 - Total of article derived from each database

Keywords Google Science Eric
Scholar Direct
“Programming for elementary school” 65 87 2025
“Programming and coding in primary school” 111 73 4534
“Programming and computational thinking” 1140 54 5

The selection of 20 articles needed which related to this research study is based on the PRISMA (Preffered
Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis) guidelines to select papers by Moher et al., 2009; updated
2020. PRISMA Flowchart for the Systematic Literature Review for this study as shown in Figure 1.

Fig. 1 - PRISMA flowchart

77
Salleh Hudin., Online Journal for TVET Practitioners Vol.8 No.1 (2023) p.75-88

According to the PRISMA guideline to select papers, there are four steps to be accomplished before deciding the
final articles that will be review in the study area. The four steps are identification, screening, eligibility and inclusion.
For the first step which is identification step, the articles were retrieved from few databases involved Google Scholar,
Science Direct, and Eric using the keywords which has been set; “Programming for elementary school”, “Programming
in primary school” and “Programming and computational thinking”. All the keywords were decided to be used in order
to fulfil the aim of this study and to answer all the research questions. The timeline also has been set up. Only articles
from 2018 onwards will be included. To ensure that the source is as recent as possible, it is recommended that a
reference be no more than five years old.
From all the 3 databases used, the total articles gain were 8094 articles. It is a huge amount as we only aim for 20
articles to be reviewed. So that we move to the second step which is screening all the articles retrieved in step 1. The
screening process was done by looking at the tittle and abstract of the journal. The process was done manually in fast
way to make sure it not takes a long time to decide. At this second step, only 75 articles left after duplicates removed
and excluded unrelated studies. Next, the third step applied; the eligibility step. In this step, full-text articles assessed
for eligibility has been done. It takes few days to read through all the articles before deciding only 32 articles included.
The final step which is the included step is to reduce to bare bones. At the final step, only 20 articles left. The rest are
excluded because few of the articles retrieved was proceeding paper and pilot study.
After choosing the desired articles, the next step is to produce an article matrix. The purpose of making the matrix
is to get an overview of all identified studies. Through the matrix we can identify many important point from each
articles in a simple and compact form such as the study’s aim, the methods and the results of the study. This process
will take a quite long time as we need to read all the 20 articles in details and put all the necessary data in the matrix.
However, all the data will help us in our study about the programming in primary school. It will make easier for us in
the discussion step as we already understand the study area in depth. By completing the matrix, we can identify the
theme that related to our study area. From Table 2, we can see clearly which articles from 20 articles chosen are discuss
about the same theme or same interest area. The repetition of the issue discussed in the studies will guide us to decide
the issues and challenges to implement programming education in primary school level. The issues that can be
identified from 20 articles chosen are teachers’ competency in programming, students’ readiness, computational
thinking skill, parental concern and support, school facilities and government.
Through this SLR, we can fulfill the objectives of this study. First, we can identify that many stakeholders will
face challenges in the implementation of programming education in primary schools which includes teachers, students,
parents and the policy maker; Ministry of Education. Other than that, we also can meet the second objectives of this
study which are recognizing the factors that contribute to the challenges of implementing programming in primary
school. The factors are the competency in programming among the teachers, the level of students’ readiness to learn
programming in young age, to build the computational thinking skill among young child trough programming
education, parents’ anxiety towards programming education in primary school, school facilities that do not support
programming learning and government planning, financial support, teaching material support, proper training for
teachers. In addition, through this SLR study, we also can understand the relationship between computational thinking
skill and programming clearly.
This literature review revealed that relatively little research has been done on programming education at an early
age. The majority of current research efforts have primarily focused on the programming education in the contexts of
secondary education and higher education in Malaysia. Thus, this literature review included all the existed research on
programming education at an early age from all around the world. The results of all the studies about
programming education in primary schools from around the world will be used to associate the differences within
Malaysian context.

78
 Salleh Hudin., Online Journal for TVET Practitioners Vol.8 No.1 (2023) p.75-88

3. Findings and Discussion

Table 2 - Issues and challenges in programming education for primary school level
Issues and Challenges
Teachers’ Competency Students’ Computational Parents Facility Government
No First Author & Title of Article Country readiness thinking concern
Teachers’ Teachers’ Teachers’ Digital skill and
Knowledge Skill attitude Pedagogy support
1 Binaoui, A. (2022). Morocco √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √
The Effectiveness and Impact of
Teaching Coding through Scratch on
Moroccan Pupils’ Competencies.

2 Seda, A. (2022). Turkey √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √

Primary School Teachers’ and Students’
Views about Robotic Coding Course.

3 Cindy, J. G. (2021) South Africa √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √

Foundation Phase Teachers’ Experience
of Teaching the Subject, Coding, in
Selected Western Cape School.

4 Luisa, G. (2021) Germany √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √

Challenging but
Full of Opportunities: Teachers’
Perspectives on Programming in Primary
Schools.

5 Mukasheva, M. (2021). Kazakhstan √ √

Computational thinking assessment at
primary school in the context of learning
programming.

6 Muhamad Yusof, M. (2021). Malaysia √ √ √ √ √ √ √

Exploring Teachers’ Practices in
Teaching Robotics Programming in
Primary School.

7 Wang, J (2021). United State √ √ √ √ √

Use Hopscotch to Develop Positive of America

79
 Salleh Hudin., Online Journal for TVET Practitioners Vol.8 No.1 (2023) p.75-88

Attitudes Toward Programming for

Elementary School Students.

8 Predrag, O. (2021). Croatia √ √ √ √ √ √

Prospective Teachers’ Opinion on
Computer Programming in Primary
Education.

9 Kjällander, S. (2021). Sweden √ √ √ √ √ √ √

Elementary Students’ First Approach to
Computational Thinking and
Programming.

10 Ray, P. (2021). Finland √ √ √ √ √ √ √

Inspiring or Confusing - A Study of
Finnish 1-6 Teachers’ Relation to
Teaching Programming.

11 Monteiro, A.F. (2021). Portugal √ √ √ √ √ √ √

Coding as Literacy in Preschool: A Case
Study.

12 Silva, R. (2021). Portugal √ √ √ √ √ √

Fostering Computational Thinking
Skills: A Didactic Proposal for
Elementary School Grades

13 Tengler, K. (2020). Austria √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √

Programming In Primary Schools -
Challenges and Opportunities.

14 Margaret, L. (2020). Australia √ √ √ √ √ √

Teaching Coding and Computational
Thinking in Primary Classroom:
Perceptions of Australian Pre-service
Teacher.

15 Rosman, N. (2020) Malaysia √ √ √ √ √ √

Mastering Programming Concept

80
 Salleh Hudin., Online Journal for TVET Practitioners Vol.8 No.1 (2023) p.75-88

through Blended Learning: A Case Study

16 Serife, N. Y. (2020). Turkey √ √ √ √ √ √ √

Perceived Acceptance and Use of Scratch
Software for Teaching Programming: A
Scale Development Study.

17 Gashawa, A. (2019). Sweden √ √ √

Students Perceptions of Programming in
Primary School.

18 Agnello, M.F. (2019). Japan √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √

Building Human Infrastructure through
Programming and English Education in
Rural Japan

19 Mason, S. L. (2019). United √ √ √ √ √ √ √

Preparing elementary school teachers to States
teach computing, coding, and
computational thinking.

20 Yukiko, M. (2018). Japan √ √ √ √

An Investigation into Parents’ Concerns
about Programming Education in
Japanese Primary Schools.

81
Salleh Hudin., Online Journal for TVET Practitioners Vol.8 No.1 (2023) p.75-88

3.1 Teachers’ Competency in Teaching Programming

Omar et al. (2020) stated that the main purpose of competency is to enable someone to perform more tasks
effectively at their optimum level. In educational field, teachers who master the knowledge, skills, and attitudes of
subject-matter and designated teaching task could get the fact that they are fully-fledged the competency traits that able
to certify them as a teacher. Teachers’ competency has greatly emphases on three elements; knowledge, skills, and
attitudes. These three elements are interconnected between one after another. In addition, Mason and Rich (2019) stated
that teachers must comprehend the subject matter they are teaching, the technology they are employing, and the
pedagogy associated with the subject matter, technology, and students if they are to successfully use technology in the
classroom. Mason and Rich (2019) also specified that along with expanding their knowledge, teachers ought to enhance
their attitudes towards teaching robotics or coding as well as their sense of self-efficacy. From the finding of previous
studies, we decided to determine the teachers’ competency by 4 key areas which are teachers’ programming
knowledge, teachers’ skill in programming, teachers’ attitude towards programming, and teachers' proficiency in digital
pedagogy. From 20 chosen articles that have been reviewed, there are 17 articles discussed about the challenges faced
by teachers in their competency traits which consist of programming knowledge, programming skill, attitude towards
programming, and digital pedagogy. If we want to successfully adopt programming in our educational system, all these
four key areas must be prioritized because they are closely tied to one another. A programming teacher must possess all
4 competency traits well in order to implement effective programming class to the students.
The first challenges in teacher competency traits is the programming knowledge. For the knowledge trait, Luisa et
al. (2021) said that the biggest hindrance for teachers is considered to be cognitive issues, such as insufficient or
outdated topic knowledge. A competent teacher will always improve his knowledge as the world changes in order to
remain relevant in current education needs. Teachers who lack content knowledge of programming may experience
cognitive difficulties to teach their students during the class. According to Misfeldt et al. (2019), student achievement
will be impacted if the teachers are not well prepared to teach programming. To teach programming effectively,
teachers must be well prepared with the content knowledge of programming; for example, teacher must know the
programming language well, be able to distinguish the suitable programming tools properly, and so on. This statement
is also supported by Cindy and Aslam (2021) which stated that teachers must possess a deep understanding of coding
elements including functions, loops, and conditionals.
The second challenges faced by teacher in competency traits is the skills possess by teacher. Binaoui et al. (2022)
stated that the programming education is newly adopted and many teachers had no idea how to use it. The mastery of
programming skills is also crucial in implementing the effective programming teaching and learning session. Teaching
programming topics requires a strong foundation in technical skills like computer literacy among teachers. Muhamad
Yusof et al. (2021) pointed out that technical skills such as computer literacy are also very important in the teaching of
programming topics. A teacher cannot be a competent teacher if only possess theoretical knowledge. A good
programming teacher should possess both; theoretical knowledge and the hands-on skills. Kjällander et al. (2021) in
their study found that although teachers are responsible for teaching students to be digitally competent, teachers do not
feel they are sufficiently skilled in this area. Low Information & Communication Technology (ICT) skills can cause
sessions of programming to be disrupted and more time-consuming. To avoid this situation, teachers need to equip
themselves with ICT skills and have a good perception of ICT in teaching. Teachers have a key role as change agents in
education. Computer programming skills among teachers will be a catalyst to produce students who can contribute to
the development and advancement of digital technology and act as creators of new technology (Alias et al., 2020)
Next challenge in teacher competency traits is teachers’ attitude. The attitude and belief of the teacher towards
programming education are very important. Teachers must understand the significance of programming knowledge and
skills for students to be prepared to face the challenges of their working world in the future. When it comes to evolving
educational needs such as the introduction of programming education in primary school, teachers must be optimistic to
accept the new changes and try to adapt. However, teachers’ attitude and belief in computer science are interrelated
with skills and knowledge that are important in developing a competency. Omar et al. (2018) stated that teaching
without the knowledge of a specific area or subject and knowing what to prepare especially in pedagogical context will
demotivate the teacher even further. Students' enthusiasm for learning programming can be influenced by teachers'
motivation. A teacher who is inexperienced in programming lacks confidence and is unmotivated to teach. Students
will consequently lack motivation to learn as a result of the teacher's ambiguous explanations. Luisa et al. (2021)
mentioned that teacher should both address content knowledge and affective factors such as attitudes, motivation and
confidence in teaching programming.
Other than that, programming teachers also facing with digital pedagogy challenge. Digital pedagogy in teaching
programming is crucial to perform a good programming lesson for young learners. Muhammad Yusof et al. (2021)
stated that computer literacy among programming teachers is very important in implementing programming lesson. To
provide effective programming classes for young learners, teachers first must master digital pedagogical knowledge.
Without strong digital pedagogical skills in a programming class, teachers will face many challenges. Teachers might
not be aware of which didactic features and teaching methods should be used when teaching programming; for
example, how to master looking after each student and their programming issues. Younger learners frequently require a
lot of assistance, and it can be challenging to get to all of them. Teachers will suffer from the rush when assisting

82
 Salleh Hudin., Online Journal for TVET Practitioners Vol.8 No.1 (2023) p.75-88

students. Other than that, many challenges need to be faced by teachers if they lack of pedagogical knowledge to teach
programming. Monteiro et al. (2021) stated that the challenges included engaging younger children, developing spatial
awareness, and controlling children's anxiousness to engage in lesson.
In context of Malaysian education, programming education becomes part of the new curriculum in Kurikulum
Standard Sekolah Rendah (KSSR) through a new subject called Teknologi Maklumat dan Komunikasi (TMK) for
primary school beginning in 2016. This subject involved level 2 students, consisting students in year 4 until year 6.
This subject taught by ICT teachers. However, Muhamad Yusof et al. (2021) have mentioned that started in 2020 the
students learn programming through another subject namely Reka Bentuk dan Teknologi (RBT) after the TMK subject
was abolished under the KSSR Revision 2017. This change presented a significant barrier to teach programming due to
teachers’ programming knowledge is very limited. RBT subject was formerly known as Kemahiran Hidup (KH). The
RBT teachers have extensive training in each of these technical areas involving carpentry, gardening, sewing, and
entrepreneurship. The biggest obstacle to RBT teachers performing well in programming class because they are
suddenly required to teach programming, which is outside of their area of expertise. In this case, RBT teachers need
more exposure and workshop to strengthen their knowledge in programming. The absence of teachers’ training and
teaching competency in programming and coding at the same time will affect teachers’ attitudes and motivation toward
programming. Teachers might have negative attitudes and a lack of motivation because of their poor self-concept
toward programming. Mason and Rich (2019) insisted that a lack of knowledge in any of these areas; content,
technology, or pedagogy could be a knowledge barrier for teachers of coding, computing, or robotics. To gain the
competence and confidence to teach computing, elementary schools need effective pre-service and in-service training.

3.2 Students’ Readiness to Learn Programming

Another concern in this systematic literature review study area is the student’s readiness to learn programming in
early education. From 20 articles reviewed, there are 16 articles that discussed on the students’ readiness issue. The
challenges that occur among young learners are related to cognitive and metacognitive issues.
Cognitive issues are associated with a lack of digital literacy among young learners. Primary school students might
be cognitively overwhelmed and might have insufficient prior knowledge regarding digital literacy. Luisa et al. (2021)
in the study pointed out that the most frequent cognitive issues of a lack of digital literacy are younger students find it
challenging to grasp and implement many instructions in programming because they are often still learning
fundamental computer skills like how to use a mouse. Conversely, some programming procedures and concepts are too
abstract for younger students. The programming language and mediation language are two examples. Young learners
will face difficulty in understanding the abstract during programming lessons. Gary et al. (2017) stated that primary
schools have indicated the following major concerns, such as the lack of coding interest of the students. To make the
teaching and learning process easier, teachers and students must be well-versed in the specialized terminologies and
programming languages.
The next issue is the use of digital media is also linked to metacognitive challenges. Students might have problems
because of metacognitive issues such as being easily distracted. As we know, it is common that young learners cannot
stay focused to learn for a long time especially when they lack interest or are overexcited about new things introduced
to them. Programming block-based tools like scratch is similar to playing games like roblock and minecraft which they
are familiar with. This situation will make the students overexcited and distracted as they consider that they have ‘new
games’ to play with. As a result, they will neglect teachers’ explanation and instruction about the programming task
because they are too busy exploring ‘new games. Sometimes, young learners are eager to explore new knowledge
without noticing that they are off track. Luisa et al. (2021) stated that keeping children focused is a struggle of its own
because they are frequently side-tracked when given an engaging new toy to experiment with. The distraction that
occurs in this situation give a challenge to the teacher to achieve the objective of the lesson.
The students’ readiness challenges are not only happened in other countries. Programming teachers in Malaysia
also face with the same issue. Primary school students in Malaysia are not well prepared to learn programming because
most of them still learn the basic of computer literacy. As programming education is newly introduced into our
curriculum for level 2 students started in 2016, students seem like difficult to understand the programming language
well. Muhamad Yusof et al. (2021) in his study in Malaysian schools found that most young students find the
programming language difficult to understand. This difficulty faced by the students will make them unmotivated to
learn programming.

83
Salleh Hudin., Online Journal for TVET Practitioners Vol.8 No.1 (2023) p.75-88

3.3 Computational Skill

The relationship between programming and computational skill is another concern in this systematic literature
review exploration. From 20 articles reviewed, all 20 articles discussed the computational skill issue. It means that
computational thinking skill are closely related to the programming education. Computational thinking involves using
fundamental ideas from computer science to solve problems, design systems, and comprehend human behavior. Both
teachers and students must develop their computational skill to master programming education. Teachers and students
need to understand that coding is a language and that there are various coding languages in programming. For example,
students practice computational concepts like code, sequence, and loop as they multimodally create and transform
programming. Through programming activities, young children can practice fundamental skills including constructing
an algorithm, debugging, and testing. Chalmers (2018) pointed out that programming allows students to take part in
organized tasks of creating the code sequences required to program a robot, to solve a problem.
Cindy and Aslam (2021) stated that the purpose of programming was to help students improve their ability to think
sequentially and to give detailed instructions for solving issues through the use of game creation, instructors improved
students' grasp of coding basics including functions, loops, and variables. Programming is more than just coding. It
helps students to develop computational thinking which involve problem-solving like abstraction and decomposition.
As a result, students gain abstraction and generalization skills, decomposition skills by breaking down complex
problems into smaller, more manageable pieces, algorithmic thinking abilities through the structuring of a series of
instructions, and debugging abilities through the attempt to fix errors found in their proposed solutions.
This situation hinders the efforts to achieve learning objectives in RBT subjects in the Malaysian context.
However, Muhamad Yusof et al. (2021) in his research found that according to teachers, students’ skills, such as
computational thinking skills, are still low. This situation also was explained in a systematic literature review
conducted by Mohd Kusnan et al. (2020), which involved 19 studies on computational thinking in the Malaysian
context. The education department is working on organizing various courses, and seminars to help teachers improve
their skills in computational. In fact, studies to assess the competency of teachers before formulating modules to be
used in teacher training were carried out. In this programming lesson, teachers are not making students be a
programmer, but help the students to use programming and coding tools to solve the task given by using computational
thinking.

3.4 School Facilities to Support the Programming Education

In addition, this systematic literature review also noted that school facilities are also among the challenges in
implementing programming in primary education. From 20 articles that have been reviewed, there are 10 articles
discussed about the facilities issue for programming lessons in primary school. The lack of resources such as technical
equipment at primary schools was also raised as a challenge. Ineffective programming teaching and learning sessions
can also be impacted by limited access to facilities and equipment. Ray (2021) stated that inadequate equipment and
material at school and some pointed out the lack of a broader discussion regarding a more holistic perspective on the
implementation of programming in primary school.
According to Agnello (2019), many rural schools lack modern hardware and software, and administrators and
instructors have complained about feeling extremely challenged to keep up with the computer programming
curriculum. This situation may lead to inequality in education. Because of a lack of resources, teachers can teach
students with theory only. Luisa et al. (2021) in their study discovered that the majority of teachers claimed that the
absence of teaching resources such as robotic sets and pertinent modules led them to exclusively employ simulated or
virtual robot substitutes. The high cost of robotic sets makes it difficult for educators to supply for all kids. Therefore,
in certain schools, students must share the robots. To teach robotics programming, physical robots are preferable to
simulated and virtual robots because they produce more engaging and enjoyable real-world experiences. Physical
robots have a greater positive effect on students in this area. Luisa et al. (2021) also mentioned about the challenges
with school funding, particularly concerning resources' accessibility need to be overcome if we aim for a successful
programming education in primary school.
This challenge also faced by programming teacher in Malaysia. Muhamad Yusof et al. (2021) in his study found
that limited access to equipment and facilities is also an obstacle in pursuing effective programming lesson. The
majority of teachers stated the lack of teaching aids such as robotic sets and appropriate modules caused teachers to use
only simulated or virtual robot alternatives. Muhamad Yusof et al. (2021) also stated that the expensive price of robotic
sets creates an obstacle for teachers and schools to provide for all students. In addition, Ali et al. (2018) in their
research discovered that according to the majority of teachers, students showed high interest in learning programming
activities conducted by teachers. Teaching aids, supportive materials, and facilities are very important in implementing
programming education. Teachers are not able to teach programming appropriately without adequate resources.
Adequate resources used during programming lessons can attract young learners to learn and help them to understand
the content easily. The efficient teacher delivery has kept them interested in what they are studying. However, if there
are no supplementary teaching tools, such as robotics kits, some students believe that programming for robots is still
challenging.

84
 Salleh Hudin., Online Journal for TVET Practitioners Vol.8 No.1 (2023) p.75-88

3.5 Parents’ Support

The next issue that can be identified through this literature review exploration is parents’ concerns about
programming education in primary schools. Knowing parents' concerns about programming education is crucial to
introducing computer education to primary schools smoothly and appropriately. There are 4 articles from all 20 articles
that have been reviewed discussed this issue.
Angello et al. (2019) suggested that engaging parents in programming activities at public schools are a good action
to expose parents to programming education. As primary students are still young and cannot handle the equipment at
home on their own and need helps in completing programming task, they need parents’ support in learning
programming. Also, once parents have been exposed to the programming education, they will understand the
importance of programming education for their children in future job opportunities. This situation will lead the parents
to provide support in terms of programming equipment. Parents will try to prepare all the programming equipment and
tools needed by their children.
Parents play a crucial role in the primary education of their children, and their views toward education have a big
impact on the attitudes of the kids. Gary et al. (2017) stated that primary students may need to be more reliant on their
parents and self-knowledge in coding. Parent-child collaboration in programming learning is very good to be carried
out. Parents' misperceptions and anxieties around programming education may prevent them from becoming actively
involved in their children's programming education.
Parents' lack of understanding and awareness about programming education will make their children struggle.
Parents should understand clearly about the importance of programming education and try to support this curriculum
reform. Parents can support this programming education by providing learning equipment at home if they can afford it.
Parents also can support the programming education by helping their children with programming tools. Parents can
learn through YouTube and teach their children at home. Luisa et al. (2021) stated that if parents are not clear about the
aim of programming education, parents might have negative attitudes and there might be a lack of technical equipment
at home. Therefore, it is necessary to encourage parents to involve in programming education. Research by Yukiko
(2018) discovered that participation in a programming workshop raises parents' expectations and reduces their anxieties
about implementing programming education in elementary schools. In Malaysia, we can do the same activity like
Angello et al. (2019) done which is engaging parents in programming activities at public schools. We can organize a
day programming workshop with parents to expose them to the programming education in primary school.

3.6 Government / Policy Makers

Another issue that has been highlighted during the exploration of this literature review is the policy of the
government especially focusing on curriculum and time consumption. From 20 articles reviewed, there are 13 articles
pointed out this particular issue. Time constrain will be a hindrance to the teachers because of an overloaded curriculum
and programming is time-consuming. Gary et al. (2017) stated that time constraints for scheduling computer lessons
and the government's immaturity in designing a well-defined coding curriculum for young learners are obstacles for
teachers to deliver a successful programming session. Luisa et al. (2021) in their study found that time allocated in the
curriculum for kids to comprehend programming is a difficult task for everyone to accomplish in the given
timeframe. This situation also happened in Malaysia. There is limited time to learn programming. During 1 year of
learning RBT, there are 8 subtopics to be covered in RBT subject. Time allocation for programming in RBT is too
short. 8 sessions of 1 hour lesson for year 4, 12 sessions of 1 hour lesson for year 5 and 10 session of 1 hour lesson for
year 6.
Other than time constrain, policymakers also need to focus on supportive material and resources. For example, in
Malaysian education RBT textbook is the main reference for teaching and learning sessions. However, the content on
programming topics in the textbook can be considered as being too simple and too brief. As a result, various
supplemental resources are required to complete the lesson. Additionally, there are no included teaching
recommendations for educators. Due to the lack of necessary data, it is challenging for teachers to present
comprehensive learning content in this situation. Parties, such as the Curriculum Development Division and the
Ministry of Education Malaysia, could identify aspects that can be improved and create guidelines for teachers. At the
same time, teachers should also take the initiative to explore and learn more about programming to gain extra
knowledge.
Next, the government also needs to do a study on what types of programming tools that suitable for young learners.
The study by Serife et al. (2020) mentioned that the selection of programming tools should be based on factors such as
the target audience, content, and educational environment while considering the stated criteria. Block-based
programming tools such as Scratch, Mblock, Alisblock, code.org, thinkerCad circuits, blockly, alice, code game were
among suitable programming tools for young learners. All in all, for the programming to be implemented in the best
possible way, support structures would need to be put in place, time constraints need to be managed, and adequate
resources need to be provided by the ministry of education.

85
Salleh Hudin., Online Journal for TVET Practitioners Vol.8 No.1 (2023) p.75-88

4. Conclusion
In conclusion, we can recognize that there are similar challenges occurs in implementing programming education
in primary school level worldwide. As programming curriculum is newly implemented in primary school, it gives
difficulties and challenges to many stakeholders; teachers, students, parents, policy makers. Changes in the curriculum
always in line with issues for different stakeholders. Each stakeholder will face different difficulties. For teachers, they
having issues with their teaching competency and school facilities to adapt with curriculum reform. Students facing
difficulties in cognitive and metacognitive issues. Parents will face the anxiety because they are not clear with the
objective of programming education and are not familiar with it. While, the policy maker facing with the planning the
curriculum issue, training to the teacher issue, decision making on suitable programming tools for young learners, time
consuming for programming education in primary school and school allocation budget planning.
From this SLR, we can identify that most teachers around the world facing with similar challenges in
implementing programming education in the primary school level. The challenges faced by teachers that occur during
teaching programming to young learners are related to teacher’s competency traits; knowledge, skill, attitude and
digital pedagogy. Lack of any of these 4 competency traits will give bad effect to the students’ motivation and
performance. Marcin et al. (2022) stated that the study of programming presents difficulties for many students. It
should be taught by a competent teacher with knowledge of the subject and pedagogy. Teachers need to be well-
prepared their self with perceived preparedness for the new curricular reform. Ray et al. (2021) stated that perceived
preparedness refers to teachers' readiness before the curriculum reform. This preparation includes being familiar with
the new curriculum, predicting relevant teaching materials, working together with colleagues to prepare, receiving help
from school administration, and self-perceived preparation level. Sáez-López et al. (2020) stated that in order to be
well-prepared programming teachers, they need to improve their education. Continuous training and extensive
professional development involving technical skills and comprehension of appropriate pedagogies need to be provided
to RBT teachers (Muhamad Yusof et al., 2021).
The lack of facility provided by the school and government also give a big challenge to teachers in teaching
programming. Limited internet access, outdated computer set, absence of robotic programming set, no programming
module to refer and expensive programming equipment are examples of the difficulties face by primary school
teachers. To overcome the difficulties to implement programming education in primary school, more resources at the
school level must be provided including equipment, facilities, instructional aids, and modules. Muhamad Yusof et al.,
(2021) mentioned that more equipment, facilities, teaching aids, and modules must be provided at the school level to
overcome the challenges in implementing T&F of RBT subjects in Malaysia. Sahaat & Mohamad Nasri (2020) also
highlighting the need to create additional modules and tools as teaching aids to facilitate learning in the classroom.
Mason and Rich (2019) stated that there are many obstacles prevent primary teachers from teaching computer
science properly. Teachers might encounter institutional barriers in the form of unsupportive administrators or
legislators, physical barriers like a lack of computers or dependable internet access, and emotional barriers like
attitudes, dispositions, and beliefs that prevent the use of technology. According to Tengler et al. (2020), it is essential
to offer high-quality continuing education for teachers, as well as to offer technical infrastructure and free materials, in
order to enable them to address the challenges of computer science education in a meaningful way. To have a better
understanding of teachers' experiences, practices, and opinions, further research is required. This would help
educational planners and policy maker create a suitable programming curriculum for primary schools in Malaysia. Such
research should concentrate on teachers who teach coding in more diverse school situations. Other than that, Muhamad
Yusof et al., (2021) suggested that continuous efforts in forming close ties and cooperation between the school with
industry players and local universities must be continued for the sake of progress that could benefit students and
teachers.

Acknowledgement
Appreciation goes to all quarters who contributed directly and indirectly to make the publication of this article
possible.

References
Abdelmajied, F.Y. (2022). Industry 4.0 and Its Implications: Concept, Opportunities, and Future Directions. Supply
Chain - Recent Advances and New Perspectives in the Industry 4.0 Era. http://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.102520

Abdul Khalil, A., Othman, M.K. & Saidon, M.K. (2020), Memacu Pendidikan di Era Revolusi Industri 4.0:
Penerapan Nilai-nilai Islam dan Inovasi dalam Pengajaran di Institusi Pengajian Tinggi.
https://doi.org/10.17576/islamiyyat-2020-42IK-02

86
 Salleh Hudin., Online Journal for TVET Practitioners Vol.8 No.1 (2023) p.75-88

Agnello, M. F., Araki, N., and Domenach, F. (2019). Building Human Infrastructure through Programming and
English Education in Rural Japan. International Journal for Talent Development and Creativity.
https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1297223.pdf

Ahmad, A. (2018). Kepentingan Pendidikan Dalam Penbentukan Kualiti Hidup Sejahtera.

www.researchgate.net/publication/265201615

Allsop, Y. (2019). Assessing computational thinking process using a multiple evaluation approach. International
Journal of Child-Computer Interaction, 19, 30-55.

Alias, M. S., Dahrumi, M. Y., Wan Jusoh, W. Z., Zulkifli, Z., Mat Sarif, M. A., & Muda, M. A. (2020). Impak Positif
Bengkel Pengaturcaraan Komputer Melalui Aplikasi Google Meet Dalam Kalangan Guru Sains Komputer Negeri
Selangor. https://anyflip.com/bnkac/nwty

Ali, A., Zakaria, N., & Khamis, L. (2018). Persepsi Pelajar Dalam Kemahiran Psikomotor Pemasangan Kit Model
Kereta Menggunakan CD Interkatif. Online Journal for TVET Practitioners. Special Issue,
https://publisher.uthm.edu.my/ojs/index.php/oj-tp/article/view/4798

Badrulhisham, A., Mat Johar, M. H. & A.Rashid, T. (2019). Mendepani Cabaran Revolusi Industri 4.0 (IR4.0) Dalam
Konteks Mahasiswa:Analisis Menurut Perspektif Islam.
https://kuim.edu.my/journal/index.php/JILMI/article/download/620/504

Binaoui, A., Moubtassime, M., & Belfakir, L. (2022). The Effectiveness and Impact of Teaching Coding through
Scratch on Moroccan Pupils’ Competencies, International Journal of Modern Education and Computer Science
(IJMECS), 14(5), pp. 44-55, 2022. https://doi10.5815/ijmecs.2022.05.05

Chalmers, C. (2018). Robotics and Computational Thinking in Primary School. Int. J. Child-Computer Interact, 17,
93-100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcci.2018.06.005

Cindy, J. G. & Aslam, F. (2021). Foundation Phase Teachers’ Experience of Teaching the Subject, Coding, in
Selected Western Cape School. South African Journal of Education, 41(4). https://doi.org/10.15700/saje.v41n4a1959

Gashwa, A., Jalal, N., Lechen, Z. & Eva, N. (2019). Students Perceptions of Programming in Primary School.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/335292942

Kjällander, S., Mannila, L., Åkerfeldt, & Heintz, F. (2021). Elementary Students’ First Approach to Computational
Thinking and Programming. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11020080

Lai, W.S. & Aziz, N. (2019). Persepsi Pelajar Terhadap Kebolehpasaran Graduan dalam Era Revolusi Perindustrian
4.0. https://www.ukm.my/personalia/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/Artikel_2_Dr-Lai-Wei-Sieng_FEP.pdf

Ling, U. L., Saibin, T. C., Labadin, J., & Aziz, N. A. (2018). Preliminary investigation: Teachers perception on
computational thinking concepts. Journal of Telecommunication, Electronic and Computer Engineering, 9 (2 9), 23-29.

Luisa, G., Isabella, G., & Gordon, F. (2021). Challenging but Full of Opportunities: Teachers’ Perspectives on
Programming in Primary Schools. 21st Koli Calling International Conference on Computing Education Research (Koli
Calling ’21). https://doi.org/10.1145/3488042.3488048

Margaret, L. & Vinesh, C. (2020). Teaching Coding and Computational Thinking in Primary Classroom: Perceptions
of Australian Preservice Teacher. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41297-020-00117-1
Mannova, B. (2022). Teaching Coding in Schools. http://doi.org/10.21125/edulearn.2022.1399
Mason, S. L., & Rich, P. J. (2019). Preparing Elementary School Teachers to Teach Computing, Coding, and
Computational Thinking. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 19(4), 790-824.

Misfeldt, M., Szabo A. & Helenius, O. (2019). Surveying Teachers’ Conception of Programming as a Mathematics
Topic Following the Implementation of a New Mathematics Curriculum. http://www.mathematik.uni-
dortmund.de/~prediger/ERME/CERME11_Proceedings_2019.pdf

Monteiro, A. F., Miranda, P. M. & Osório, A. J. (2021). Coding as Literacy in Preschool: A Case Study. Educ. Sci. 11,
198. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11050198

87
Salleh Hudin., Online Journal for TVET Practitioners Vol.8 No.1 (2023) p.75-88

Mohamad Marzuki, A. H., Mhod Shukri, N., & Taha, H. (2019). Gaya pengajaran Grasha dalam kalangan pensyarah
sains di Kolej Pra-Universiti di Pulau Pinang. Jurnal Pendidikan Sains Dan Matematik Malaysia, 9(2), 16-24.
https://doi.org/10.37134/jpsmm.vol9.2.3.2019

Mohd Kusnan, R., Tarmuji, N. H., & Omar, M. K. (2020). Sorotan Literatur Bersistematik: Aktiviti Pemikiran
Komputasional dalam Pendidikan di Malaysia. Malaysian Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, 5(12), 112-122.
https://doi.org/10.47405/mjssh.v5i12.581

Muhamad Yusof, M., Ab Jalil, H. & Perumal, T. (2021). Exploring Teachers’ Practices in Teaching Robotics
Programming in Primary School. Asian Social Science; 17(11), https://doi.org/10.5539/ass.v17n11p122

Mukasheva, M. & Omirzakova, A. (2021). Computational Thinking Assessment at Primary School in the Context of
Learning Programming. World Journal on Educational Technology: Current Issues. 13(3), 336-353.
https://doi.org/10.18844/wjet.v13i3.5918

Omar, M. K., Zahar, F. N., & Mat Rashid, A. (2020). Knowledge, Skills and Attitudes as Predictors in Determining
Teacher’s Competency in Malaysian TVET Institutions. http://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2020.081612

Predrag, O. (2021). Prospective Teachers’ Opinion on Computer Programming in Primary Education.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/353212865

Ray, P., Kirsti, H., & Paula, K. (2021). Inspiring or Confusing - A Study of Finnish 1-6 Teachers’ Relation to Teaching
Programming. International Journal on Math, Science and Technology Education.
https://doi.org/10.31129/LUMAT.9.1.1355

Rosman, N. & Hamid, J. (2020). Mastering Programming Concept through Blended Learning: A Case Study.
https://doi.org/10.37134/jictie.vol7.1.6.2020

Sáez-López, J. M., Olmo-Muñoz, J., González-Calero, J. A., and Cózar- Gutiérrez, R. (2020). Exploring the Effect of
Training in Visual Block Programming for Pre-service Teachers. Multimodal Technologies and Interaction, 4(3),
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/344218709_Exploring_the_Effect_of_Training_in_Visual_Block_Programmi
ng_for_Preservice_Teachers

Sahaat, Z. & Mohamad Nasri, N. (2020). Cabaran Pelaksanaan Mata Pelajaran Reka Bentuk dan Teknologi Sekolah
Menengah. http://journalarticle.ukm.my/15253/1/38454-126974-1-PB.pdf

Serife, N. Y., Alev, A. C., & Tarik, K. (2020). Perceived Acceptance and Use of Scratch Software for Teaching
Programming: A Scale Development Study. International Journal of Computer Science Education in School, 4(1)
https://DOI:10.21585/ijcses.v4i1.59

Seda, A. & Yasar, C. (2022). Primary School Teachers’ and Students’ Views about Robotic Coding Course. African
Educational Research Journal, 10(2). https://10.30918/AERJ.102.22.018

Silva, R., Fonseca, B., Costa, C., and Martins, F. (2021). Fostering Computational Thinking Skills: A Didactic Proposal
for Elementary School Grades. Educ. Science,11, 518. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11090518

Tengler, K., B. Sabitzer, & O. Kastner-Hauler. (2020). Programming In Primary Schools -Challenges and
Opportunities. https://www.Researchgate.Net/Publication/346096621
Yukiko, M. (2018). An Investigation into Parents’ Concerns about Programming Education in Japanese Primary
Schools. 15th International Conference on Cognition and Exploratory Learning in Digital Age (CELDA 2018).
https://eric.ed.gov/?q=programming+in+primary+school&ft=on&id=ED600774

88