Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
10.1145/3626252.3630830acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagessigcseConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Discourse Practices in Computer Science Education

Published: 07 March 2024 Publication History

Abstract

Rich classroom discussion, or discourse, has long been a recommended pedagogical practice in K-12 math and science education. Research shows that discourse is beneficial for all learners, but especially for English learners and minoritized students in STEM. Discourse helps develop students' agency, academic language, and conceptual understanding. Some K-12 computer science (CS) curricula incorporate student discourse, but we believe it is under-used. In this paper, we review how discourse helps students learn, discuss the use of discourse in CS and math education, share ideas for promoting discourse in CS classrooms, and call on curriculum developers, teacher professional learning providers, and researchers to support the increased use of discourse in K-12 CS education.

References

[1]
Carne Barnett-Clarke, Alma Ramirez, and Debra Coggins. 2010. Math Pathways & Pitfalls--Percents, Ratios, and Proportions with Algebra Readiness: Lessons and Teaching Manual, Grades 6--9. WestEd, San Francisco, CA. https://mpp.wested.org/
[2]
Satabdi Basu, Daisy Rutstein, Carol Tate, Arif Rachmatullah, and Hui Yang. 2022. Standards-Aligned Instructional Supports to Promote Computer Science Teachers' Pedagogical Content Knowledge. In Proceedings of the 53rd ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education V. 1 (Providence, RI, USA) (SIGCSE 2022). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 404--410. https://doi.org/10.1145/3478431.3499403
[3]
Kristy Elizabeth Boyer, William Lahti, Robert Phillips, Michael D. Wallis, Mladen A. Vouk, and James C. Lester. 2010. Principles of Asking Effective Questions during Student Problem Solving. In Proceedings of the 41st ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA) (SIGCSE '10). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 460--464. https://doi.org/10.1145/1734263.1734417
[4]
Courtney B. Cazden. 1988. Classroom Discourse: The Language of Teaching and Learning. Heinemann, Portsmouth, NH. 87011874
[5]
Code.org. 2023a. Lesson 10: Structuring Data. https://studio.code.org/s/csd5--2023/lessons/10
[6]
Code.org. 2023b. Lesson 23: Text and Prompts. https://studio.code.org/s/express-2023/lessons/23
[7]
Computer Science Teachers Association. 2017. CSTA K-12 Computer Science Standards, Revised 2017. https://csteachers.org/k12standards/
[8]
Pauline Gibbons. 2009. English Learners, Academic Literacy, and Thinking: Learning in the Challenge Zone. Heinnemann, Portsmouth, NH.
[9]
Joan I. Heller, Thomas Hanson, Carne Barnett-Clarke, and Kate D. Darling. 2010. The Impact of Math Pathways & Pitfalls on Students' Mathematics Achievement and Mathematical Language Development: A Study Conducted in Schools with High Concentrations of Latino/a Students and English Learners. https://mpp.wested.org/supporting-research/research-findings/#IES-1
[10]
Illustrative Mathematics. [n.d.-a]. Illustrative Mathematics. https://illustrativemathematics.org/
[11]
Illustrative Mathematics. [n.d.-b]. Unit 1, Lesson 19: Designing a Tent. https://curriculum.illustrativemathematics.org/MS/teachers/1/1/19/index.html
[12]
K-12 Computer Science Framework Steering Committee. 2016. K-12 Computer Science Framework. Technical Report. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA.
[13]
Lisa Linnenbrink-Garcia, Erika A. Patall, and Reinhard Pekrun. 2016. Adaptive Motivation and Emotion in Education: Research and Principles for Instructional Design. Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences, Vol. 3, 2 (2016), 228--236. https://doi.org/10.1177/2372732216644450
[14]
M-PLANS. [n.d.-a]. M-PLANS Toolkit. http://m-plans.org/toolkit
[15]
M-PLANS. [n.d.-b]. Motivation Design Principles. http://m-plans.org/mdps
[16]
Lauren Margulieux, Paul Denny, Kathryn Cunningham, Michael Deutsch, and Benjamin R. Shapiro. 2021. When Wrong is Right: The Instructional Power of Multiple Conceptions. In Proceedings of the 17th ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research (Virtual Event, USA) (ICER 2021). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 184--197. https://doi.org/10.1145/3446871.3469750
[17]
David McKinney, Chloe Morton, Brenda Tuohy, Sam Berg, Audrey Karlstad, Courtney Ortega, Zelda Allison, Griffin Munzel, Max Washburn, and Yvonne Kao. 2024. Iterative Design of a Socially-Relevant and Engaging Middle School Data Science Unit. In Proceedings of the 55th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (Portland, OR, USA) (SIGCSE '24). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, bibinfonumpages7 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3626252.3630886
[18]
Sarah Michaels, Mary Catherine O'Connor, Megan Williams Hall, and Lauren B. Resnick. 2010. Accountable Talk Sourcebook: For Classroom Conversation That Works. https://ifl.pitt.edu/publications/
[19]
Sarah Michaels and Cathy O'Connor. 2012. Talk Science Primer. Technical Report. TERC. https://inquiryproject.terc.edu/shared/pd/TalkScience_Primer.pdf
[20]
Jim Minstrell. 2001. The role of the teaching in making sense of classroom experiences and effecting better learning. In Cognition and Instruction: Twenty-Five Years of Progress, Sharon M. Carver and David Klahr (Eds.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers, Mahwah, NJ, Chapter 4, 121--149.
[21]
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM). 2014. Principles to Actions: Ensuring Mathematical Success for All. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, Reston, VA. https://www.nctm.org/PtA/
[22]
National Research Council. 2001. Adding It Up: Helping Children Learn Mathematics. The National Academies Press, Washington, DC. https://doi.org/10.17226/9822
[23]
National Research Council. 2007. Taking Science to School: Learning and Teaching Science in Grades K-9. The National Academies Press, Washington, DC. https://doi.org/10.17226/11625
[24]
Harold Pashler, Patrice M. Bain, Brian A. Bottge, Arthur Graesser, Kenneth Koedinger, Mark McDaniel, and Janet Metcalfe. 2007. Organizing Instruction and Study to Improve Student Learning (NCER 2007--2004). Technical Report. National Center for Education Research, Institute of Education Science, U.S. Department of Education, Washington, DC. http://ncer.ed.gov
[25]
Kathryn M. Rich, Carla Strickland, T. Andrew Binkowski, and Diana Franklin. 2019. A K-8 Debugging Learning Trajectory Derived from Research Literature. In Proceedings of the 50th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (Minneapolis, MN, USA) (SIGCSE '19). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 745--751. https://doi.org/10.1145/3287324.3287396
[26]
Kathryn M. Rich, Carla Strickland, T. Andrew Binkowski, Cheryl Moran, and Diana Franklin. 2017. K-8 Learning Trajectories Derived from Research Literature: Sequence, Repetition, Conditionals. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research (Tacoma, Washington, USA) (ICER '17). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 182--190. https://doi.org/10.1145/3105726.3106166
[27]
Dana Saito-Stehberger, Leiny Garcia, and Mark Warschauer. 2021. Modifying Curriculum for Novice Computational Thinking Elementary Teachers and English Language Learners. In Proceedings of the 26th ACM Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education V. 1 (Virtual Event, Germany) (ITiCSE '21). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 136--142. https://doi.org/10.1145/3430665.3456355
[28]
Margaret S. Smith and Mary Kay Stein. 2018. 5 Practices for Orchestrating Productive Mathematics Discussions, 2nd Edition. Corwin, Thousand Oaks, CA.
[29]
Juha Sorva. 2012. Visual Program Simulation in Introductory Programming Education. Ph.,D. Dissertation. Aalto University, Department of Computer Science and Engineering.
[30]
Alaaeddin Swidan, Felienne Hermans, and Marileen Smit. 2018. Programming Misconceptions for School Students. In Proceedings of the 2018 ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research (Espoo, Finland) (ICER '18). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 151--159. https://doi.org/10.1145/3230977.3230995
[31]
Kristen Taylor. 2022. Math Language Routines: Discourse with a Purpose. https://illustrativemathematics.blog/2022/02/17/math-language-routines-discourse-with-a-purpose/
[32]
Steve Walsh. 2011. Exploring Classroom Discourse: Language in Action. Taylor & Francis, New York, NY. https://www.routledge.com/Exploring-Classroom-Discourse-Language-in-Action/Walsh/p/book/9780415570671
[33]
WestEd. [n.d.]. Math Pathways & Pitfalls. https://mpp.wested.org/
[34]
Jacqueline L. Whalley and Raymond Lister. 2009. The BRACElet 2009.1 (Wellington) Specification. In Proceedings of the Eleventh Australasian Conference on Computing Education - Volume 95 (Wellington, New Zealand) (ACE '09). Australian Computer Society, Inc., AUS, 9--18.
[35]
Dorothy Y. White. 2003. Promoting productive mathematical classroom discourse with diverse students. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, Vol. 22, 1 (2003), 37--53. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0732--3123(03)00003--8
[36]
Jeff Zwiers, Jack Dieckmann, Sara Rutherford-Quach, Vinci Daro, Renae Skarin, Steven Weiss, and James Malamut. 2017. Principles for the Design of Mathematics Curricula: Promoting Language and Content Development. Technical Report. Stanford University, UL/SCALE. http://ell.stanford.edu/content/mathematics-resources-additional-resources io

Cited By

View all

Index Terms

  1. Discourse Practices in Computer Science Education

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Information & Contributors

    Information

    Published In

    cover image ACM Conferences
    SIGCSE 2024: Proceedings of the 55th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education V. 1
    March 2024
    1583 pages
    ISBN:9798400704239
    DOI:10.1145/3626252
    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 the author(s) 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].

    Sponsors

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    Published: 07 March 2024

    Permissions

    Request permissions for this article.

    Check for updates

    Author Tags

    1. academic language
    2. computer science education
    3. discourse

    Qualifiers

    • Research-article

    Funding Sources

    Conference

    SIGCSE 2024
    Sponsor:

    Acceptance Rates

    Overall Acceptance Rate 1,595 of 4,542 submissions, 35%

    Upcoming Conference

    SIGCSE TS 2025
    The 56th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education
    February 26 - March 1, 2025
    Pittsburgh , PA , USA

    Contributors

    Other Metrics

    Bibliometrics & Citations

    Bibliometrics

    Article Metrics

    • 0
      Total Citations
    • 134
      Total Downloads
    • Downloads (Last 12 months)134
    • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)7
    Reflects downloads up to 27 Jan 2025

    Other Metrics

    Citations

    Cited By

    View all

    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