Advertisement

Leveraging Multilingual Identities in Computer Science Education

  • Sharin JacobEmail author
  • Leiny Garcia
  • Mark Warschauer
Chapter
Part of the New Language Learning and Teaching Environments book series (NLLTE)

Abstract

Too often, educators assume that multilingual students come to school without the conceptual or linguistic resources necessary for learning the subjects of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). To address this issue, K-12 STEM educational policymakers have called for instructional models that build on language learners’ existing resources, opening new possibilities for computer science education. In connecting an upper elementary computer science curriculum to students’ lives and interests, this qualitative study explores how multilingual students leverage their identities to support disciplinary skills development. Using data from student semi-structured interviews, we find here that multilingual students express their identities through computing and that this expression supports positive social and academic outcomes in the classroom.

References

  1. Aish, N., Asare, P., & Miskioğlu, E. E. (2018, March). People Like Me: Providing relatable and realistic role models for underrepresented minorities in STEM to increase their motivation and likelihood of success (pp. 83–89). Paper presented at the 2018 IEEE Integrated STEM Education Conference (ISEC), Princeton, NJ.Google Scholar
  2. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Boyatzis, R. E. (1998). Transforming qualitative information: Thematic analysis and code development. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  4. 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 (Vol. 1, p. 25). Vancouver, Canada.Google Scholar
  5. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2015). Computer and information technology. Occupational Outlook Handbook, 2014–2015. Retrieved from https://www.bls.gov/ooh/computer-and-information-technology/home.htm
  6. Canagarajah, A. S. (2013). Negotiating translingual literacy: An enactment. Research in the Teaching of English, 48(1), 40–67.Google Scholar
  7. College Board. (2017). AP program participation and performance data 2017. [Data file]. Retrieved from https://research.collegeboard.org/programs/ap/data/participation/ap-2017
  8. Cummins, J., Hu, S., Markus, P., & Montero, M. K. (2015). Identity texts and academic achievement: Connecting the dots in multilingual school contexts. TESOL Quarterly, 49(3), 555–581.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. diSessa, A. (2000). Changing minds: Computers, learning and literacy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Ed Data. (2018). California public schools. [Data file]. Retrieved from https://www.ed-data.org/state/CA
  11. Eglash, R., Gilbert, J. E., & Foster, E. (2013). Broadening participation: Toward culturally responsive computing education. Communications of the ACM, 56(7), 33–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Goldman, J., Shilton, K., Burke, J., Estrin, D., Hansen, M., Ramanathan, N., … & West, R. (2009). Participatory Sensing: A citizen-powered approach to illuminating the patterns that shape our world. Foresight & Governance Project, White Paper, 1–15.Google Scholar
  13. Google & Gallup. (2015). Images of computer science: Perceptions among students, parents and educators in the U.S. Retrieved from https://services.google.com/fh/files/misc/images-of-computer-science-report.pdf
  14. Grover, S., & Pea, R. (2013). Computational thinking in K–12: A review of the state of the field. Educational Researcher, 42(1), 38–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE), & Computer Science Teachers Association (CSTA). (2011). Operational definition of computational thinking for K-12 education. Retrieved from http://www.iste.org/docs/ct-documents/computational-thinking-operational-definition-flyer.pdf
  16. Jacob, S., Nguyen, H., Tofel-Grehl, C., Richardson, D., & Warschauer, M. (2018). Teaching computational thinking to English learners. NYS TESOL Journal, 5(2), 12–24.Google Scholar
  17. Jacob, S., & Warschauer, M. (2018). Computational thinking and literacy. Journal of Computer Science Integration, 1(1), 1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kafai, Y., Searle, K., Martinez, C., & Brayboy, B. (2014, March). Ethnocomputing with electronic textiles: Culturally responsive open design to broaden participation in computing in American Indian youth and communities. In Proceedings of the 45th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (pp. 241–246). ACM.Google Scholar
  19. LeCompte, M. D., Schensul, J. J., Nastasi, B. K., & Borgatti, S. P. (1999). Enhanced ethnographic methods: Audiovisual techniques, focused group interviews, and elicitation. New York: Altamira Press.Google Scholar
  20. Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry (Vol. 75). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  21. Margolis, J. (2010). Stuck in the shallow end: Education, race, and computing. Boston: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  22. Martin, A., McAlear, F., & Scott, A. (2015). Path not found: Disparities in access to computer science courses in California high schools. Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED561181
  23. McFarland, J., Hussar, B., de Brey, C., Snyder, T., Wang, X., Wilkinson-Flicker, S., et al. (2017). The condition of education 2017 (NCES 2017–144). U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.Google Scholar
  24. Mercier, E. M., Barron, B., & O’connor, K. M. (2006). Images of self and others as computer users: The role of gender and experience. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 22(5), 335–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. National Science Foundation. (2017). Women, minorities, and persons with disabilities in science and engineering. [Data file]. Retrieved from https://www.nsf.gov/statistics/2017/nsf17310/data.cfm
  26. Norton, B. (1997). Language, identity, and the ownership of English. TESOL Quarterly, 31(3), 409–429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Norton, B. (2013). Identity and language learning: Extending the conversation. Britsol: Multilingual Matters.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Packard, B. L., & Wong, E. D. (1999). Future images and women’s career decisions in science. Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED430805
  29. Peppler, K., & Warschauer, M. (2012). Uncovering literacies, disrupting stereotypes: Examining the (dis)abilities of a child learning to computer program and read. International Journal of Learning and Media, 3(3), 15–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Resnick, M., Maloney, J., Monroy-Hernández, A., Rusk, N., Eastmond, E., Brennan, K., et al. (2009). Scratch: Programming for all. Communications of the ACM, 52(11), 60–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Ricento, T. (2005). Considerations of identity in L2 learning. Handbook of Research in Second Language Teaching and Learning, 1, 895–910.Google Scholar
  32. Royal, D., & Swift, A. (2016, October 18). U.S. minority students less exposed to computer science. Gallup. Retrieved from http://www.gallup.com/poll/196307/minority-students-less-exposed-computer-science.aspx
  33. Saldaña, J. (2015). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Sage.Google Scholar
  34. Smith, M. (2016, January 30). Computer Science For All. [Web log comment]. Retrieved from https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/blog/2016/01/30/computer-science-all
  35. Tofel-Grehl, C., Fields, D., Searle, K., Maahs-Fladung, C., Feldon, D., Gu, G., et al. (2017). Electrifying engagement in middle school science class: Improving student interest through e-textiles. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 26(4), 406–417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Wang, J., Hong, H., Ravitz, J., & Moghadam, S. H. (2016, February). Landscape of K-12 computer science education in the US: Perceptions, access, and barriers. In Proceedings of the 47th ACM Technical Symposium on Computing Science Education (pp. 645–650). ACM.Google Scholar
  37. Warschauer, M. (1999). Electronic literacies. Language, culture, and power in online education. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  38. Warschauer, M. (2009). Digital literacy studies: Progress and prospects. In The future of literacy studies (pp. 123–140). London: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Wing, J. M. (2006). Computational thinking. Communications of the ACM, 49(3), 33–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Wortham, S. (2006). Learning identity: The joint emergence of social identification and academic learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of California, IrvineIrvineUSA

Personalised recommendations