Abstract
Computational thinking is a relatively new field for teachers and educational researchers, where new pedagogical approaches emerge to teach various aspects of computational thinking that covers various thinking abilities and techniques for solving problems. Computational thinking concept received great attention from researchers and instructors with an increasing interest related to teaching of computational thinking in K-5 education, as well as the role of computational thinking in kids’ gaining of thinking skills and digital competences. Various studies have been conducted related to the implementation of computational thinking activities in schools. However, there is a lack of study that analyzes the trends of these studies. In this respect, this study aims to conduct a bibliometric analysis and content analysis to investigate the computational thinking studies in K-5 level to explore the current research trends in the field. The analysis covers a total of 156 studies conducted between years 2009 and 2021. The analysis separately provides results for early childhood and elementary levels. The analysis mainly revealed that mostly used pedagogical approaches are robotics, block-based programming, stem, unplugged and gaming activities. In addition, the analysis explored the findings based on four aspects of computational thinking; decomposition, abstraction, pattern recognition and algorithm design.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Data Availability
The datasets are available on reasonable request.
References
Aguirre-Muñoz, Z., & Pantoya, M. L. (2016). Engineering literacy and engagement in kindergarten classrooms. Journal of Engineering Education, 105(4), 630–654. https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20151.
AlAmer, R. A., Al-Doweesh, W. A., Al-Khalifa, H. S., & Al-Razgan, M. S. (2015, October). Programming unplugged: bridging CS unplugged activities gap for learning key programming concepts. [Paper presentation]. 2015 Fifth International Conference on e-Learning (econf), Manama, Bahrain. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/7478218.
Andrian, R., & Hikmawan, R. (2021). The importance of computational thinking to train structured thinking in problem solving. Jurnal Online Informatika, 6(1), 113–117. https://doi.org/10.15575/join.v6i1.677.
Angeli, C., & Giannakos, M. (2020). Computational thinking education: Issues and challenges. Computers in Human Behavior, 105, 1–3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.106185.
Araujo, A. L. S. O., Andrade, W. L., Guerrero, D. D. S., & Melo, M. R. A. (2019, February). How many abilities can we measure in computational thinking? A study on Bebras challenge [Paper presentation]. 50th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, Minneapolis, USA. https://doi.org/10.1145/3287324.3287405.
Atmatzidou, S., & Demetriadis, S. (2017). A didactical model for educational robotics activities: A study on improving skills through strong or minimal guidance. Educational Robotics in the Makers Era 1 (pp. 58–72). Springer International Publishing.
Ballard, E. D., & Haroldson, R. (2022). Analysis of computational thinking in children’s literature for K-6 students: Literature as a non-programming unplugged resource. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 59(8), 1487–1516. https://doi.org/10.1177/07356331211004048.
Barr, D., Harrison, J., & Conery, L. (2011). Computational thinking: A digital age skill for everyone. Learning and Leading with Technology, 38(6), 20–23. http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ918910.pdf.
Barrón-Estrada, M. L., Zatarain-Cabada, R., Romero-Polo, J. A., & Monroy, J. N. (2022). Patrony: A mobile application for pattern recognition learning. Education and Information Technologies, 27(1), 1237–1260. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10636-7.
Bati, K. (2022). A systematic literature review regarding computational thinking and programming in early childhood education. Education and Information Technologies, 27(2), 2059–2082. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10700-2.
Battal, A., Afacan Adanır, G., & Gülbahar, Y. (2021). Computer science unplugged: A systematic literature review. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 50(1), 24–47. https://doi.org/10.1177/00472395211018801.
Bell, T., & Vahrenhold, J. (2018). CS unplugged—how is it used, and does it work? In H. J. Böckenhauer, D. Komm & W. Unger (Eds.), Adventures between lower bounds and higher altitudes (pp. 497–521). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-98355-4_29.
Bell, T., Witten, I., & Fellows, M. (2015). CS Unplugged: An enrichment and extension programme for primary-aged students. https://classic.csunplugged.org/documents/books/english/CSUnplugged_OS_2015_v3.1.pdf
Bender, W. (2017). The sugar learning platform: Affordances for computational thinking. Revista de Educación a Distancia (RED), 54(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.6018/red/54/1.
Bers, M. U., Flannery, L., Kazakoff, E. R., & Sullivan, A. (2014). Computational thinking and tinkering: Exploration of an early childhood robotics curriculum. Computers & Education, 72, 145–157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.10.020.
Budd, J. M. (1988). A bibliometric analysis of higher education literature. Research in Higher Education, 28(2), 180–190. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00992890.
Budinski, N., Lavicza, Z., Fenyvesi, K., & Novta, M. (2019). Mathematical and Coding Lessons based on creative origami activities. Open Education Studies, 1(1), 220–227. https://doi.org/10.1515/edu-2019-0016.
Cansu, S. K., & Cansu, F. K. (2019). An overview of computational thinking. International Journal of Computer Science Education in Schools, 3(10), 17–30. https://doi.org/10.21585/ijcses.v3i1.53.
Chen, H. E., Sun, D., Hsu, T. C., Yang, Y., & Sun, J. (2022). Visualising trends in computational thinking research from 2012 to 2021: A bibliometric analysis. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 47 (2023), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2022.101224.
Ching, Y. H., Hsu, Y. C., & Baldwin, S. (2018). Developing computational thinking with educational technologies for young learners. TechTrends, 62(6), 563–573. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-018-0292-7.
Contreras, F., & Abid, G. (2022). Social sustainability studies in the 21st century: A bibliometric mapping analysis using VOSviewer Software. Pakistan Journal of Commerce and Social Sciences (PJCSS), 16(1), 167–203. http://hdl.handle.net/10419/261309.
Csizmadia, A., Curzon, P., Dorling, M., Humphreys, S., Ng, T., Selby, C., & Woollard, J. (2015). Computational thinking: A guide for teachers. Computing at School Community, 2015, 1–18.
Czakóová, K., & Udvaros, J. (2021). Applications and games for the development of algorithmic thinking in favor of experiential learning. [Paper presentation]. 13th International Conference on Education and New Learning Technologies, Online Conference. https://doi.org/10.21125/edulearn.2021.1389.
Delen, I., & Sen, S. (2023). Effect of design‐based learning on achievement in K‐12 education: A meta‐analysis. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 60(2), 330–356. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21800.
Dietz, G., Landay, J., & Gweon, H. (2019). Building blocks of computational thinking: Young children’s developing capacities for problem decomposition. In Proceedings of the 41st Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society.
Donthu, N., Kumar, S., Mukherjee, D., Pandey, N., & Lim, W. M. (2021). How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 133, 285–296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.04.070.
Durak, H. Y., & Saritepeci, M. (2018). Analysis of the relation between computational thinking skills and various variables with the structural equation model. Computers & Education, 116, 191–202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.09.004.
Erumit, K. A., İhsan Benzer, A., & Şahin, G. (2020). A framework for studying programming teaching in secondary education. Croatian Journal of Education: Hrvatski časopis za odgoj i obrazovanje, 22(2), 563–595. https://doi.org/10.15516/cje.v22i2.3560.
Erümit, A. K., & Sahin, G. (2020). Plugged or unplugged teaching: A case study of students’ preferences for the teaching programming. International Journal of Computer Science Education in Schools, 4(1), 1–14. http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1274662.pdf.
Esteve-Mon, F. M., Adell-Segura, J., Llopis Nebot, M., Novella, V., M. G., & Aparicio, P., J (2019). The development of computational thinking in student teachers through an intervention with educational robotics. Journal of Information Technology Education: Innovations in Practice, 18, 139–152. https://doi.org/10.28945/4442.
Fernaeus, Y., Håkansson, M., Jacobsson, M., & Ljungblad, S. (2010, June). How do you play with a robotic toy animal? A long-term study of Pleo. [Paper presentation]. 9th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children, Barcelona, Spain. https://doi.org/10.1145/1810543.1810549.
Garcia-Costa, D., Suarez, A., Martinez, P. A., Martos, J., Fayos, R., & Lopez-Iñesta, E. (2020). A transversal virtual remote laboratory for teaching in STEM disciplines using robotics platforms. In INTED2020 Proceedings (pp. 6069–6075). IATED.
Goschnick, S. (2015). App review: ScratchJr (scratch Junior). International Journal of People-Oriented Programming (IJPOP), 4(1), 50–55. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJPOP.2015010104.
Gouws, L. A., Bradshaw, K., & Wentworth, P. (2013, July). Computational thinking in educational activities: an evaluation of the educational game light-bot 18th ACM Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education, Canterbury, England, UK. https://doi.org/10.1145/2462476.2466518.
Hooshyar, D., Pedaste, M., Yang, Y., Malva, L., Hwang, G. J., Wang, M., & Delev, D. (2021). From gaming to computational thinking: An adaptive educational computer game-based learning approach. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 59(3), 383–409. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106575.
Hsu, T. C., Chang, S. C., & Hung, Y. T. (2018). How to learn and how to teach computational thinking: Suggestions based on a review of the literature. Computers & Education, 126, 296–310. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.07.004.
International Society for Technology in Education [ISTE] (2021). Computational thinking competencies. https://www.iste.org/standards/iste-standards-for-computational-thinking.
Ioannou, A., & Makridou, E. (2018). Exploring the potentials of educational robotics in the development of computational thinking: A summary of current research and practical proposal for future work. Education and Information Technologies, 23(6), 2531–2544. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-018-9729-z.
João, P., Nuno, D., Fábio, S. F., & Ana, P. (2019). A cross-analysis of block-based and visual programming apps with computer science student-teachers. Education Sciences, 9(3), 181. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci9030181.
Johnson, N., & Phillips, M. (2018). Rayyan for systematic reviews. Journal of Electronic Resources Librarianship, 30(1), 46–48. https://doi.org/10.1080/1941126X.2018.1444339.
Judge, S., Puckett, K., & Çabuk, B. (2004). Digital equity: New findings from the early childhood longitudinal study. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 36(4), 383–396. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2004.10782421.
Kale, U., & Yuan, J. (2021). Still a new kid on the block? Computational thinking as problem solving in Code. Org. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 59(4), 620–644. https://doi.org/10.1177/073563312097205.
Kalelioglu, F., & Gülbahar, Y. (2014). The Effects of Teaching Programming via scratch on Problem solving skills: A discussion from Learners’ perspective. Informatics in education, 13(1), 33–50.
Kalelioglu, F., Gülbahar, Y., & Kukul, V. (2016). A framework for computational thinking based on a systematic research review. Baltic Journal of Modern Computing, 4(3), 583–596. http://acikerisim.baskent.edu.tr/handle/11727/3831.
Kalelioğlu, F. (2015). A new way of teaching programming skills to K-12 students: Code. Org. Computers in Human Behavior, 52, 200–210. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.05.047.
Kanaki, K., & Kalogiannakis, M. (2018). Introducing fundamental object-oriented programming concepts in preschool education within the context of physical science courses. Education and Information Technologies, 23(6), 2673–2698. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-018-9736-0.
Karaosmanoğlu, G., & Adigüzel, Ö. (2021). An overview of the creative drama experience in the information technologies and software course from the students’ perspective. Journal of Qualitative Research in Education, (26), https://doi.org/10.14689/enad.26.1.
Khudzari, J. M., Kurian, J., Tartakovsky, B., & Raghavan, G. V. (2018). Bibliometric analysis of global research trends on microbial fuel cells using Scopus database. Biochemical engineering journal, 136, 51–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bej.2018.05.002.
Kirçali, A., & Özdener, N. (2022). A comparison of plugged and unplugged tools in teaching algorithms at the K-12 level for computational thinking skills. Technology Knowledge and Learning, 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-021-09585-4.
Koracharkornradt, C. (2017, June). Tuk Tuk: a block-based programming game. In Proceedings of the 2017 Conference on Interaction Design and Children (pp. 725–728).
Kwon, K., Jeon, M., Guo, M., Yan, G., Kim, J., Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T., & Brush, T. A. (2021). Computational thinking practices: Lessons learned from a problem-based curriculum in primary education. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2021.2014372.
Lee, J. (2020). Coding in early childhood. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 21(3), 266–269. https://doi.org/10.1177/1463949119846541.
Lee, J., & Junoh, J. (2019). Implementing unplugged coding activities in early childhood classrooms. Early Childhood Education Journal, 47(6), 709–716. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-019-00967-z.
Lee, J., Joswick, C., & Pole, K. (2022). Classroom play and activities to support computational thinking development in early childhood. Early Childhood Education Journal, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-022-01319-0.
Liu, Y., Ma, Z., & Qian, Y. (2019, May). Developing Chinese Elementary School Students’ Computational Thinking: A Convergent Cognition Perspective. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Global Computing Education (pp. 238–238). https://doi.org/10.1145/3300115.3312514.
Lynch, M. (2019). Why we must teach our teachers computational thinking?https://www.thetechedvocate.org/why-we-must-teach-our-teachers-computational-thinking/.
McClelland, K., & Grata, L. A. (2018). Review of the importance of computational thinking in K-12. [Paper presentation}. eLmL, The Tenth International Conference on Mobile, Hybrid, and On-line Learning, Rome, Italy.
Moreno-Guerrero, A. J., Parra González, M. E., & López Belmonte, J. (2022). Computer in education in the 21st century. A scientific mapping of the literature in web of Science. Virtuales, 11(1), 201–223. https://doi.org/10.54988/cv.2022.1.1019.
National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. The National Academies Press.
Nishida, T., Kanemune, S., Idosaka, Y., Namiki, M., Bell, T., & Kuno, Y. (2009). A CS unplugged design pattern. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 41(1), 231–235. https://doi.org/10.1145/1539024.1508951.
Novia, N., Permanasari, A., & Riandi, R. (2021, March). Research on educational games in STEM area 2010–2020: a bibliometric analysis of literature. [Paper presentation]. International Conference on Mathematics and Science Education (ICMScE), Jawa Barat, Indonesia. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1806/1/012209.
Ouzzani, M., Hammady, H., Fedorowicz, Z., & Elmagarmid, A. (2016). Rayyan—A web and mobile app for systematic reviews. Systematic Reviews, 5(210), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-016-0384-4.
Palts, T., & Pedaste, M. (2020). A model for developing computational thinking skills. Informatics in Education, 19(1), 113–128. https://doi.org/10.15388/infedu.2020.06.
Pauna, V. H., Picone, F., Le Guyader, G., Buonocore, E., & Franzese, P. P. (2018). The scientifc research on ecosystem services: A bibliometric analysis. Ecological Questions, 29(3), 53–62.
Rafiq, A. A., Triyono, M. B., Djatmiko, I. W., Wardani, R., & Köhler, T. (2023). Mapping the evolution of computational thinking in education: A bibliometrics analysis of scopus database from 1987 to 2023. Informatics in Education. https://doi.org/10.15388/infedu.2023.29.
Rich, K. M., & Yadav, A. (2020). Applying levels of abstraction to mathematics word problems. TechTrends, 64, 395–403. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-020-00479-3.
Rich, P. J., Mason, S. L., & O’Leary, J. (2021). Measuring the effect of continuous professional development on elementary teachers’ self-efficacy to teach coding and computational thinking. Computers & Education, 168, 104196. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104196.
Rich, P. J., Egan, G., & Ellsworth, J. (2019, July). A framework for decomposition in computational thinking. [Paper presentation]. 2019 ACM Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education, Aberdeen, Scotland, UK. https://doi.org/10.1145/3304221.3319793.
Rowe, E., Almeda, M. V., Asbell-Clarke, J., Scruggs, R., Baker, R., Bardar, E., & Gasca, S. (2021). Assessing implicit computational thinking in Zoombinis puzzle gameplay. Computers in Human Behavior, 120, 106707. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2021.106707.
Rowe, E., Asbell-Clarke, J., Cunningham, K., & Gasca, S. (2017, October). Assessing implicit computational thinking in zoombinis gameplay: Pizza pass, fleens & bubblewonder abyss. In Extended abstracts publication of the annual symposium on computer-human interaction in play (pp. 195–200).
Saqr, M., Ng, K., Oyelere, S. S., & Tedre, M. (2021). People, ideas, milestones: A scientometric study of computational thinking. ACM Transactions on Computing Education (TOCE), 21(3), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1145/3445984.
Saxena, A., Lo, C. K., Hew, K. F., & Wong, G. K. W. (2020). Designing unplugged and plugged activities to cultivate computational thinking: An exploratory study in early childhood education. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 29(1), 55–66. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-019-00478-w.
Schina, D., Esteve-Gonzalez, V., & Usart, M. (2021). Teachers’ perceptions of bee-bot robotic toy and their ability to integrate it in their teaching. [Paper presentation]. International Conference on Robotics in Education (RiE), Bratislava, Slovakia.
Schrader, A. M. (1985). A bibliometric study of the JEL, 1960–1984. Journal of Education for Library and Information Science, 279–300. https://www.jstor.org/stable/40323167.
Selby, C., & Woollard, J. (2014). Computational thinking: the developing definition. [Paper presentation]. 45th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Sendurur, P. (2019). Investigation of pre-service computer science Teachers’ CS-unplugged design practices. Education and Information Technologies, 24(6), 3823–3840. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-019-09964-6.
Silva, R., Fonseca, B., Costa, C., & Martins, F. (2021). Fostering computational thinking skills: A didactic proposal for elementary school grades. Education Sciences, 11(9), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11090518.
Socratous, C., & Ioannou, A. (2021). Structured or unstructured educational robotics curriculum? A study of debugging in block-based programming. Educational Technology Research and Development, 69(6), 3081–3100. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-021-10056-x.
Strawhacker, A., & Bers, M. U. (2019). What they learn when they learn coding: Investigating cognitive domains and computer programming knowledge in young children. Educational Technology Research and Development, 67(3), 541–575. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-018-9622-x.
Su, J., & Yang, W. (2023). A systematic review of integrating computational thinking in early Childhood Education. Computers and Education Open, 100122, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeo.2023.100122.
Tang, X., Yin, Y., Lin, Q., Hadad, R., & Zhai, X. (2020). Assessing computational thinking: A systematic review of empirical studies. Computers & Education, 148, 103798. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103798.
Tekdal, M. (2021). Trends and development in research on computational thinking. Education and Information Technologies, 26(5), 6499–6529. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10617-w.
Tonbuloğlu, B., & Tonbuloğlu, İ. (2019). The effect of unplugged coding activities on computational thinking skills of middle school students. Informatics in Education, 18(2), 403–426. https://doi.org/10.15388/infedu.2019.19.
Tsortanidou, X., Daradoumis, T., & Barberá, E. (2021). A K-6 computational thinking curricular framework: Pedagogical implications for teaching practice. Interactive Learning Environments, 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2021.1986725.
Van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2018). Manual for VOSviewer version 1.6. 8. CWTS Meaningful Metrics. Universiteit Leiden.
Weintrop, D., & Wilensky, U. (2012, August). RoboBuilder: A program-to-play constructionist video game. Constructionism 2012 Conference, Athens, Greece. http://ccl.sesp.northwestern.edu/papers/2012/DCM_Weintrop.pdf.
Whyte, R., Ainsworth, S., & Medwell, J. (2019, July). Designing for Integrated K-5 Computing and Literacy through Story-making Activities. In Proceedings of the 2019 ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research (pp. 167–175).
Wing, J. M. (2006). Computational thinking. Communications of the ACM, 49(3), 33–35. https://doi.org/10.1145/1118178.1118215.
Wing, J. M. (2014). Computational thinking benefits society. 40th Anniversary Blog of Social Issues in Computing, New York, NY, USA.
Wu, S. Y., & Su, Y. S. (2021). Visual programming environments and computational thinking performance of fifth-and sixth-grade students. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 59(6), 1075–1092. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633120988807.
Yadav, A., Hong, H., & Stephenson, C. (2016). Computational thinking for all: Pedagogical approaches to embedding 21st century problem solving in K-12 classrooms. TechTrends, 60(6), 565–568. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-016-0087-7.
Yildiz, M., & Karal, H. (2021). A Computer Science Unplugged activity: CityMap. International Journal of Computer Science Education in Schools, 5(2), 14–27. https://doi.org/10.21585/ijcses.v5i2.110.
Yu, J., & Roque, R. (2019). A review of computational toys and kits for young children. International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction, 21, 17–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcci.2019.04.001.
Funding
No funding was received for conducting this study.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
All authors contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation, data collection, and data analysis were performed by first, second and third authors. Literature review was done by the first author. The first draft of the manuscript was written by all authors. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing Interests
The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare that are relevant to the content of this article.
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Adanır, G.A., Delen, I. & Gulbahar, Y. Research trends in K-5 computational thinking education: a bibliometric analysis and ideas to move forward. Educ Inf Technol 29, 3589–3614 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-11974-4
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-11974-4