Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
10.1145/3265757.3265762acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageswipsceConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

A survey of Australian teachers' self-efficacy and assessment approaches for the K-12 digital technologies curriculum

Published: 04 October 2018 Publication History

Abstract

As K-12 computer science (CS) education has been introduced to a number of countries around the world, the CS education community has been busy working to understand the learning and teaching of computing at these year levels, as well as how to build teacher capacity in teaching the subject. So far, much of the work on teacher professional development in K-12 CS education has focused on building content knowledge and skills.
In Australia, schools have began implementation phases of the new curriculum, however, as schools are now approaching formal curriculum reporting requirements, we seek to find out how prepared teachers feel they are to assess student learning in Digital Technologies, and what support they require. We present results from an online survey of Australian K-12 teachers in which they were asked to report their self-efficacy of assessing Digital Technologies against the Australian Teacher Professional Standards and various assessment practices. Teachers were also invited to share what they perceived to be the challenges of undertaking assessment and their self-identified needs for supporting assessment and reporting processes. The findings indicate that primary and secondary teachers report reasonable levels of self-efficacy, however, they still require time and support to develop assessment strategies for the subject area. This paper may support other contexts currently shifting from initial capacity building and curriculum familiarisation toward formal assessment and reporting of CS curriculum.

References

[1]
Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS). 2017. Schools Australia, 2017. (2017). http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/[email protected]/mf/4221.0
[2]
Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA). 2017. Australian Curriculum: Digital Technologies. (2017). https://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/f-10-curriculum/technologies/digital-technologies/
[3]
Australian Curriculum Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA). 2018. Structure. (2018). https://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/f-10-curriculum/technologies/digital-technologies/structure/
[4]
Australian Curriculum Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA). 2018. Worked Samples. (2018). https://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/resources/work-samples/samples/worksheet-digital-systems-at/
[5]
Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership (AITSL). 2017. Australian Professional Standards for Teachers. (2017). https://www.aitsl.edu.au/teach/standards
[6]
Frances Bailie, Bill Marion, and Deborah Whitfield. 2010. How Rubrics that Measure Outcomes Can Complete The Assessment Loop. Journal of Computing Sciences in Colleges (2010).
[7]
Albert Bandura. 1997. Self-ef?cacy: The exercise of control. Freeman, New York. 604 pages.
[8]
Albert Bandura. 2006. Guide for constructing self-efficacy scales. In Self-efficacy beliefs of adolescents. 307--337.
[9]
T. C. Bell, I. H. Witten, M. R. Fellows, S. Kanemune, and Y. Kuno. 1998. Computer Science Unplugged: Off-line activities and games for all ages. Journal of Computing Sciences in Colleges (1998).
[10]
Karen Brennan and Mitchel Resnick. 2012. New frameworks for studying and assessing the development of computational thinking. annual American Educational Research Association meeting, Vancouver, BC, Canada (2012).
[11]
C Brooks and S Gibson. 2012. Professional learning in a digital age. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology 38, 2 (2012), 1--17.
[12]
D. Ginat and E. Menashe. 2015. SOLO Taxonomy for assessing novices' algorithmic design. In Proceedings of the 46th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (SIGCSE '15).
[13]
D. Giordano, F. Maiorana, A. Csizmadia, S. Marsden, C. Riedesel, and S. Mishra. 2015. New horizons in the assessment of computer science at school and beyond: Leveraging on the ViVA platform. In ITiCSE-WGP 2015 - Proceedings of the 2015 ITiCSE Conference on Working Group Reports.
[14]
Shuchi Grover, Stephen Cooper, and Roy Pea. 2014. Assessing computational learning in K-12. In Proceedings of the 2014 conference on Innovation & technology in computer science education - ITiCSE '14.
[15]
P McKenzie, P Weldon, G Rowley, M Murphy, and J McMillan. 2014. Staff in Australia's Schools 2013: Main Report on the Survey. Technical Report. Commonwealth of Australia. 1--181 pages. https://docs.education.gov.au/system/fles/doc/other/sias_2013_main_report.pdf
[16]
Jesús Moreno-León, Gregorio Robles, and Marcos Román-González. 2015. Dr. Scratch: Automatic Analysis of Scratch Projects to Assess and Foster Computational Thinking. RED. Revista de Educación a Distancia (2015).
[17]
Janine T. Remillard. 2000. Can Curriculum Materials Support Teachers' Learning? Two Fourth-Grade Teachers' Use of a New Mathematics Text. The Elementary School Journal 100, 4 (3 2000), 331.
[18]
Brandon Rodriguez, Stephen Kennicutt, Cyndi Rader, and Tracy Camp. 2017. Assessing Computational Thinking in CS Unplugged Activities. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM SIGCSE Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education -SIGCSE '17.
[19]
Mark Sherman and Fred Martin. 2015. The assessment of mobile computational thinking. Journal of Computing Sciences in Colleges (2015).
[20]
L. Shulman. 1986. Those who understand: knowdge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher 15, 2 (1986), 4--14.
[21]
Einar M. Skaalvik and Sidsel Skaalvik. 2007. Dimensions of Teacher Self-Efficacy and Relations With Strain Factors, Perceived Collective Teacher Efficacy, and Teacher Burnout. Journal of Educational Psychology (2007).
[22]
Einar M. Skaalvik and Sidsel Skaalvik. 2010. Teacher self-efficacy and teacher burnout: A study of relations. Teaching and Teacher Education (2010).
[23]
The Cross Sectoral Assessment Working Party (Australian Capital Territory). {n. d.}. Teachers' Guide to Assessment. ({n. d.}).
[24]
Helen Timperley. 2008. Teacher professional learning and development. The International Academy of Education 1, 18 (2008), 1--30.
[25]
Victorian Department of Education and Training. 2017. Digital Technologies Curriculum: Assessment. (2017). http://www.digipubs.vic.edu.au/pubs/digitaltechnologies/digitaltechnologies-curriculum_assessment
[26]
Aman Yadav, Marc Berges, Phil Sands, and Jon Good. 2016. Measuring computer science pedagogical content knowledge: An exploratory analysis of teaching vignettes to measure teacher knowledge. Proceedings of the 11th Workshop in Primary and Secondary Computing Education (2016).
[27]
B. J. Zimmerman, A. Bandura, and M. Martinez-Pons. 1992. Self-Motivation for Academic Attainment: The Role of Self-Efficacy Beliefs and Personal Goal Setting. American Educational Research Journal (1992).

Cited By

View all
  • (2023)Classifying the Characteristics of Effective Continuing Professional Development (CPD) for Computer Science Teachers in the 16-18 SectorACM Transactions on Computing Education10.1145/358227523:2(1-30)Online publication date: 30-Jan-2023
  • (2023)Modelling the sustainability of a primary school digital education curricular reform and professional development programEducation and Information Technologies10.1007/s10639-023-11653-429:3(2857-2904)Online publication date: 15-Jun-2023
  • (2022)“I would be afraid to be a bad CS teacher”: Factors Influencing Participation in Pre-Service Secondary CS Teacher EducationProceedings of the 2022 ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research - Volume 110.1145/3501385.3543966(237-246)Online publication date: 3-Aug-2022
  • Show More Cited By

Index Terms

  1. A survey of Australian teachers' self-efficacy and assessment approaches for the K-12 digital technologies curriculum

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Information & Contributors

    Information

    Published In

    cover image ACM Other conferences
    WiPSCE '18: Proceedings of the 13th Workshop in Primary and Secondary Computing Education
    October 2018
    170 pages
    ISBN:9781450365888
    DOI:10.1145/3265757
    Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    Published: 04 October 2018

    Permissions

    Request permissions for this article.

    Check for updates

    Author Tags

    1. K-12 education
    2. assessment
    3. computer science education
    4. curriculum
    5. teacher professional development

    Qualifiers

    • Research-article

    Conference

    WiPSCE '18

    Acceptance Rates

    WiPSCE '18 Paper Acceptance Rate 32 of 72 submissions, 44%;
    Overall Acceptance Rate 104 of 279 submissions, 37%

    Contributors

    Other Metrics

    Bibliometrics & Citations

    Bibliometrics

    Article Metrics

    • Downloads (Last 12 months)60
    • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)4
    Reflects downloads up to 26 Jan 2025

    Other Metrics

    Citations

    Cited By

    View all
    • (2023)Classifying the Characteristics of Effective Continuing Professional Development (CPD) for Computer Science Teachers in the 16-18 SectorACM Transactions on Computing Education10.1145/358227523:2(1-30)Online publication date: 30-Jan-2023
    • (2023)Modelling the sustainability of a primary school digital education curricular reform and professional development programEducation and Information Technologies10.1007/s10639-023-11653-429:3(2857-2904)Online publication date: 15-Jun-2023
    • (2022)“I would be afraid to be a bad CS teacher”: Factors Influencing Participation in Pre-Service Secondary CS Teacher EducationProceedings of the 2022 ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research - Volume 110.1145/3501385.3543966(237-246)Online publication date: 3-Aug-2022
    • (2022)Design and Analysis of a Disciplinary Computer Science Course for Pre-service Primary TeachersInformatics in Schools. A Step Beyond Digital Education10.1007/978-3-031-15851-3_11(125-137)Online publication date: 26-Sep-2022
    • (2021)Evaluating Computer Science Professional Development for Teachers in the United StatesProceedings of the 21st Koli Calling International Conference on Computing Education Research10.1145/3488042.3488054(1-9)Online publication date: 17-Nov-2021
    • (2021)Exploring and Influencing Teacher Grading for Block-based Programs through Rubrics and the GradeSnap ToolProceedings of the 17th ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research10.1145/3446871.3469762(101-114)Online publication date: 16-Aug-2021
    • (2021)Comparing Programming Self-Esteem of Upper Secondary School Teachers to CS1 StudentsProceedings of the 26th ACM Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education V. 110.1145/3430665.3456372(554-560)Online publication date: 26-Jun-2021
    • (2021)An Accelerated CS0 for Online Mature-Age Part-Time StudentsProceedings of the 26th ACM Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education V. 110.1145/3430665.3456361(526-532)Online publication date: 26-Jun-2021
    • (2021)Toward A Framework for Formative Assessment of Conceptual Learning in K-12 Computer Science ClassroomsProceedings of the 52nd ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education10.1145/3408877.3432460(31-37)Online publication date: 3-Mar-2021
    • (2021)Primary teachers’ self-assessment of their confidence in implementing digital technologies curriculumEducational Technology Research and Development10.1007/s11423-021-10043-2Online publication date: 14-Sep-2021
    • Show More Cited By

    View Options

    Login options

    View options

    PDF

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    Figures

    Tables

    Media

    Share

    Share

    Share this Publication link

    Share on social media