Finnish teachers as adopters of educational innovation: perceptions of programming as a new part of the curriculum

ABSTRACT

Background and context

In 2016, programming was introduced as part of the revised National Core Curriculum for Basic Education in Finland. Over five years after implementation there has not been substantial increase in teacher or student competencies in programming.

Objective

This study explored the perceptions, attitudes, and emotions of Finnish pre-primary, primary and secondary school teachers regarding programming being integrated into the national curriculum at the time when it was first introduced.

Method

The perceptions of Finnish teachers were surveyed via a questionnaire (N =943) administered at the end of a one-day in-service training. The study used a mixed-methods approach, where responses were examined through content analysis and part of the data was quantified for quantitative analyses.

Findings

Teachers perceive programming as a new part of the curriculum based on the advantageousness, complexity and compatibility of the innovation and various internal and external factors. Their attitudes towards the integration of programming into the curriculum, which range from negative to positive, relate to their emotions.

Implications

We propose that it is vital, when planning supportive measures, to take into account the holistic and affective nature of educational change and teachers’ perceptions, various factors, and their dependencies that influence the adoption process.

KEYWORDS:

• Programming
• curriculum reform
• teacher perceptions
• adoption of innovation
• educational innovation
• 21st-century competencies

Introduction

As societies rapidly become digitalised, schools experience pressure to review their curricula in line with the associated changes. Current international and national trends in curriculum development include the 21st-century movement (Binkley et al., 2012; Reimers & Chung, 2016) and the role of digital technology in education (Vahtivuori-Hänninen et al., 2014). Several initiatives have tackled these challenges (for e.g. see, Balanskat & Engelhardt, 2015; Freeman et al., 2016). At the European level, the development of digital competencies is seen as a precondition for successful digital transformation (Balanskat & Engelhardt, 2015); the European Union (EU) has launched grassroots-level initiatives, such as the EU Code Week, that seek to promote these goals and support the teaching of programming and the understanding of a digitalising society (Moreno-León & Robles, 2015). The European Commission has detailed the competencies needed in the changing teaching profession and has categorised them into six areas: professional engagement, digital resources, digital pedagogy, digital assessment, empowering learners and facilitating learners. Programming is included in the area aimed at facilitating students’ learning under the theme of digital content creation (European Commission, 2017). As a part of these trends and fundamental competencies, computing, in varying forms, has also been introduced into the national K–12 curricula in many countries (Heintz et al., 2016). Programming can be seen as a part of a wider variety of digital competencies or as playing a specific role in the curriculum. The role of programming skills in relation to other digital competencies and the emphasis placed on computing vary between different countries (Balanskat & Engelhardt, 2015).

In Finland, programming was introduced in the core curriculum in the fall of 2016 as a brand new element that was integrated into both the mathematics and crafts objectives and a set of transversal competencies. The transversal approach emphasises programming as a 21st-century competence in addition to subject-based learning, and it is present in the curriculum as a mandatory cross-curricular theme (Toikkanen & Leinonen, 2017). The transversal competencies that consider global future-oriented skill development are as follows: taking care of oneself and managing daily life; work life competence and entrepreneurship; participation involvement and building a sustainable future; thinking and learning to learn; cultural competence, interaction and expression; multiliteracy and digital competence (Lavonen, 2020). The curriculum objectives for programming are present from the first grade to the ninth grade and range from supporting students’ competencies in the basics of programming and familiarising them with programming environments to making simple programs and utilising programming for creating novel artefacts (Finnish National Board of Education [FNBE], 2014a, 2014b). These curriculum objectives are based on the development of critical and creative thinking and the ability to form real-life connections (Heintz et al., 2016; Toikkanen & Leinonen, 2017).

The terminology and topics in the curricula in Finland and other countries address computer science, computing, programming, computational thinking and digital literacy. The terminology used varies between contexts, but it is important to note that, overall, the emphasis on computing, informatics and programming covers a different area than that covered by ICT, which concentrates on computer literacy (Heintz et al., 2016). In this study, we use the concepts of programming and the teaching of programming, as these are the concepts that are present in the Finnish national core curriculum. The Finnish curriculum promotes an understanding of programming as a concept that is broader than merely coding or programming: it is a part of transversal competencies across disciplines, subject areas and grade levels. Thus, it is recognised that the act of teaching programming includes the development of computational thinking and is linked to other digital and pedagogical competence-building. Toikkanen and Leinonen (2017, p. 241) discuss the concepts used in the curriculum and conclude, “Computational thinking is seen as a goal and programming or coding as a means to reach that goal”.

In this study, we view the 2016 reform of the Finnish national core curriculum (Finnish National Board of Education [FNBE], 2014a, 2014b), particularly the introduction of programming as an educational innovation, and consider teachers as adopters of this innovation. We study teachers’ perceptions of this reform at the time when the curriculum was first introduced (2015–2016). This study is unique in surveying a large population of Finnish teachers. Furthermore, this study adds value to the discussion on factors affecting the adoption of teaching programming with consideration of the current alarming situation in Finland, with there not being a substantial increase in teacher or student competencies in programming over five years into curriculum implementation.

Curriculum reform as an educational innovation

In the following section, theories on innovation are discussed in relation to the educational context and curriculum reform. Rogers' (2003) theory on the diffusion of innovation provides an opportunity to define and examine the characteristics of innovations as well as the process through which innovations are diffused. Innovation is defined by Rogers (2003) as an object, idea or practice that seems new to an individual or group – here, to pre-primary, primary and secondary school teachers. According to Serdyukov (2017), innovations in the educational context can present themselves as e.g. a new pedagogical theory, teaching method, tool or institutional structure. To qualify as an educational innovation, it must induce significant change in teaching and learning. Nicholls (2018) notes that innovation in the educational context can be seen as a qualitative, intentional improvement that demands change in the culture of schools. Educational innovations can target one or more levels of education: curriculum, institution and administration, teaching and learning and teacher education (Serdyukov, 2017).

Rogers (2003) depicts the adoption of an innovation through a five-stage innovation-decision process. This process involves an individual or other decision-making unit moving from the initial acquirement of the knowledge of an innovation to the formation of an attitude towards the same, to the adoption or rejection of a decision and, finally, to the implementation and confirmation and said innovation. In this process, the uncertainty associated with the perceived newness of the innovation is reduced by obtaining information and then forming a favourable or unfavourable attitude towards the innovation. The characteristics of the innovation (Nielsen, 1993; Rogers, 2003), the participation of stakeholders and the communication channels used (Rogers, 2003) influence the adoption of an innovation. Rogers categorises five perceived characteristics of innovation: relative advantage, compatibility, complexity, trialability and observability. The claim is that the greater the advantage, compatibility, trialability and observability of the innovation, and the lesser its complexity, the faster the rate of its adoption will be. The relative advantage of an innovation depicts its advantageousness compared to an old system that it is attempting to replace. Compatibility refers to the consistency of the innovation with regard to the adopters’ values, needs and previous experiences, while complexity refers to its usability and understandability. Further, trialability refers to the opportunity to try out the innovation before its actual implementation. Last, observability refers to the visibility of the results of the innovation.

Fullan’s (2015) theory connects innovation to the educational context and also discusses qualities of innovations similar to Rogers (2003) and refers to these as the characteristics of change. Teacher advocacy and the possibility of participating in the adoption and development of an innovation increases stakeholders’ commitment to the continued use of the same (Fullan, 2015). Information about the innovation and its adoption spreads from user to user through personal contacts and various other mediums. In the 21st century, information is increasingly disseminated through the web; however, Rogers (2003) notes that, in certain situations, personal contact may be more efficient in altering individuals’ attitudes and decisions.

Fullan (2015) analysed the adoption of innovations, particularly in the school setting and states that both external and local factors influence how innovations are adopted. External factors include municipality- and national-level issues, such as curriculum guidelines, while local factors include school-level aspects, such as teachers’ and principals’ previous experiences and attitudes, the collaboration practices employed at schools, teachers’ beliefs, teacher and parent competencies and the resources available, such as time. Funding challenges, the availability of technological and pedagogical support and a lack of time can especially hinder the adoption of an innovation (Fullan, 2015, Nicholls, 2018). Additionally, the adoption of educational technology innovations is impacted by the access to technology (Fixsen et al., 2005; Norris et al., 2003) and the teachers experience and competence in the pedagogical use of technology (Israel et al., 2015). Moreover, Serdyukov (2017) emphasises the importance of an atmosphere that supports continuous learning and notes that the adoption and re-invention of innovations require creative and critical thinking on all levels of the education system.

Attitudes and emotions as a part of the adoption process of educational innovations

Attitudes and emotions play a role in teachers’ commitment to change and have been previously studied in relation to school reform (Hargreaves, 2014; Lasky, 2005). Educational innovation requires teachers to give up familiar practices in which they have high levels of competence and adopt those in which they feel less competent, which leads to them experiencing feelings of insecurity. Innovations also necessitate changes in teachers’ attitudes when the traditional ways of teaching and the roles and relationships between teachers and their pupils are altered (Nicholls, 2018; Serdyukov, 2017). Teachers’ attitudes towards educational innovations are also entangled with their emotions and beliefs. The relationship between attitudes, emotions and beliefs is complex and interdependent.

Attitudes are defined as positive or negative perceptions that are constructed based on beliefs and experiences and are indicative of one’s intent to exhibit a particular behaviour (Ajzen, 2005). In turn, emotions can be viewed as contextual, momentary and non-static affective responses to behaviours or events (Jones & Youngs, 2012) and can also be classified in the fundamental and dichotomous positive–negative model (Chen, 2016). Mandated reform agendas can include normative beliefs that are incompatible with the teacher’s own beliefs, thus leading to negative emotions and self-preservation (Day, 2011). Imposed change has, however, also been found to cause self-renewal in teachers (Oplatka, 2005).

When researching the introduction of programming as an educational innovation, it is relevant to consider research on affect related to technology. These can include computer anxiety, technology attitude and self-efficacy (Yu et al., 2012). These aspects have been found to be major predictors of one’s attitude towards using computer-supported education (Celik & Yesilyurt, 2013). In a subject specific point of view, individuals’ attitudes can be looked through individuals describing their relationship with a topic that is taught, such as mathematics (Hannula et al., 2016).

Affect related to the adoption of technological innovations can also be explored using the technology acceptance model (TAM). In this model, the variables of perceived usefulness and ease of use influence individuals’ attitude towards and intention to use a technology system. The attitudes towards using a technology can be looked at as the expression of positive or negative feelings when involved in an activity (Davis, 1989). The perceived usefulness in the TAM model corresponds to Rogers’s (2003) advantageousness and compatibility characteristics. Further, the ease of use in the TAM corresponds to Rogers’s (2003) complexity characteristic.

Adopting programming in Finnish schools

The Finnish school system entails the devolution of decision-making power and highlights a culture of trust. University-level teacher education aims to prepare reflective teachers who possess critical thinking and argumentation skills (Lavonen, 2020). In Finland, the teacher is seen as an autonomous professional who functions as the main decision-maker in the classroom and in their professional development. The teacher plans their own teaching based on the curriculum, adapts it to suit their students and, ultimately, makes decisions regarding the teaching methods and materials to be employed.

The introduction of programming as new cross-curricular content in a mandatory, top-down manner, and with only a few guidelines to support its implementation (Leinonen & Toikkanen, 2017), led to the creation of new requirements and related attitudes and skills for teachers (Mannila et al., 2018). The broad core challenge in this context is the need for teachers to start teaching 21st-century competencies to their students while simultaneously trying to acquire those 21st-century competencies that will enable them to do so (Korhonen & Lavonen, 2017). Teachers are in the process of evaluating the reform and simultaneously developing their digital competencies. Thus, Finnish teachers ultimately have autonomy with regard to deciding whether to include elements of programming in their teaching (Heintz et al., 2016), i.e. either adopt or reject the innovation (Rogers, 2003).

Efforts are being made to support the implementation of the new curriculum by organising various local and national development projects and providing up-to-date in-service education and professional development programs for teachers (for e.g. see, Fagerlund, 2021; Toikkanen & Leinonen, 2017). A recent national study by Tanhua-Piiroinen et al. (2020) reports that 50% of the studied basic education teachers had received in-service training in programming, and 25–45% of them had received training in other digital competencies. The study found a significant correlation between the received in-service training and the measured digital skills of the teachers. Moreover, there was a negative correlation between their self-expressed need for in-service training and their digital competencies (Tanhua-Piiroinen et al., 2020).

However, the same study showed that, over five years after the implementation of the new curriculum, there has not been a substantial increase in Finnish teachers’ programming competencies. On the one hand, it is worth noting that two-thirds of the studied teachers that participated in a digital skills test failed to obtain any points in the programming tasks. On the other hand, 16% of the teachers achieved a perfect score on said tasks. Overall, there has been no increase in programming skills among teachers between 2017 and 2019. There remains a demand for in-service training in digital competencies, which includes programming.

Tanhua-Piiroinen et al. (2020) also studied students and reported an alarming result: overall, 89% of 15 year old students did not receive any points in basic programming tasks. In addition, in a study that surveyed 11 to 13 year old students in Helsinki, the capital of Finland, students evaluated themselves as having good basic digital technology skills; but non-linear pedagogical practices involving the creative use of technology, such as 3D modelling, making animations and working with robotics, all of which require computational thinking, were found to be lacking (Korhonen et al., 2020).

In summary, it seems that only a small proportion of teachers and students have managed to acquire basic programming skills. The teacher interview data from the study of Tanhua-Piiroinen et al. (2020) confirm that programming is not yet established in school practices. Professional development in programming is still needed among teachers, and it has been reported to benefit them the most when it is directly connected to their teaching and is completed during work hours (Tanhua-Piiroinen et al., 2020). In addition, Fagerlund et al. (2020) stated that there is still ambivalence among teachers with respect to grasping what to teach, learn and assess in relation to programming (Fagerlund et al., 2020).

Research goals

There is little research on teachers’ abilities to teach programming, concrete classroom activities, pedagogical implementation and students’ learning when taught programming in Finland. Additionally, there is no studies examining how Finnish teachers perceive programming in the educational context. In this study, we examine the specific moment when programming was introduced into the curriculum and the adoption process began.

The aim of this article is to depict and discuss Finnish teachers’ perceptions regarding programming as a new part of the curriculum within the framework of educational change and at a time when the curriculum had only recently been introduced to the teachers.

The research questions are as follows:

1. What kind of perceptions do teachers have about

   1. programming as a new content of curriculum?

   2. the factors that affect the adoption of teaching programming?

2. What kind of attitudes and emotions do teachers have towards programming as a new part of the national curriculum?

Methods

Context and participants

The Innokas Network, which is a nationwide Finnish school development network, has worked to initiate educational reform for the teaching and learning of 21st-century competencies, which include programming. Innokas works extensively with practicing teachers and coordinates research and development from the University of Helsinki. The network arranged nationwide one-day professional in-service training in programming for teachers by introducing the background of programming as a part of the national curriculum, examining curriculum content from a teaching programming perspective and organising four hands-on workshops during the training day. The trainings were held in the fall of 2015 and 2016 for a total of 1,500 teachers. They were organised in 14 cities and involved participants from 164 municipalities, thus representing all regions of Finland quite evenly.

The training day started with an introductory lecture on the topic by presenting the curriculum connections of programming. The lecture included orienting participatory tasks about programming without tools and teaching examples were shown. After this, teachers were able to choose two of four hands-on workshops to attend. The workshops were led by Innokas Network trainer teachers and tutor students. The themes for the workshops were: the basics of programming, programming with robotics, programming with games and programming in mathematics. The training day concluded with a lecture guiding teachers in how to share their learning in their own schools.

At the end of the training day, teachers were asked to fill out a questionnaire that forms the basis of this study. The questionnaire was devised by the researchers and, excluding the background questions (see, Table 1), consisted of open-ended questions regarding the introduction of programming into the curriculum. These followed the theories of Rogers (2003) and Fullan (2015): the elements that influence the adoption of teaching programming and the teacher’s views regarding the introduction of this new content to the curriculum. The questions were as follows: What are your thoughts on programming being included in the curriculum? What are the possibilities and challenges associated with teaching programming?

Table 1. Summary of participants (N = 943).

Background variable	Groups	N	%
Gender	Female	627	66.5
	Male	310	32.9
	Missing	6	0.6
Grade level	K–2	139	14.7
	3–6	471	49.9
	7–9	157	16.6
	K–9	156	16.5
	Other	20	2.1
Region	Metropolitan area^a	198	21.0
	Southern Finland	226	24.0
	Western Finland	204	21.6
	Eastern Finland	158	16.8
	Northern Finland	150	15.9
	Missing	7	0.7
Experience in teaching programming	None	266	28.2
	A few times	542	57.5
	Once a month	57	6.0
	At least once a week	78	8.3

^aMetropolitan area – capital of Finland, Helsinki, and its surrounding municipalities, Espoo, Vantaa and Kauniainen

The data consist of 943 teachers’ written answers to the open-ended questions. Two-thirds (66.5%) of the participants were female, and one-third (32.9%) were male (Table 1). Half of the participants were class teachers for Grade 3–6; there were also teachers who teach kindergarteners and students up to Grade 2 (K-2), subject teachers who teach students in Grade 7–9, and those who teach all grade levels from kindergarten to Grade 9 (K-9). Such teachers include subject teachers and special education teachers. The teachers were also asked about their previous experience with teaching programming, and more than half stated that they had taught it a few times (57.5%). Many had no experience at all (28.2%), while others had more regular experience (14.3%).

Mixed-methods approach

The data used in the present study consisted of qualitative data that comprised the answers to the open-ended questions in the questionnaire. This study used a mixed-methods approach, employing both qualitative and quantitative data analyses. The convergent parallel design, in which qualitative and quantitative analyses are used in parallel, was chosen to examine teachers’ perceptions towards programming from different perspectives to construct a more profound understanding of the studied phenomena (Creswell, 2014).

The analysis process consisted of examining the teachers’ open-ended written answers through content analysis, in which the qualitative data were categorised and coded into appropriate themes (Saldaña, 2015). The content analysis approach was chosen because it enables a condensed description of phenomena as well as a systematic analysis (Elo & Kyngäs, 2008; Tuomi & Sarajärvi, 2009). Both inductive and deductive approaches were employed depending on the research question, as explained in the following section. To improve the reliability of our analysis, the first, third and fourth authors repeatedly read through the data during multiple investigative cycles. The analytic categories were refined multiple times and retested in relation to the data excerpts.

To answer the first research question the data were analysed and coded on two levels. First, the data were approached in a theory-driven, deductive manner, and the categories concerning teachers´ perceptions of programming as new content of curriculum were coded by applying Rogers’s (2003) theory of the diffusion of innovations (research question 1a) and the categories regarding teachers´ perception of factors affecting the adoption of teaching programming by applying Fullan’s (2015) theory of educational change (research question 1b). A second level of coding was conducted in both sub-questions in a data-driven, inductive manner by examining and combining the (theory-based) categories and, subsequently, renaming certain categories to describe the data more accurately.

To answer the second research question, i.e. to examine teachers’ attitudes and emotions towards programming being introduced into the curriculum, the content analyses were conducted in a data-driven, inductive manner. Although the data were originally qualitative, the attitude categories were coded as exclusive in order to quantify the data to carry out further quantitative analyses. The IBM SPSS Statistics version 25 software was used to perform the statistical analyses. The relations among the background variables (i.e. gender, grade level, region and experience in teaching programming) and the categorisation of teachers’ attitudes towards programming as a new part of the curriculum were examined using the chi-square test of independence (McHugh, 2013). The group differences were examined using the Bonferroni correction. Finally, the statistical significance was set at p < 0.05.

Results

Perceptions regarding programming being integrated into the curriculum

When asked about their perceptions regarding programming being integrated into the curriculum, the teachers’ answers included descriptions of the associated benefits and challenges. In the analysis, the answers were found to represent three of the five characteristics of innovation from Rogers’s (2003) theory. The answers were classified into the following main categories: advantages, complexity and compatibility (Table 2). Each main category included two to three subcategories. The teachers’ responses could also include multiple points of view (i.e. overlapping categories)

Table 2. Characteristics of innovation.

Category	Subcategory	Quote	Mentions (n)
Advantages			462
	Competence	I’m a little scared, because my own skills are not up to date. I’ve just let my programming competences get buried. Now I will just refresh my own skills and bravely try it (programming) in some form in math class.		343
	Motivation	Programming seems really interesting and at least I myself, am excited. I believe that children, too, will be excited through this and practice their thinking skills in a versatile way.		119
Complexity			372
	Teaching content	I am excited to start teaching programming as long as I get to know what and how it is reasonably taught to different grades.		221
	Tools & software	It is just fine if the resources and teacher education can keep up. Schools should have enough tools that work.		83
	Allocation	I’m a little scared of how it will be integrated into teaching, so that is doesn’t remain a secluded entity on the shoulders of a couple of teachers.		68
Compatibility			129
	Needs	A necessary skill that you learn the best when you start early through play and slowly adding to the skills.		73
	Previous experiences	The same things have been taught before but now they are thought of and structured in a new way. In the future the way of thinking that is related to coding will become increasingly important. Technology should be taught in a versatile way.		35
	Personal values	In my opinion, developing logical thinking skills in school is always a good idea! I see programming as a bridge that unites many subjects that teachers and students have to walk together.		21
Total			963

Almost half (43%) of all the surveyed teachers wrote about the advantages offered by adding programming to the new curriculum. These were primarily perceived from their own perspective, as teachers reflected on their own relationship with the content. The most mentioned aspect of the advantages was competence related to the intent of teaching programming. 13.7% of the teachers who mentioned competence issues were eager to develop their own professional competence, and 13.4% also reflected on their colleagues’ presumed competence, or lack thereof, in teaching programming and mentioned the need to support teachers with more training. Teachers viewed programming as something they could implement in various subjects. It was considered to challenge teachers to look at their own teaching in a new way, for example, by re-evaluating how they taught their own subject and crossed subject-matter borders.

I’m eagerly awaiting and seeing this as an opportunity to develop and renew myself as a teacher, and to learn new skills. (Teacher 826, grade level 7–9)

Teachers considered the advantages of programming also from the students’ competence perspective. Programming was seen as an important skill in society, and the teachers stated that it was necessary for schools to equip students with relevant and useful skills. Moreover, over a fifth of teachers who mentioned competence issues (22.7%) stated that programming would help students develop other important skills, such as logical thinking. The students’ participation was seen as an advantage when they were able to teach each other.

The motivational aspects of programming were also seen as an advantage. Teachers reported that their own interest in and motivation for programming worked as a means for creating new teaching possibilities. They also noted that the motivational aspect of programming made school subjects interesting for students. They occasionally mentioned boys and those who might not traditionally “fit in” in the school system and that such students might find programming especially interesting, which could create opportunities to enhance their capability and facilitate their success.

It is exciting and enables subject border crossing practice. My interest was immediately awakened (Teacher 197, grade level K-9)

At first it was a strange thing, but when I orientated myself, I figured out that this connects well with mathematics, mother tongue, arts and so on. And I believe that students will like this, for once something interesting for the boys to do. (Teacher 785, grade level K-9)

Since programming is new to the Finnish core curriculum, it is not surprising that over one third of all the surveyed teachers (34.3%) discussed the complexity of this new addition to the curriculum. It was mainly expressed as programming being a new and challenging phenomenon for teachers since they lacked skills and experience with regard to teaching it. A major aspect related to the complexity of the prospect of teaching programming was the plans for its implementation in schools: teachers were unable to determine what they should teach, using what equipment and software, in which lessons or subjects programming would be integrated and how much time they should allocate to it. This lack of awareness made the prospect of teaching programming complex and challenging, even terrifying, for certain teachers. However, teachers also had a contrary view: they approached it positively, stating that they would start with simple exercises and learn it little by little together with their students.

Thoughts regarding teaching content considered how programming is unknown or hard to the teachers (46.2%). A few teachers who mentioned teaching content (6.3%) expressed contrarily that they found programming to be nothing new and familiar to them, something that they had already done even if they did not call it programming. For these teachers this curriculum change would not affect their teaching and they would keep doing what they had been doing so far. 22.6% of teachers who wrote about the teaching content aspect of programming felt that the training had given them relevant knowledge and certainty about the new teaching content. While 39.8% of teachers’ responses regarding content were pessimistic and concerned about their competence and sufficient time to learn the new content. Teachers wished for good quality, clear materials and guidelines on what should be taught at each grade level.

The topic is big and no resources have been given. The lesson hours for mathematics have been reduced. I wish for an easy program to follow. Where do I begin, how do I progress and where do we end up? The whole new curriculum includes so many new things that one feels anxious. (Teacher 813, grade level 3-6)

Cautiously interested, but I would also want more specific content. After all, it doesn’t say in the mathematics curriculum to just teach mathematics and leave it to the teacher’s responsibility to decide what contents and what goals are chosen. (Teacher 357, grade level K-2)

Teachers felt that tools and software were lacking and that there are no resources to acquire them. Existing tools did not function properly, or they were outdated, teachers did not know how to use them and there were problems with the network quality. There were however also contrary views of having enough tools and e.g. programmable robotics kits but lacked training for their adoption

Teachers were unsure about how to allocate programming into their timetables especially among subject teachers in secondary school. There were questions about under which subject it would be taught, were it would fit in the schedule and where would the time for this be found. Teachers had concerns that this would fall on the shoulders of the few excited teachers.

The compatibility of programming as a new part of the curriculum was discussed by 12.5% of all surveyed teachers in relation to their needs, personal values, and previous experiences. They often had primarily positive views regarding programming being introduced in schools and curricula. Teachers said that they looked forward to it and that it was a good change. They also considered programming as a current and relevant part of today’s world that should be taught in an age-appropriate manner to students of all ages. This need was primarily discussed from the point of view of students to be able to program or understand programming in relation to their future.

Teaching programming as part of future skills is a necessary and great ‘newcomer’ to schools. I am awaiting excitedly and believe that I found new ways to motivate the child and support their growth toward a society where they will perhaps eventually work in. (Teacher 869, grade level 3–6)

There were, however, also questions about the importance of programming, including statements that teaching programming seemed unnecessary and irrelevant. In addition, there were occasional comments in which teachers thought programming had received too much attention in the media and that this had led to unnecessary pressure and emphasis on the phenomenon. Teachers considered their previous experiences in their answers and realised during the training day that they had actually been conducting programming activities in classes without being aware of it. Teachers stated that they were familiar with programming and had already gained teaching experience with the same in the previous curriculum.

The integration of programming into the curriculum had personal value for teachers as they described how it relates to them individually. Teachers found programming to be important and interesting, even as part of common knowledge. In contrast, there were also statements from teachers depicting how they did not understand why it would be important to have programming in school and did not find it necessary from the perspective of their own values.

Perceptions regarding the factors that affect the adoption of teaching programming

In addition to the characteristics of innovation, the teachers’ answers included thoughts regarding which factors would affect the adoption of teaching programming in accordance with the curriculum. Their answers were categorised into internal and external factors by adapting Fullan’s (2015) theory. The internal factors were coded into six subfactors: participation, in-service training, tools, time, the school’s operational culture and available materials. The external factors were coded into three subfactors: digitalised society, core curriculum and 21st-century skills (Table 3).

Table 3. Internal and external factors.

Category	Subcategory	Quote	Mentions (n)
Internal factors			527
	Participation	I’m a bit scared of how it will integrate into teaching so that it doesn’t remain an isolated topic taught by only a few teachers.		185
	In-service training	Interesting. Now we just need easy-access training available for everyone.		138
	Tools	I am excited, but the excitement ends when the principal announces that there is no money for tools.		84
	Time	The topic is of great interest to me. I believe it is the same for students. I wonder – will there be enough time for all the new things in the curriculum? And also the time for myself to adopt new things?		57
	School’s operational culture	There are still problems with regard to the tools and software and the internal operational culture at school. They have to first change, and the whole school commit and plan a strategy for teaching programming. The municipality needs to provide a clear budget for purchases, so that all schools have equal opportunities to implement high-quality programming teaching.		43
	Materials	It is a good thing, but hopefully, for instance, the lower secondary school teachers will receive clear materials or a clearly outlined list of topics that has to be gone through.		20
External factors			98
	Digitalized society	I think it is a good thing because technology is developing at a pace that the current teaching will leave students behind in work life. The downside is that is adds to the teacher’s workload and raises the demand level.		41
	Core curriculum	The topic is surely important from the point of view of society. As a teacher, I experience inadequacy with the lack of training, as the new curriculum is already being implemented.		35
	21^st century competencies	Coding is a fairly necessary skill nowadays, and the youth become employed in industries where it is needed, so it is good that it is being taught from a young age.		22
Total			625

Internal factors

An important issue was that 19.6% of all surveyed teachers mentioned participation in the adoption of teaching programming. Teachers examined whether they felt included in the change process. Most statements concerning participation (37.8%) indicated that the teachers felt that they were not offered enough training, resources, or information. 14.6% of teachers who discussed participation expressed fear that some of their colleagues would refuse to begin teaching programming and that this resistance to change would be apparent. This would lead to a situation in which teaching programming would become the responsibility of only a few teachers. There were also teachers who outright refused to start teaching programming, stating that it was unnecessary or too difficult and that, because they had not received the required training, they would not attempt to teach it.

I myself am interested and am taking the matter forward. It does, however, raise wonderment and even resistance among teachers. (Teacher 675, grade level, K–9)

At first it was a little frightening. In my case after the training I know I will manage well. I am concerned about other teachers’ attitudes. They don’t even want to try, because they supposedly don’t know how to use machines. (Teacher 853, grade level 3–6)

The equality of teaching programming was considered not only from the teachers’ point of view but also from that of the students. The varying economic statuses of schools and municipalities were seen to create inequality, and teachers expressed concern that not all students would be provided equal opportunities to learn programming. Inequality among students was thus seen to be caused by either the schools’ resources (e.g. tools for all) or the possible quality of teaching, which depends on the teachers’ competence and eagerness to teach programming.

Another commonly considered internal factor associated with teaching programming was in-service training (14.6%): the teachers felt that they themselves (or, at least, their colleagues) needed to be capable of teaching programming. They stated that all teachers should be trained, even those who resisted it.

Scary. 90% of teachers have no clue about what programming is and how it connects to school and different subjects. There should be a lot more training and especially mandatory training since people will not participate in anything outside working hours. (Teacher 890, grade level other, grade level K-9)

Those teachers who had already participated in training recognised that it was helpful and enhanced their capability to teach programming. 35.5% of teachers who mentioned in-service training felt that there was a lack of training and that it was difficult to arrange to receive training, as it involved, for instance, challenges related to finding substitute teachers or obtaining permissions.

The lack of or multitude of tools of programming were found to be challenging in starting to teach programming (8.9%). Teachers were mainly worried about the small amount or lack of proper hardware and software; but some of teachers who mentioned tools (2.4%) stated that there were too many kinds of hardware and software, which made it difficult for them to know where to start. A lack of time was also considered an issue for teachers from various perspectives (6.0%): a lack of time to study and teach programming, to plan their lessons and to fit them into their class schedules.

A small number of all the surveyed teachers (4.6%) expressed concern regarding schools’ internal operational cultures. The need for school-level changes, commitments and strategies for teaching programming was identified. These needs were also evident at the municipality level with regard to providing a clear budget for purchases and equal opportunities for schools to implement high-quality programming teaching. The teachers stated that knowledge-sharing was important and that they wished to have collegial pedagogical support; this would enable them to not feel abandoned, and their anxiety related to teaching programming, which stems from inadequate competence, would be relieved.

The allocation of responsibility. How to share best practices so that not everyone will have to ‘re-invent the wheel’. Sharing competence, but how? (Teacher 223, grade level other, 3–9)

Good that it will a part of teaching. There are still problems related to equipment and internal school culture. They have to be changed first and the whole school has to commit and plan a strategy for programming. The city has to provide a clear budget for tool purchases, so that all schools have the same opportunities to implement high quality teaching in programming. (Teacher 639, grade level 3–6)

A fraction of all the surveyed teachers (2.1%) worried about the materials with which they would first have to acquaint themselves to teach programming and feel more confident about the same. They wondered from where they would acquire proper study materials. There were contrary views about materials with on one hand, a need to find better, more clear and structured materials and on the other hand views that found that there were already plenty of good materials available.

External factors

The teachers considered competence related to programming in current and future societies, which are becoming rapidly digitalised (4.3% of all surveyed teachers mentioned a digitalized society). Programming is seen as a relevant yet commonplace competence in current society; therefore, it was important to include it in schools as well. As the national core curriculum is the framework that guides and compels teachers in designing their teaching, it is not surprising that teachers referred to it when expressing their thoughts regarding teaching programming (3.7% of all surveyed teachers). Mostly, the addition of programming to the core curriculum had been perceived positively. It was also stated that programming was already present and being taught at schools and that the new core curriculum just emphasised it further. Teachers also worried about the resources required for teaching programming because of all the other changes that the new core curriculum had implemented. The teachers also viewed programming as a part of 21st-century competencies (2.3% of all surveyed teachers). They considered the introduction of programming into the core curriculum a part of an effort to meet 21st-century demands. Most of the participating teachers tended to agree with and welcome this trend.

Attitudes and emotions towards programming as the new part of the curriculum

The teachers’ responses included a range of attitudes and emotions towards programming as a new part of the curriculum. Their attitudes ranged from positive to negative, and a variety of emotions were expressed.

Attitudes towards programming

Teachers’ responses are presented in six categories, which represent their attitudes towards programming as a new part of the curriculum. The distribution of teachers’ attitudes (n, %) is presented in Table 4. Having a negative attitude towards programming as a part of the curriculum entailed that the teacher did not find the curriculum change relevant and their view towards the phenomenon was negative and even pessimistic. A conditionally negative attitude depicted that the teacher had certain practical concerns about the change (e.g. about the associated materials and competencies). A neutral attitude implied that the teacher did not express a positive or negative attitude and remained impartial in the discussion. Change from negative to positive attitude denotes teachers’ responses in which an initially negative attitude, prior to receiving the in-service training, developed into a positive attitude after receiving the relevant information and tools during the training. A conditionally positive attitude described teacher attitudes that involved positive curiosity but included negative hesitation and insecurities regarding, for example, competence and time. The positive attitude category denoted views of enthusiasm and excitement for teaching a new and important skill.

Table 4. Categories of teachers’ attitudes towards programming as a new part of the curriculum.

Category	Description	Quote	n	%
Negative attitude	The teacher presents a negative or even pessimistic attitude and does not find the change important or relevant.	Unlikely to change anything	39	4.2
Conditionally negative	The teacher expresses concern for the change on a practical level.	A little insecure about my own competence and about the materials available	86	9.3
Neutral	The teacher has a neutral outlook towards the change.	Doesn’t raise any special thoughts	91	9.9
Change from negative to more positive	The teacher explains that they previously had a negative attitude, but it has changed now to a more positive one.	I was terrified before, but the training gave me tools.	92	10.0
Conditionally positive	The teacher expresses mixed feelings and mostly sees the change positively but is worried about something related to it.	Interesting. I am wondering a bit if my competence and time are enough.	256	27.7
Positive attitude	The teacher shows enthusiasm and considers programming important.	Interesting, exciting, a great way to learning thinking skills	359	38.9

Most teachers expressed either only positive or conditionally positive attitudes towards programming, and almost 10% of the teachers reported having changed their attitudes towards the idea of teaching programming after the in-service training day or after obtaining more information. Similarly, approximately 10% of the teachers held neutral attitudes towards programming, less than 10% had conditionally negative attitudes, and 4.1% had only negative attitudes.

The aforementioned attitude categories were coded to transform the data into a numerical format that enables quantitative analyses. The chi-square test of independence showed a statistical significance (χ²(5) = 26.44, p < 0.001) between gender and teachers’ attitudes towards programming as a new part of the curriculum. The post-hoc tests (the Bonferroni correction) showed that more female teachers (n = 78) reported a change in their attitude, from negative to more positive, towards programming at the end of the training day than male teachers (n = 12). The chi-square test also indicated a statistically significant difference between teachers’ attitudes towards programming based on what grade level they were currently teaching (χ²(20) = 37.497, p < 0.05). However, after Bonferroni correction, the differences between grade levels and the teachers’ attitudes were not significant. The teachers’ experience with teaching programming appeared to be unrelated to their attitude towards programming (χ²(15) = 20.951, p > 0.05). The test showed no statistical significance between geographical region and teachers’ attitude towards programming.

Emotions in relation to attitudes

Almost half the respondents (48.5%) expressed certain emotions towards programming as a new part of the curriculum. These ranged from fear to enthusiasm. The emotions were coded in an inductive, data-driven manner, and the codes were labelled according to the teachers’ written answers. In Table 5, the most commonly mentioned emotions that the teachers expressed are cross-tabulated with their attitudes towards programming. Many of the teachers mentioned feeling multiple emotions at once. They used many different words to describe similar emotions, and, thus, many of the expressions of emotions were combined in the analysis to form six main emotion categories: anxiety, confusion, insecurity, worry, curiosity and elation.

Table 5. Teachers’ emotions in relation to their attitudes towards programming as a new part of the curriculum (number of mentions).

	Attitude
	Negative	Conditionally negative	Neutral	Change from negative to more positive	Conditionally positive	Positive	Total
Emotion
Anxiety	15	14		45	28	2	104
Confusion	5	6	1	9	27		48
Insecurity		8		2	4		14
Worry		3		4	6		13
Curiosity			3	14	82	108	207
Elation				17	45	88	150
Total							536

Anxiety received 104 mentions in the form of “fear”, “panic”, “nervousness” and “being horrified”. Anxiety, in its different expressions, was mentioned mostly in relation to the teacher’s lack of competence and skills with regard to being able to teach programming. It was also connected to concerns related to time. The teachers were concerned about how to accommodate the teaching of programming into the school timetable and about having enough time to train themselves to teaching it. Many teachers said that they felt confused (48 mentions) or experienced uncertainty in relation to teaching programming. Such emotions were expressed in relation to the ability to teach programming. The teachers felt confused as to how, how much, using which hardware or software, during which lessons and with what competence they would implement this change. Some teachers also mentioned feeling insecure (14 mentions) due to their lack of competence. Worry (13 mentions) was mainly expressed in relation to the teachers’ differing competence levels in teaching programming. The most mentioned emotion with regard to teaching programming was curiosity (207 mentions). The teachers stated that they felt curiosity and interest towards programming and that they were looking forward to learning more about it. Some were already familiar with programming and were personally interested in it. The teachers were also looking forward to seeing how the teaching of programming would be implemented in practice. In addition to feeling curious and interested in the prospect of teaching programming, many teachers also expressed feeling elation (150 mentions) towards it.

In addition to the most mentioned emotions presented in the table, a few teachers also mentioned feeling the following emotions towards the prospect of teaching programming: relief (five mentions), tranquillity (four mentions), inadequacy (three mentions), frustration (three mentions), hopelessness (two mentions), hopefulness (two mentions) and loneliness (one mention).

Individual teachers expressed several emotions within their responses. Some teachers who had negative or conditionally negative attitudes towards programming also expressed feelings of anxiety. They described being afraid of starting to teach programming because they had no competence or experience in this regard. Certain teachers with negative attitudes also expressed confusion regarding how to implement the same. Moreover, some teachers with conditionally negative attitudes also expressed insecurity due to a lack of skills in teaching programming.

The teachers who expressed a change in their attitudes mentioned mostly feeling anxiety towards adopting programming into their pedagogical practice. Many teachers explained that they had previously felt anxious, but the knowledge and experience gained during the training had helped them reduce their anxiety and fear. A few teachers whose attitude had changed also described experiencing feelings of confusion, insecurity and worry; however, feelings of interest and elation were more common. Furthermore, teachers with conditionally positive attitudes reported feeling anxiety and confusion, but they were mostly curious about the prospect of teaching programming and felt elation towards the same. The teachers with positive attitudes expressed feeling intrigued and elated.

Discussion

The purpose of the present study was to examine teachers’ perceptions regarding programming as a new part of the national curriculum within a sample of 943 teachers from various regions of Finland. The study took place, at the specific moment when programming was introduced into the curriculum and the adoption process began. Among the participating teachers, 14% had experience in teaching programming, with the rest having little or almost no experience with the same. This study provides knowledge about teachers’ willingness to be a part of reform processes and to be involved in changing schools’ operational cultures. The results yield new knowledge regarding the factors, attitudes and emotions that influence the process of introducing programming to the curriculum and educational reform in the Finnish context.

By relying largely on the theories of the diffusion of innovations (Rogers, 2003) and educational change (Fullan, 2015), our first research question enabled the identification of the teachers’ perceptions regarding programming as a new component of the curriculum and regarding the factors that affect the adoption of teaching programming. The teachers’ relationship with the new content is multifaceted: they consider their own, their colleagues and their students’ relation to programming (Berglund & Lister, 2010). The research results for the first question are illustrated as characteristics and internal and external factors related to the educational innovation. The characteristics of the new curricular content described the teachers’ thoughts regarding its advantages, complexity and compatibility. The introduction of programming into the curriculum was seen as advantageous because it challenged and motivated teachers and students to learn new skills that are currently needed and that will also be important in the future. These skills were also seen to reflect the digital environment and lead to the development of teaching. The teaching of programming was also viewed as complex, as the teachers reported experiencing insecurity and a lack of competence with regard to the related content, tools and programs. They lack support in making curricular decisions, and there is a need to provide them with adequate tools, such as rubrics, for making equitable decisions when teaching new content (Coenraad et al., 2020). From the perspective of the characteristic of compatibility, teachers’ personal and societal needs, values and previous experience were evident. The issue of the media coverage of the phenomenon was also raised. Most teachers felt that the introduction of programming to the curriculum was meaningful and an important part of today’s schooling, while some thought that a lot of noise was made about a small issue.

The internal and external factors that impact the prospect of teaching programming were in line with the factors discussed in Fullan’s (2015) theory of educational change and other research regarding educational innovations (e.g. Fixsen et al., 2005; Israel et al., 2015; Norris et al., 2003). The most prominent internal factors were participation and in-service training. The teachers felt that the demand to teach programming was placed upon them without adequate information, support or training. These deficits were linked in the teachers’ answers to the whole teacher community and a concern that the top-down mandatory reform, without a sufficient possibility for participation and support, drove some teachers’ resistance, which could lead to the teaching of programming becoming the responsibility of only a few enthusiastic teachers. The broad need for in-service training was also raised in relation to the above concerns validating previous studies that highlighted the need for more in-service training opportunities for teachers (for e.g. see, Mannila et al., 2018; Toikkanen & Leinonen, 2017). The teachers expressed the need for training to be made available to all teachers and for schools’ operational culture to change towards that of competence development and sharing during the school day. The teachers were also concerned about inequality arising from the scarcity of tools, materials and programs in Finnish schools. Of the external factors, the curriculum, the digitalisation of society and the need for 21st-century competencies were discussed.

The results related to the second research question further highlighted the role of attitudes in reforming school (Hargreaves, 2014; Lasky, 2005). Most of the teachers held a positive or conditionally positive attitude towards programming (66.6%), 9.9% had a neutral attitude, and 13.5% had a negative or conditionally negative attitude. A small proportion (10%) of teachers’ attitudes changed during the training day, and an increase in the relevant knowledge led to a positive attitude. Female teachers showed more attitude change toward the positive. Previous experience in teaching programming, grade levels or geographical regions was not found to have an effect on teachers’ attitudes.

Further, the second research question studied the emotions linked to teachers’ attitudes towards teaching programming supporting previous research which indicates that emotions influence educational change (Hargreaves, 2014; Lasky, 2005). The affective nature of teaching has long been recognised, and there has been an increased interest in studying emotions in school (Hargreaves, 1998; Oplatka, 2007). The teachers indeed expressed ample affect when reporting their thoughts on teaching programming. Their expressions of emotions ranged from great elation to anxiety. A certain level of anxiety is present in all change processes (Fullan, 2015), and professionals in all fields have faced situations of uncertainty, instability, uniqueness and value conflict (Schön, 1983). However, the results of this study, presents a noteworthy number of wide-ranging affective mentions regarding the curriculum change. The emotions of elation and curiosity were found to have the most significant connections with positive attitudes, while anxiety and confusion were found to be connected to both negative and positive emotions. The whole emotional range was connected to a change from negative to more positive emotions.

It is crucial to note that the main type of thinking during the persuasion (Rogers, 2003) or initiation stage (Fullan, 2015) of the adoption process of an educational innovation is affective. The individual is said to consider the advantages and disadvantages of the innovation with respect to their own situation (Rogers, 2003). This was clear in the teachers’ thinking, as they expressed personal feelings toward being introduced to programming with words such as “terror”, “despair”, “excitement” and “curiosity”. Our data further highlighted the complexity of the relationship between attitudes and emotions, where attitude can be viewed as either a sister concept of emotion or a parent concept that includes emotions, beliefs and behaviour (Hannula et al., 2016). The simultaneous presence of certain emotions and attitudes, such as feelings of anxiety and conditionally positive attitudes, highlight the complexity of the reactions to new situations. In our study, we have only scratched the surface of this phenomenon. Further studies are needed to more closely analyse the relations between emotion and attitudes as well as their connections to the characteristics of educational innovations and internal and external factors. Additionally, studies on the implementation stage of teaching programming and educational practice is crucial.

This study’s results may help understand the current state of the adoption of programming in Finnish schools. Overall, the fact that most of the teachers perceived the introduction of programming into the curriculum as a positive change and viewed it as advantageous as part of 21^st century education formed, at the time, a promising foundation for developing the needed competencies and furthering its implementation. However, as recent studies (e.g. Tanhua-Piiroinen et al., 2020) show that teachers’ and students’ competencies in programming is alarmingly inadequate despite the new curriculum having been in effect for several years. We ponder whether the factors presented in this study such as teachers´ emotions, attitudes and providing adequate support on the school, municipality and national level were taken into consideration when implementing the reform. The results of this study show that the introduction of programming into the curriculum evoked a large array of emotions in teachers and that these emotions were connected to attitudes. We suggest that it is worthwhile paying attention to how teachers’ continuous learning through in-service training is supported and structured so that positive changes in emotions and attitudes are made possible in the future.

Simultaneously it is worthwhile thinking about how well this top-down reform fits in the Finnish autonomous educational culture and finding new ways of involving teachers in planning curriculum reforms. The Finnish autonomous culture can be viewed as a double-edged sword as on one hand teachers can develop their expertise and experiment freely. On the other hand, it can be difficult to get new pedagogical approaches to be widely adopted in schools when individual teachers are accustomed to their autonomy and own ways of working (Toikkanen & Leinonen, 2017). It can be thus difficult to implement a nationwide reform. As Serdyukov (2017) states, in order for an educational innovation to make a significant difference it should be adopted widely (Serdyukov, 2017).

The aforementioned challenges have led to different initiatives intended to support teachers with teaching programming. Most recently, in 2021, the Finnish Ministry of Education and Culture addressed these challenges and provided tangible recommendations and guidelines for educators in the form of a nationwide development program. The program aims to strengthen three interconnected skills: media literacy, ICT skills and programming skills. The program structures and provides detailed descriptions and materials in line with the curriculum regarding programming skills in three areas: computational thinking, inquiry-based working and programmable environments (Ministry of Education and Culture, 2021). In light of this study, it is pivotal that such initiatives take into account the holistic and affective nature of educational change, teachers’ perceptions and the various factors and their dependencies that influence the adoption process. The study confirms Rogers’s (2003) and Fullan’s (2015) theories by illustrating the enabling and hindering role of factors on educational reform, especially the role of attitudes and emotions. These findings are significant in enabling overcoming the barriers to implementation through professional development of teachers. An ecosystem approach to bridge the gap in teachers’ professional development and research is needed to take these factors into consideration and provide a sustainable solution for continued adoption of the educational innovation (e.g. Falkner et al., 2018; Serdyukov, 2017).

Limitations

When interpreting the results, it is essential to consider that this study was based on the teachers’ voluntary questionnaire answers and, thereby, represented their self-reported perceptions and interpretations rather than observable educational practices or behaviours. The teachers took part in the training either on their own initiative or as guided by their principal. The questionnaire was answered at the end of the training day. The impact of the training is demonstrated by the reported changes in the teachers’ attitudes. Due to the scarcity of studies on the implementation of programming in schools (Israel et al., 2015), further research is needed to follow up on teachers as they adopt programming into their teaching. Despite these limitations, this study encompassed many municipalities of varying sizes and teachers from pre-primary, primary and secondary schools from all regions of Finland. Further, the study reached a large population when the curriculum reform was taking place.

Acknowledgments

This research was carried out in collaboration with the Innokas Network and with funding from the Strategic Research Council (grants 312527 and 336064 [Growing Mind]).

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by the Academy of Finland [grants 312527 and 336064 [Growing Mind]]; Academy of Finland [grants 312527 [Growing Mind]]; Academy of Finland [grant 312527 [Growing Mind]].