Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Algorithmic thinking, cooperativity, creativity, critical thinking, and problem solving: exploring the relationship between computational thinking skills and academic performance

  • Published:
Journal of Computers in Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The continued call for twenty-first century skills renders computational thinking a topical subject of study, as it is increasingly recognized as a fundamental competency for the contemporary world. Yet its relationship to academic performance is poorly understood. In this paper, we explore the association between computational thinking and academic performance. We test a structural model—employing a partial least squares approach—to assess the relationship between computational thinking skills and academic performance. Surprisingly, we find no association between computational thinking skills and academic performance (except for a link between cooperativity and academic performance). These results are discussed respecting curricular mandated instruction in higher-order thinking skills and the importance of curricular alignment between instructional objectives and evaluation approaches for successfully teaching and learning twenty-first-century skills.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Anderson, L. (2002). Curricular alignment: A re-examination. Theory into Practice, 41(4), 255–264.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ater-Kranov, A., Bryant, R., Orr, G., Wallace, S., & Zhang, M. (2010). Developing a community definition and teaching modules for computational thinking: Accomplishments and challenges. In Proceedings of the 2010 ACM conference on information technology education (pp. 143–148). ACM.

  • Atmatzidou, S., & Demetriadis, S. (2016). Advancing students’ computational thinking skills through educational robotics: A study on age and gender relevant differences. Robotics And Autonomous Systems, 75, 661–670. doi:10.1016/j.robot.2015.10.008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barr, V., & Stephenson, C. (2011). Bringing computational thinking to K-12. ACM Inroads, 2(1), 48. doi:10.1145/1929887.1929905.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bateman, D., Taylor, S., Janik, E., & Logan, A. (2008). Curriculum coherence and student success. Champlain College CEGEP. Retrieved from: http://www.cdc.qc.ca/parea/786950_bateman_curriculums_champlain_st_lambert_PAREA_2007.pdf.

  • Bazelais, P., Lemay, D. J., & Doleck, T. (2016). How does grit impact college students’ academic achievement in science? European Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 4(1), 33–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Biggs, J. (1996). Enhancing teaching through constructive alignment. Higher Education, 32, 1–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Biggs, J. (1999). Teaching for quality learning at university. Society for Research into Higher Education/Open University Press.

  • Brennan, K., & Resnick, M. (2012). New frameworks for studying and assessing the development of computational thinking. Vancouver: Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bundy, A. (2007). Computational thinking is pervasive. Journal of Scientific and Practical Computing, 1(2), 67–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, S., Pérez, L., & Rainey, D. (2010). K-12 computational learning. Communications of the ACM, 53(11), 27. doi:10.1145/1839676.1839686.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Denning, P. (2009). The profession of IT beyond computational thinking. Communications of the ACM, 52(6), 28. doi:10.1145/1516046.1516054.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deschryver, M. D., & Yadav, A. (2015). Creative and computational thinking in the context of new literacies: Working with teachers to scaffold complex technology-mediated approaches to teaching and learning. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 23(3), 411–431.

    Google Scholar 

  • Farris, A. V., & Sengupta, P. (2014). Perspectival computational thinking for learning physics: A case study of collaborative agent-based modeling. In Proceedings of the 12th international conference of the learning sciences (ICLS 2014) (pp. 1102–1107).

  • Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foundation for Critical Thinking. (2015). Elements and standards learning tool. Retrieved from: http://www.criticalthinking.org/pages/analyzing-and-assessing-thinking-/783.

  • Futschek, G. (2006). Algorithmic thinking: The key for understanding computer science. In International conference on informatics in secondary schools-evolution and perspectives (pp. 159–168). Berlin: Springer.

  • Google for Education. (n.d.). CT overview. Retrieved from https://edu.google.com/resources/programs/exploring-computational-thinking/#!ct-overview.

  • 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. doi:10.1007/s11528-016-0098-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grover, S., & Pea, R. (2013). Computational thinking in K-12: A review of the state of the field. Educational Researcher, 42(1), 38–43. doi:10.3102/0013189x12463051.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guzdial, M. (2008). Education paving the way for computational thinking. Communications of the ACM, 51(8), 25. doi:10.1145/1378704.1378713.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hair, J., Ringle, C., & Sarstedt, M. (2011). PLS-SEM: Indeed a silver bullet. The Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 19(2), 139–152. doi:10.2753/mtp1069-6679190202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hu, C. (2011). Computational thinking: What it might mean and what we might do about it. In Proceedings of the 16th annual joint conference on innovation and technology in computer science education (pp. 223–227). ACM.

  • Katai, Z. (2014). The challenge of promoting algorithmic thinking of both sciences- and humanities-oriented learners. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 31(4), 287–299. doi:10.1111/jcal.12070.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kiss, G., & Arki, Z. (2017). The influence of game-based programming education on the algorithmic thinking. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 237(21), 613–617.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kock, N. (2015a). WarpPLS. Retrieved from http://www.warppls.com.

  • Kock, N. (2015b). WarpPLS 5.0 user manual. ScripWarp Systems. Retrieved from http://cits.tamiu.edu/WarpPLS/UserManual_v_5_0.pdf.

  • Korkmaz, Ö., Çakir, R., & Özden, M. (2017). A validity and reliability study of the computational thinking scales (CTS). Computers in Human Behavior. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2017.01.005.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kules, B. (2016). Computational thinking is critical thinking: Connecting to university discourse, goals, and learning outcomes. In Proceedings of the association for information science and technology. Silver Springs, MD: American Society for Information Science.

  • Lee, I., Martin, F., & Apone, K. (2014). Integrating computational thinking across the K-8 curriculum. ACM Inroads, 5(4), 64–71. doi:10.1145/2684721.2684736.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, J., & Wang, L. (2010). Computational thinking in discrete mathematics. In IEEE 2nd international workshop on education technology and computer science (pp. 413–416).

  • Lockwood, J., & Mooney, A. (2017). Computational thinking in education: Where does it fit? A Systematic Literary Review. (under review).

  • Lu, J., & Fletcher, G. (2009). Thinking about computational thinking. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 41(1), 260–264. doi:10.1145/1539024.1508959.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lye, S., & Koh, J. (2014). Review on teaching and learning of computational thinking through programming: What is next for K-12? Computers in Human Behavior, 41, 51–61. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2014.09.012.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mezirow, J. (2000). Learning as transformation: Critical perspectives on a theory in progress. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mishra, P., Yadav, A., & Deep-Play Research Group. (2013). Rethinking technology & creativity in the 21st century. TechTrends, 57(3), 10–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mueller, J., Beckett, D., Hennessey, E., & Shodiev, H. (2017). Assessing computational thinking across the curriculum. In Emerging research, practice, and policy on computational thinking (pp. 251–267). Springer International Publishing.

  • National Council for Curriculum and Assessment. (2013). Draft specification for junior cycle short course. Retrieved from http://www.juniorcycle.ie/NCCA_JuniorCycle/media/NCCA/Documents/Consultation/Short%20Courses/SC_P_and_C.pdf.

  • National Research Council. (2011). Report of a workshop of pedagogical aspects of computational thinking. Retrieved from http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=13170.

  • Papert, S. (1996). An exploration in the space of mathematics educations. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 1(1), 95–123. doi:10.1007/bf00191473.

    Google Scholar 

  • Polya, G. (1981). Mathematical discovery: On understanding, learning and teaching problem solving. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Resnick, M., Silverman, B., Kafai, Y., Maloney, J., Monroy-Hernández, A., Rusk, N., et al. (2009). Scratch. Communications of the ACM, 52(11), 60. doi:10.1145/1592761.1592779.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Román-González, M., Pérez-González, J., & Jiménez-Fernández, C. (2017). Which cognitive abilities underlie computational thinking? Criterion validity of the computational thinking test. Computers in Human Behavior, 72, 678–691. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.08.047.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sawyer, K. (2012). Explaining creativity: The science of human innovation (2nd ed.). New York: Oxford Univ. Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sengupta, P., Kinnebrew, J., Basu, S., Biswas, G., & Clark, D. (2013). Integrating computational thinking with K-12 science education using agent-based computation: A theoretical framework. Education And Information Technologies, 18(2), 351–380. doi:10.1007/s10639-012-9240-x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Snalune, P. (2015). The benefits of computational thinking. ITNOW, 57(4), 58–59. doi:10.1093/itnow/bwv111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Standl, B. (2016). A case study on cooperative problem solving processes in small 9th grade student groups. IEEE global engineering education conference (EDUCON), Abu Dhabi (pp. 961–967).

  • Voogt, J., Fisser, P., Good, J., Mishra, P., & Yadav, A. (2015). Computational thinking in compulsory education: Towards an agenda for research and practice. Education and Information Technologies, 20(4), 715–728. doi:10.1007/s10639-015-9412-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Voskoglou, M. G., & Buckley, S. (2012). Problem solving and computers in a learning environment. Egyptian Computer Science Journal, 36(4), 28–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Warneken, F., Steinwender, J., Hamann, K., & Tomasello, M. (2014). Young children’s planning in a collaborative problem-solving task. Cognitive Development, 31, 48–58. doi:10.1016/j.cogdev.2014.02.003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weintrop, D., Beheshti, E., Horn, M., Orton, K., Jona, K., Trouille, L., et al. (2015). Defining computational thinking for mathematics and science classrooms. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 25(1), 127–147. doi:10.1007/s10956-015-9581-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, R. L. (2005). Targeting critical thinking within teacher education: The potential impact on Society. The Teacher Educator, 40(3), 163–187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wing, J. (2006). Computational thinking. Communications of the ACM, 49(3), 33. doi:10.1145/1118178.1118215.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wing, J. (2008). Computational thinking and thinking about computing. Philosophical Transactions Of The Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical And Engineering Sciences, 366(1881), 3717–3725. doi:10.1098/rsta.2008.0118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wing, J. (2011). Research notebook: Computational thinking—What and why? The Link Newsletter, 6, 1–32. Retrieved from http://link.cs.cmu.edu/files/11-399_The_Link_Newsletter-3.pdf.

  • Wing, J. (2014). Computational thinking benefits society. Social issues in computing. Retrieved from http://socialissues.cs.toronto.edu/2014/01/computational-thinking/.

  • Wold, H. (1982). Soft modeling: The basic design and some extensions. In K. Joreskog & H. Wold (Eds.), Systems under indirect observation (pp. 1–54). Amsterdam: North-Holland.

  • 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. doi:10.1007/s11528-016-0087-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yadav, A., Stephenson, C., & Hong, H. (2017). Computational thinking for teacher education. Communications of the ACM, 60(4), 55–62. doi:10.1145/2994591.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. McGill University, 3700 McTavish St., Montreal, QC, H3A 1Y2, Canada

    Tenzin Doleck, Paul Bazelais, David John Lemay & Anoop Saxena

  2. Colorado Mesa University, Grand Junction, CO, USA

    Ram B. Basnet

Authors
  1. Tenzin Doleck
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Paul Bazelais
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. David John Lemay
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Anoop Saxena
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Ram B. Basnet
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tenzin Doleck.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Doleck, T., Bazelais, P., Lemay, D.J. et al. Algorithmic thinking, cooperativity, creativity, critical thinking, and problem solving: exploring the relationship between computational thinking skills and academic performance. J. Comput. Educ. 4, 355–369 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-017-0090-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-017-0090-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation