short-paper

From 'Use' to 'Choose': Scaffolding CT Curricula and Exploring Student Choices while Programming (Practical Report)

Authors:

Nicholas Lytle,

Veronica Catete,

Danielle Boulden,

Tiffany BarnesAuthors Info & Claims

WiPSCE '19: Proceedings of the 14th Workshop in Primary and Secondary Computing Education

Article No.: 18, Pages 1 - 6

https://doi.org/10.1145/3361721.3362110

Published: 23 October 2019 Publication History

Abstract

As computing skills become necessary for 21st-century students, infused computational thinking (CT) lessons must be created for core courses to truly provide computing education for all. This will bring challenges as students will have widely varying experience and programming ability. Additionally, STEM teachers might have little experience teaching CT and instructing using unfamiliar technology might create discomfort. We present a design pattern for infused CT assignments that scaffold students and teachers into block-based programming environments. Beginning with existing code, students and teachers work together 'Using' and comprehending code before 'Modifying' it together to fix their programs. The activity ends with students 'Choosing' their own extensions from a pre-set list. We present a comparison of two implementations of a simulation activity, one ending with student choosing how to extend their models and one having all students create the same option. Through triangulating data from classroom observations, student feedback, teacher interviews, and programming interaction logs, we present support for student and teacher preference of the 'Student-Choice' model. We end with recommended strategies for developing curricula that follow our design model.

References

[1]

Bernd Meyer Aidan Lane and Jonathan Mullins. 2012. Simulation with Cellular A Project Based Introduction to Programming (first ed.). Monash University, Melbourne, Australia. Online: https://github.com/MonashAlexandria/snapapps.

[2]

Tim Bell, Jason Alexander, Isaac Freeman, and Mick Grimley. 2009. Computer science unplugged: School students doing real computing without computers. The New Zealand Journal of Applied Computing and Information Technology 13, 1 (2009), 20--29.

[3]

Veronica Cateté, Nicholas Lytle, Yihuan Dong, Danielle Boulden, Bita Akram, Jennifer Houchins, Tiffany Barnes, Eric Wiebe, James Lester, Bradford Mott, et al. 2018. Infusing computational thinking into middle grade science classrooms: lessons learned. In Proceedings of the 13th Workshop in Primary and Secondary Computing Education. ACM, ACM, 21.

Digital Library

[4]

Veronica Cateté, Kathleen Wassell, and Tiffany Barnes. 2014. Use and development of entertainment technologies in after school STEM program. In Proc. of the 45th ACM technical symposium on Computer science education. ACM, ACM, 163--168.

Digital Library

[5]

National Research Council et al. 2011. Successful K-12 STEM education: Identifying effective approaches in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. National Academies Press, Washington, D.C.

[6]

Jan Cuny. 2012. Transforming high school computing: a call to action. ACM Inroads 3, 2 (2012), 32--36.

Digital Library

[7]

Edward L Deci, Robert J Vallerand, Luc G Pelletier, and Richard M Ryan. 1991. Motivation and education: The self-determination perspective. Educational psychologist 26, 3-4 (1991), 325--346.

[8]

Jeffrey Frykholm. 2004. Teachers' tolerance for discomfort: Implications for curricular reform in mathematics. Journal of Curriculum and Supervision 19, 2 (2004), 125--149.

[9]

Dan Garcia, Brian Harvey, and Tiffany Barnes. 2015. The beauty and joy of computing. ACM Inroads 6, 4 (2015), 71--79.

Digital Library

[10]

Marianthi Grizioti and Chronis Kynigos. 2018. Game modding for computational thinking: an integrated design approach. In Proceedings of the 17th ACM Conference on Interaction Design and Children. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 687--692.

Digital Library

[11]

Shuchi Grover, Roy Pea, and Stephen Cooper. 2016. Factors influencing computer science learning in middle school. In Proceedings of the 47th ACM technical symposium on computing science education. ACM, ACM, 552--557.

Digital Library

[12]

Yasmin B Kafai and Mitchel Resnick. 2012. Constructionism in practice: Designing, thinking, and learning in a digital world. Routledge.

[13]

Irene Lee, Fred Martin, Jill Denner, Bob Coulter, Walter Allan, Jeri Erickson, Joyce Malyn-Smith, and Linda Werner. 2011. Computational thinking for youth in practice. Acm Inroads 2, 1 (2011), 32--37.

Digital Library

[14]

Raymond Lister, Colin Fidge, and Donna Teague. 2009. Further evidence of a relationship between explaining, tracing and writing skills in introductory programming. Acm sigcse bulletin 41, 3 (2009), 161--165.

[15]

Nicholas Lytle, Veronica Cateté, Danielle Boulden, Yihuan Dong, Jennifer Houchins, Alexandra Milliken, Amy Isvik, Dolly Bounajim, Eric Wiebe, and Tiffany Barnes. 2019. Use, Modify, Create: Comparing Computational Thinking Lesson Progressions for STEM Classes. In Proceedings of the 2019 ACM Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education. ACM, ACM, 395--401.

Digital Library

[16]

Nicholas Lytle, Veronica Cateté, Yihuan Dong, Danielle Boulden, Bita Akram, Jennifer Houchins, Tiffany Barnes, and Eric Wiebe. 2019. CEO: A Triangulated Evaluation of a Modeling-Based CT-Infused CS Activity for Non-CS Middle Grade Students. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Global Computing Education. ACM, ACM, 58--64.

Digital Library

[17]

Jane Margolis. 2010. Stuck in the shallow end: Education, race, and computing. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.

Digital Library

[18]

Frank Pajares. 1996. Self-efficacy beliefs in academic settings. Review of educational research 66, 4 (1996), 543--578.

[19]

Seymour Papert and Idit Harel. 1991. Situating constructionism. Constructionism 36, 2 (1991), 1--11.

[20]

Dale Parsons and Patricia Haden. 2006. Parson's Programming Puzzles: A Fun and Effective Learning Tool for First Programming Courses. In Proceedings of the 8th Australasian Conference on Computing Education - Volume 52 (ACE '06). Australian Computer Society, Inc., Darlinghurst, Australia, Australia, 157--163. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1151869.1151890

Digital Library

[21]

Thomas W Price, Jennifer Albert, Veronica Catete, and Tiffany Barnes. 2015. BJC in action: Comparison of student perceptions of a computer science principles course. In Research in Equity and Sustained Participation in Engineering, Computing, and Technology (RESPECT), 2015. IEEE, IEEE, 1--4.

[22]

Thomas W Price, Veronica Cateté, Jennifer Albert, Tiffany Barnes, and Daniel D Garcia. 2016. Lessons Learned from BJC CS Principles Professional Development. In Proceedings of the 47th ACM Technical Symposium on Computing Science Education. ACM, ACM, New York, NY, 467--472.

Digital Library

[23]

Robert Pucher and Martin Lehner. 2011. Project based learning in computer science--a review of more than 500 projects. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences 29 (2011), 1561--1566.

[24]

Mitchel Resnick, John Maloney, Andrés Monroy-Hernández, Natalie Rusk, Evelyn Eastmond, Karen Brennan, Amon Millner, Eric Rosenbaum, Jay S Silver, Brian Silverman, et al. 2009. Scratch: Programming for all. Commun. Acm 52, 11 (2009), 60--67.

Digital Library

[25]

Sue Sentance, Jane Waite, and Maria Kallia. 2019. Teachers' Experiences of Using PRIMM to Teach Programming in School. In Proceedings of the 50th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (SIGCSE '19). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 476--482. https://doi.org/10.1145/3287324.3287477

Digital Library

[26]

John Sweller. 1988. Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive science 12, 2 (1988), 257--285.

[27]

David Weintrop, Elham Beheshti, Michael Horn, Kai Orton, Kemi Jona, Laura Trouille, and Uri Wilensky. 2014. Defining computational thinking for science, technology, engineering, and math.

[28]

Jeannette M Wing. 2006. Computational thinking. Commun. ACM 49, 3 (2006), 33--35.

Digital Library

Cited By

Steinberg SGresalfi MVogelstein LBrady C(2022)Coding choreography: Understanding student responses to representational incompatibilities between dance and programmingJournal of Research on Technology in Education10.1080/15391523.2022.213514456:3(314-331)Online publication date: 27-Oct-2022
https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2022.2135144
Isvik ACateté VBarnes TSchulte CBecker BDivitini MBarendsen E(2021)Investigating the Impact of Computing vs Pedagogy Experience in Novices Creation of Computing-Infused CurriculaProceedings of the 26th ACM Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education V. 110.1145/3430665.3456319(255-261)Online publication date: 26-Jun-2021
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3430665.3456319
Cateté VIsvik ABarnes T(2020)Infusing Computing: A Scaffolding and Teacher Accessibility Analysis of Computing Lessons Designed by NovicesProceedings of the 20th Koli Calling International Conference on Computing Education Research10.1145/3428029.3428056(1-11)Online publication date: 19-Nov-2020
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3428029.3428056
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

From 'Use' to 'Choose': Scaffolding CT Curricula and Exploring Student Choices while Programming (Practical Report)
1. Social and professional topics
  1. Professional topics
    1. Computing education
      1. Computational thinking
      2. K-12 education

Recommendations

Use, Modify, Create: Comparing Computational Thinking Lesson Progressions for STEM Classes
ITiCSE '19: Proceedings of the 2019 ACM Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education

Computational Thinking (CT) is being infused into curricula in a variety of core K-12 STEM courses. As these topics are being introduced to students without prior programming experience and are potentially taught by instructors unfamiliar with ...
Assessing the development of mathematics teachers TPACK through an observation rubric
Abstract
The TPACK framework has gained popularity in guiding research regarding the assessment and development of teachers’ competencies to teach with technology. Since theoretically, the framework is about teachers’ knowledge for teaching using ...
A Review of Factors Influencing Students’ Choice in Tertiary Technical Education
Proceedings of the International Conference on Advancing and Redesigning Education 2023
Abstract
Malaysian Education’s Science/Technical: Arts Policy demands a 60:40 ratio of enrollment in science and arts. However, the current enrollment of science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) in higher education programs is still greatly ...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Other conferences

WiPSCE '19: Proceedings of the 14th Workshop in Primary and Secondary Computing Education

October 2019

127 pages

ISBN:9781450377041

DOI:10.1145/3361721

Copyright © 2019 ACM.

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]

In-Cooperation

GI: Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V.
University of Glasgow: University of Glasgow

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 23 October 2019

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Short-paper
Research
Refereed limited

Conference

WiPSCE'19

WiPSCE'19: 14th Workshop in Primary and Secondary Computing Education

October 23 - 25, 2019

Scotland, Glasgow, Uk

Acceptance Rates

WiPSCE '19 Paper Acceptance Rate 23 of 43 submissions, 53%;

Overall Acceptance Rate 104 of 279 submissions, 37%

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

6
Total Citations
View Citations
285
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)14
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0

Reflects downloads up to 08 Feb 2025

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Steinberg SGresalfi MVogelstein LBrady C(2022)Coding choreography: Understanding student responses to representational incompatibilities between dance and programmingJournal of Research on Technology in Education10.1080/15391523.2022.213514456:3(314-331)Online publication date: 27-Oct-2022
https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2022.2135144
Isvik ACateté VBarnes TSchulte CBecker BDivitini MBarendsen E(2021)Investigating the Impact of Computing vs Pedagogy Experience in Novices Creation of Computing-Infused CurriculaProceedings of the 26th ACM Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education V. 110.1145/3430665.3456319(255-261)Online publication date: 26-Jun-2021
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3430665.3456319
Cateté VIsvik ABarnes T(2020)Infusing Computing: A Scaffolding and Teacher Accessibility Analysis of Computing Lessons Designed by NovicesProceedings of the 20th Koli Calling International Conference on Computing Education Research10.1145/3428029.3428056(1-11)Online publication date: 19-Nov-2020
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3428029.3428056
Cateté VLytle NBoulden DHinckle MWiebe EBarnes T(2020)A block-based modeling curriculum for teaching middle grade science students about Covid-19Proceedings of the 15th Workshop on Primary and Secondary Computing Education10.1145/3421590.3421624(1-2)Online publication date: 28-Oct-2020
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3421590.3421624
Franklin DCoenraad MPalmer JEatinger DZipp AAnaya MWhite MPham HGökdemir OWeintrop DRobins AMoskal AKo AMcCauley RRobins AKo A(2020)An Analysis of Use-Modify-Create Pedagogical Approach's Success in Balancing Structure and Student AgencyProceedings of the 2020 ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research10.1145/3372782.3406256(14-24)Online publication date: 10-Aug-2020
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3372782.3406256
Martin FLee ILytle NSentance SLao NZhang JSherriff MHeckman SCutter PMonge A(2020)Extending and Evaluating the Use-Modify-Create Progression for Engaging Youth in Computational ThinkingProceedings of the 51st ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education10.1145/3328778.3366971(807-808)Online publication date: 26-Feb-2020
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3328778.3366971

View Options

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Figures

Tables

Media

View Table of Conten