Abstract
We are currently living in a period where computational thinking (CT) will influence everyone in every field of endeavor (Wing, 2006, 2008). While its definition as well as its place in school curricula are still not clear, the process of integrating CT within the K-12 school system is underway. In New Brunswick, Canada, as in other parts of the world, more and more students are being exposed to a different programming and coding activities that seek to introduce CT skills such as abstraction, decomposition, algorithmic thinking, as well as pattern recognition while solving problems in a variety of technology-rich environments. Our 3-year study of innovative practices targeting the development of CT consists of three main stages: (1) the research and development of a visual data flow programming language for development of CT skills in K-12, (2) the development of a testing method based on a selection of tasks and its application to measuring CT in middle and high school students, (3) deeper investigation into the process of CT development in students, along with the elaboration of a novel testing suite in order to better detect students’ progress for each of four components of CT skills. Our findings demonstrate, along with students’ engagement and interest in solving challenging tasks, the complexity of issues that emerge from this process as well as possible paths for future investigations.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
- 2.
- 3.
- 4.
Netherlands, Lithuania, Norway, Hungary, Greece and Poland.
- 5.
- 6.
- 7.
- 8.
- 9.
International Society for Technology in Education.
- 10.
Computer Science Teacher Association.
- 11.
References
Wing, J. M. (2006). Computational thinking. Communications of the ACM, 49(3), 33–35.
Wing, J. M. (2008). Computational thinking and thinking about computing. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 366(1881), 3117–3725.
Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms: Children, computers and powerful ideas. York: New Basic Books Inc.
Papert, S. (1996). An exploration in the space of mathematics education. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 1(1), 95–123.
Gretter, S., & Yadav, A. (2016). Computational thinking and media & information literacy: An integrated approach to teaching twenty-first century skills. TechTrends, 60(5), 510–516.
Bocconi, S., Chioccariello, A., Dettori, G., Ferrari, A., & Engelhardt, K. (2016). Developing computational thinking in compulsory education.
Webb, M., Davis, N., Bell, T., Katz, Y. J., Reynolds, N., Chambers, D. P., & Sysło, M. M. (2017). Computer science in K-12 school curricula of the 2lst century: Why, what and when? Education and Information Technologies, 22(2), 445–468.
Yadav, A., Good, J., Voogt, J., & Fisser, P. (2017). Computational thinking as an emerging competence domain. In Competence-based vocational and professional education (pp. 1051–1067). Cham: Springer International Publishing.
Barr, V., & Stephenson, C. (2011). Bringing computational thinking to K-12: What is involved and what is the role of the computer science education community? ACM Inroads, 2(1), 48–54.
Bower, M., Wood, L. N., Lai, J. W., Howe, C., Lister, R., Mason, R., & Veal, J. (2017). Improving the computational thinking pedagogical capabilities of school teachers. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 42(3), 4.
Csizmadia, A., Curzon, P., Dorling, M., Humphreys, S., Ng, T., Selby, C., & Woollard, J. (2015). Computational thinking: A guide for teachers. Computing at Schools
Faber, H. H., Wierdsma, M. D., Doornbos, R. P., van der Ven, J. S., & de Vette, K. (2017). Teaching computational thinking to primary school students via unplugged programming lessons. Journal of the European Teacher Education Network, 12, 13–24.
Grover, S., & Pea, R. (2013). Computational thinking in K–12: A review of the state of the field. Educational Researcher, 42(1), 38–43.
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.
Román-González, M., Moreno-León, J., & Robles, G. (2017a). Complementary tools for computational thinking assessment.
Chen, G., Shen, J., Barth-Cohen, L., Jiang, S., Huang, X., & Eltoukhy, M. (2017). Assessing elementary students’ computational thinking in everyday reasoning and robotics programming. Computers & Education, 109, 162–175.
Gadanidis, G., Hughes, J. M., Minniti, L., & White, J. G. (2017). Computational thinking, grade 1 students and the binomial theorem. Digital Experiences in Mathematics Education, 3(2), 77–96. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40751-016-0019-3
Karsenti, T., & Bugmann, J. (2017). Transformer l’éducation avec Minecraft? Résultats d’une recherche menée auprès de 118 élèves du primaire. Montréal: CRIFPE.
Freiman, V., Godin, J., Larose, F., Léger, M., Chiasson, M., Volkanova, V., & Goulet, M. J. (2016). Towards the life-long continuum of digital competences: Exploring combination of soft-skills and digital skills development.
Gauvin, S., Paquet, M., & Freiman, V. (2015). Vizwik–visual data flow programming and its educational implications. In Proceedings of EdMedia: World Conference on Educational Media and Technology Montréal, Canada (pp. 1602–1608).
Sáez-López, J. M., Román-González, M., & Vázquez-Cano, E. (2016). Visual programming languages integrated across the curriculum in elementary school: A two year case study using “scratch” in five schools. Computers & Education, 97, 129–141.
Gauvin, S., & Cox, P. T. (2011). Controlled dataflow visual programming languages, VINCI, August, Hong Kong (pp. 345–352). New York, NY: ACM.
Whitley, K. N., Novick, L. R., & Fisher, D. (2006). Evidence in favor of visual representation for the dataflow paradigm: An experiment testing LabVIEWs comprehensibility. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 64, 281–303.
Selby, C., & Woollard, J. (2014). Refining an understanding of computational thinking. Author’s Original, 1–23.
Brennan, K., & Resnick, M. (2012, April). New frameworks for studying and assessing the development of computational thinking. In Proceedings of the 2012 annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Vancouver, Canada (pp. 1–25).
Good, J., Yadav, A., & Mishra, P. (2017). Computational thinking in computer science classrooms: Viewpoints from CS educators. In Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 51–59). Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE)
Weintrop, D., Beheshti, E., Horn, M., Orton, K., Jona, K., Trouille, L., & Wilensky, U. (2016). Defining computational thinking for mathematics and science classrooms. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 25(1), 127–147.
ISTE & CSTA. (2011). Operational definition of computational thinking for K-12 education.
Dolgopolovas, V., Jevsikova, T., Savulionienė, L., & Dagienė, V. (2015). On evaluation of computational thinking of software engineering novice students. In Proceedings of the IFIP TC3 Working Conference “A New Culture of Learning: Computing and next Generations” (pp. 90–99).
Papert, S. (1991). Situating constructionism. In I. Harel & S. Papert (Eds.), Constructionism: Research reports and essays 1985–1990 by the epistemology and learning research group, MIT. Cambridge, MA: MIT.
Kafai, Y. B., & Burke, Q. (2014). Mindstorms 2: Children, programming, and computational participation. Retrieved May, 1, 2016.
Turkle, S., & Papert, S. (1990). Epistemological pluralism: Styles and voices within the computer culture. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 16(1), 128–157.
Blanchard, S., Freiman, V., & Lirrete-Pitre, N. (2010). Strategies used by elementary schoolchildren solving robotics-based complex tasks: Innovative potential of technology. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(2), 2851–2857.
Benitti, F. B. V. (2012). Exploring the educational potential of robotics in schools: A systematic review. Computers & Education, 58(3), 978–988.
Román-González, M., Pérez-González, J. C., & Jiménez-Fernández, C. (2017b). Which cognitive abilities underlie computational thinking? Criterion validity of the computational thinking test. Computers in Human Behavior, 72, 678–691.
Mühling, A., Ruf, A., & Hubwieser, P. (2015). Design and first results of a psychometric test for measuring basic programming abilities. In Proceedings of the workshop in primary and secondary computing education (pp. 2–10). New York, NY: ACM.
Weintrop, D., & Wilensky, U. (2015). Using commutative assessments to compare conceptual understanding in blocks-based and text-based programs. In ICER (Vol. 15, pp. 101–110).
Meerbaum-Salant, O., Armoni, M., & Ben-Ari, M. (2013). Learning computer science concepts with scratch. Computer Science Education, 23(3), 239–264.
Zur-Bargury, I., Pârv, B., & Lanzberg, D. (2013). A nationwide exam as a tool for improving a new curriculum. In Proceedings of the 18th ACM conference on innovation and technology in computer science education (pp. 267–272). New York, NY: ACM.
Dagiene, V., & Futschek, G. (2008). Bebras international contest on informatics and computer literacy: Criteria for good tasks. In Informatics education-supporting computational thinking (pp. 19–30). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.
Izu, C., Mirolo, C., Settle, A., Mannila, L., & STUPURIENĖ, G. (2017). Exploring Bebras tasks content and performance: A multinational study. Informatics in Education, 16(1), 39–59.
Basawapatna, A., Koh, K. H., Repenning, A., Webb, D. C., & Marshall, K. S. (2011). Recognizing computational thinking patterns. In Proceedings of the 42nd ACM technical symposium on computer science education (pp. 245–250). New York, NY: ACM.
Moreno-León, J., & Robles, G. (2015). Analyze your Scratch projects with Dr. Scratch and assess your computational thinking skills. In Scratch conference (pp. 12–15).
Koh, K. H., Basawapatna, A., Bennett, V., & Repenning, A. (2010). Towards the automatic recognition of computational thinking for adaptive visual language learning. In Visual languages and human-centric computing (VL/HCC), 2010 IEEE symposium on (pp. 59–66). New York: IEEE.
Korkmaz, Ö., Çakir, R., & Özden, M. Y. (2017). A validity and reliability study of the computational thinking scales (CTS). Computers in Human Behavior, 72, 558–569.
Grover, S. (2011). Robotics and engineering for middle and high school students to develop computational thinking. In annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA
Grover, S. (2015). “Systems of Assessments” for Deeper Learning of Computational Thinking in K-12. In Proceedings of the 2015 Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association (pp. 15–20).
Grover, S., Cooper, S., & Pea, R. (2014). Assessing computational learning in K-12. In Proceedings of the 2014 conference on Innovation & Technology in Computer Science Education (pp. 57–62). New York, NY: ACM.
Gunn, C., & Peddie, R. (2008). A design-based research approach for eportfolio initiatives. Hello! Where are you in the landscape of educational technology? Proceedings Ascilite Melbourne 2008
The Design-Based Research Collective. (2003). Design-based research: An emerging paradigm for educational inquiry. Educational Researcher, 5–8.
Freiman, V., & Lirette-Pitre, N. (2009). Building a virtual learning community of problem solvers: Example of CASMI community. ZDM, 41(1–2), 245–256.
Vegt, W. (2013). Predicting the difficulty level of a Bebras tasks. Olympiads in Informatics, 7, 132–139.
Dagiene, V., & Stupuriene, G. (2015). Informatics education based on solving attractive tasks through a contest. KEYCIT 2014: key competencies in informatics and ICT, 7, 97.
Dagiene, V., & Stupuriene, G. (2016). Bebras-a sustainable community building model for the concept based learning of informatics and computational thinking. Informatics in Education, 15(1), 25.
Grover, S. (2017). Assessing algorithmic and computational thinking in K-12: Lessons from a middle school classroom. In Emerging research, practice, and policy on computational thinking (pp. 269–288). Cham: Springer International Publishing.
Shute, V. J., Sun, C., Asbell-Clarke, J. (2017). Demystifying computational thinking. Educational Research Review.
Acknowledgments
This ongoing study is being conducted with the help of the Canadian Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (Partnership Development Grant #890-2013-0062), New Brunswick Innovation Foundation (2016 Research Assistantship Program), and le Secrétariat aux Affaires Intergouvernementales Canadiennes du Québec (Programme de soutien à la Francophonie Canadienne).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Djambong, T., Freiman, V., Gauvin, S., Paquet, M., Chiasson, M. (2018). Measurement of Computational Thinking in K-12 Education: The Need for Innovative Practices. In: Sampson, D., Ifenthaler, D., Spector, J., Isaías, P. (eds) Digital Technologies: Sustainable Innovations for Improving Teaching and Learning. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-73417-0_12
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-73417-0_12
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-73416-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-73417-0
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)