Abstract
We live in a century where technology has become part of our lives, and it is crucial that we become active creators of technology, not just passive users. Learning to program computers enables a person to create twenty-first-century solutions. Computer programming is more than just learning how to code; it also exposes students to the opportunity to develop computational thinking (CT), which involves problem-solving using computer science concepts. In this chapter, we explore strengths and weaknesses of students’ CT skills and compare a group of seventh- and eighth-grade students who engaged in a Scratch programming environment. Scratch is a popular visual programming language that introduces computer programming to youth. We use Dr. Scratch, a CT assessment tool, to analyze students’ Scratch projects for evidence of CT. The results of this study can show researchers and educators how they might use Dr. Scratch to analyze students’ Scratch data to help improve their CT.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
A Framework for K-12 Computer Science Education. (2016). Computing leaders ACM, CSTA, Code.org , CIC, and NMSI launch effort to guide educators and state and district policy makers about K-12 computer science. Retrieved from https://k12cs.org/
Allan, V., Barr, V., Brylow, D., & Hambrusch, S. (2010). Computational thinking in high school courses. In Proceedings of the 41st ACM technical symposium on computer science education (pp. 390–391). Milwaukee, WI: ACM.
Barr, D., Harrison, J., & Conery, L. (2011). Computational thinking: A digital age skill for everyone. Learning and Leading with Technology, 38(6), 20–23.
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.
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.
Boe, B., Hill, C., Len, M., Dreschler, G., Conrad, P., & Franklin, D. (2013). Hairball: Lint-inspired static analysis of scratch projects. In Proceeding of the 44th ACM technical symposium on computer science education (pp. 215–220). New York, NY: ACM.
Brennan, K., & Resnick, M. (2012). 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.
Burke, Q., & Kafai, Y. B. (2010). Programming and storytelling: Opportunities for learning about coding and composition. In Proceedings of the 9th international conference on interaction design and children (pp. 348–351). New York, NY: ACM.
Clark, J., Rogers, M. P., Spradling, C., & Pais, J. (2013). What, no canoes? Lessons learned while hosting a scratch summer camp. Journal of Computing Sciences in Colleges, 28(5), 204–210.
Close, K., Janisiewicz, P., Brasiel, S., and Martin, T. (2015). What do I do with all this data? How to use the FUN! Tool to automatically clean, analyze, and visualize your digital data. In Proceedings of the 11th games and learning society conference. Madison, WI, USA.
Computer Science Teacher Association. (2012). CSTA K-12 computer science standards. Retrieved October 8, 2015, from http://www.csta.acm.org/Curriculum/sub/K12Standards.html
DeJarnette, N. (2012). America’s children: Providing early exposure to STEM (science, technology, engineering and math) initiatives. Education, 133(1), 77–84.
Department for Education, (2014). National curriculum in England: Computing programmes of study. Retrieved from: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-curriculum-in-england-computing-programmes-of-study/national-curriculum-in-england-computing-programmes-of-study
Fields, D. A., Searle, K. A., Kafai, Y. B., & Min, H. S. (2012). Debuggems to assess student learning in e-textiles. In Proceedings of the 43rd ACM technical symposium on computer science education (pp. 699–699). New York, NY: ACM.
Furber, S. (2012). Shutdown or restart? The way forward for computing in UK schools. London: The Royal Society.
Goode, J. (2007). If you build teachers, will students come? The role of teachers in broadening computer science learning for urban youth. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 36(1), 65–88.
Grover, S., & Pea, R. (2013). Computational thinking in K–12. A review of the state of the field. Educational Researcher, 42(1), 38–43.
Grover, S., Pea, R., & Cooper, S. (2014). Promoting active learning and leveraging dashboards for curriculum assessment in an OpenEdX introductory CS course for middle school. In Proceedings of the first ACM conference on Learning@ scale conference (pp. 205–206). New York, NY: ACM.
Israel, M., Pearson, J. N., Tapia, T., Wherfel, Q. M., & Reese, G. (2015). Supporting all learners in school-wide computational thinking: A cross-case qualitative analysis. Computers and Education, 82, 263–279.
Kafai, Y. B., & Burke, Q. (2013). The social turn in K-12 programming: Moving from computational thinking to computational participation. In Proceeding of the 44th ACM technical symposium on computer science education (pp. 603–608). New York, NY: ACM.
Mannila, L., Dagiene, V., Demo, B., Grgurina, N., Mirolo, C., Rolandsson, L., & Settle, A. (2014). Computational thinking in K-9 education. In Proceedings of the working group reports of the 2014 on innovation and technology in computer science education conference (pp. 1–29). New York, NY: ACM.
Meerbaum-Salant, O., Armoni, M., & Ben-Ari, M. (2013). Learning computer science concepts with scratch. Computer Science Education, 23(3), 239–264.
Mishra, S., Balan, S., Iyer, S., & Murthy, S. (2014). Effect of a 2-week scratch intervention in CS1 on learners with varying prior knowledge. In Proceedings of the 2014 conference on innovation and technology in computer science education (pp. 45–50). New York, NY: ACM.
Moreno-León, J., & Robles, G. (2015). Dr. Scratch: A web tool to automatically evaluate scratch projects. In Proceedings of the workshop in primary and secondary computing education (pp. 132–133). New York, NY: ACM.
National Research Council. (2010). Report of a workshop on the scope and nature of computational thinking. Washington, DC: National Academies.
Repenning, A., Webb, D., & Ioannidou, A. (2010). Scalable game design and the development of a checklist for getting computational thinking into public schools. In Proceedings of the 41st ACM technical symposium on computer science education (pp. 265–269). New York, NY: ACM.
Resnick, M., Maloney, J., Monroy-Hernández, A., Rusk, N., Eastmond, E., Brennan, K., & Kafai, Y. (2009). Scratch: Programming for all. Communications of the ACM, 52(11), 60–67.
Settle, A., Franke, B., Hansen, R., Spaltro, F., Jurisson, C., Rennert-May, C., & Wildeman, B. (2012). Infusing computational thinking into the middle-and high-school curriculum. In Proceedings of the 17th ACM annual conference on innovation and technology in computer science education (pp. 22–27). New York, NY: ACM.
Wilson, A., & Moffat, D. C. (2010). Evaluating Scratch to introduce younger schoolchildren to programming. In Proceedings of the 22nd annual psychology of programming interest group. Leganes, Spain.
Wing, J. M. (2006). Computational thinking. Communications of the ACM, 49(3), 33–35.
Wing, J. M. (2011). Computational thinking. Retrieved from https://csta.acm.org/Curriculum/sub/CurrFiles/WingCTPrez.pdf
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Lawanto, K., Close, K., Ames, C., Brasiel, S. (2017). Exploring Strengths and Weaknesses in Middle School Students’ Computational Thinking in Scratch. In: Rich, P., Hodges, C. (eds) Emerging Research, Practice, and Policy on Computational Thinking. Educational Communications and Technology: Issues and Innovations. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-52691-1_19
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-52691-1_19
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-52690-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-52691-1
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)