Advertisement

Students’ computational thinking

  • Julian FraillonEmail author
  • John Ainley
  • Wolfram Schulz
  • Tim Friedman
  • Daniel Duckworth
Open Access
Chapter
  • 8 Downloads

Abstract

In the International Computer and Information Literacy Study (ICILS) 2018, computational thinking (CT) assessment was an option for participating countries participating. Eight countries and one benchmarking participant participated in the CT assessment. In this chapter, the CT assessment instrument and the proficiency scale derived from the ICILS 2018 test instrument and data are described and the international student results relating to CT are discussed. CT achievement is described across three regions of increasing sophistication from a functional working knowledge of computation as input and output (lower region) through to an understanding of computation as a generalizable problem-solving framework (upper region). Students’ CT achievement varied more within countries than across countries. CT tended to be higher among male students, although statistically significant gender differences were found in only two countries. In one of those countries the difference was in favor of female students and in the other it was in favor of male students. Socioeconomic status was significantly positively associated with student CT achievement. Immigrant background, language background, access to computers at home, and experience with computers were also associated with student CT achievement. In all countries, student CT achievement was strongly associated with student computer and information literacy (CIL) achievement.

References

  1. Fraillon, J., Ainley, J., Schulz, W., Duckworth, D., & Friedman, T. (2019). IEA International Computer and Information Literacy Study 2018 assessment framework. Cham, Switzerland: Springer. Retrieved from https:// www.springer.com/gp/book/9783030193881.
  2. Fraillon, J., Schulz, W., Friedman, T., & Meyer, S. (Eds.). (2020). IEA International Computer and Information Literacy Study 2018 technical report. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA). Manuscript in preparation.Google Scholar
  3. ITU. (2019). IDI 2017 rank [webpage]. Geneva, Switzerland: International Telecommunications Union. Retrieved from https://www.itu.int/net4/ITU-D/idi/2017/index.html.
  4. Rasch, G. (1960). Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment tests. Copenhagen, Denmark: Nielsen & Lydiche.Google Scholar
  5. Von Davier, M., Gonzalez, E., & Mislevy, R. (2009). What are plausible values and why are they useful? In M. von Davier, & D. Hastedt (Eds.), IERI Monograph Series: Issues and Methodologies in Large-Scale Assessments, Volume 2 (pp. 9–36). Hamburg, Germany/Princeton, NJ: International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA)/Educational Testing Service (ETS). Retrieved from http://www.ierinstitute.org/fileadmin/Documents/IERI_Monograph/IERI_Monograph_Volume_02_Chapter_01.pdf.

Copyright information

© IEA International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement 2020

Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits any noncommercial use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license and indicate if changes were made.

The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter's Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the chapter's Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder.

Authors and Affiliations

  • Julian Fraillon
    • 1
    Email author
  • John Ainley
    • 2
  • Wolfram Schulz
    • 3
  • Tim Friedman
    • 4
  • Daniel Duckworth
    • 5
  1. 1.The Australian Council for Educational ResearchCamberwellAustralia
  2. 2.The Australian Council for Educational ResearchCamberwellAustralia
  3. 3.The Australian Council for Educational ResearchCamberwellAustralia
  4. 4.The Australian Council for Educational ResearchCamberwellAustralia
  5. 5.The Australian Council for Educational ResearchCamberwellAustralia

Personalised recommendations