Running Head: READY OR NOT: TEACHER PREPAREDNESS & COMPUTATIONAL

THINKING
1

Ready or Not: Teacher Preparedness & Computational Thinking

Framing Issue

Cristina Leo

ETEC 533: Technology in the Mathematics and Science Classroom

University of British Columbia

June 23rd, 2017

Running Head: READY OR NOT: TEACHER PREPAREDNESS & COMPUTATIONAL
THINKING
2

Introduction

There is considerable discussion regarding the role of computational thinking in education

especially with the revised curriculum in British Columbia and with new course offerings such as
Applied Design, Skills and Technology. Jeanette Wing defined computational thinking as
“solving problems, designing systems, and understanding human behavior by drawing on the
concepts fundamental to computer science.” (2006) It can be said that students are growing up in
an era of rapid technological change and these students need to be better prepared to solve
real-life issues, not when they enter post-secondary but today. Therefore, it is imperative that
educators, in particular those in the role as edtech integrators, have a clear understanding of what
computational thinking is, and more importantly, knowing how to successfully integrate this
form of thinking into the curriculum so that students are motivated and engaged in the process.

The major tenets of 21st century learning focus on developing students who are creative, can
collaborate, communicate and think critically. Computational thinking is a means of achieving
these goals, however, it is vital for educators within K-12 to understand how to ensure these
goals are effectively met. This annotated bibliography attempts to explore how literature on
computational thinking in math curriculum in K-6 curriculum is implemented. Situated in the
framework of constructivism and TPACK, this paper will focus on the major researchers who are
looking into the teaching and learning of computational thinking in the classroom, as well as the
role of teachers, edtech integrators, and more importantly postsecondary institutions who train
pre-service teachers.

My initial research was spent on understanding what computational thinking is, and how it is
defined within K-12 education. Information spanned from the early work of Seymour Papert, to
the research of Mitchel Resnick, which highlighted the importance of following a kindergarten
approach to learning through play, as well as inquiring into the organizations of International
Society for Technology in Education (ISTE), Computer Science Teachers Association (CSTA),
and the National Science Foundation (NSF). From these preliminary readings, keywords and
phrases for searching included “computational thinking,” “K-6 integration,” “computer science,”
and “pre-service education.” Much of the scholarly articles discuss the lack of empirical
evidence and research regarding the implementation of computational thinking in math and
science courses at the elementary age, however, due to current demand it is thought that this
research will begin to grow within the next few years. The following articles provide an
American (South and North) point of reference. The articles were found from CiteULike as well
as UBC library online databases. Each article builds a case supporting the role of computational
thinking within a K-12 system looking at the why, what, and how this skill set can be
implemented in the current school system, so children are better equipped to participate as active
citizens in their own communities. The following articles represent greater awareness in
Running Head: READY OR NOT: TEACHER PREPAREDNESS & COMPUTATIONAL
THINKING
3

answering the framing issue of how edtech integrators, as well as elementary teachers can better
implement computational thinking into the K-6 math curriculum.

Annotated Bibliography
Article One

Angeli, C., Voogt, J., Fluck, A., Webb, M., Cox, M., Malyn-Smith, J., & Zagami, J. (2016). A
K-6 computational thinking curriculum framework: Implications for teacher knowledge. ​Journal
of Educational Technology & Society​, ​19​(3), 47.

In order to better prepare students to withstand the challenges of the 21st century the authors
propose the implementation of computational thinking within the K-6 classroom be essential.
However, the authors note that in order to do so, better understanding of what computational
thinking is, and the effective practice of training professionals is required. This study aimed to
address the framing issue of what computational skills should be provided within a K-6
curriculum. As well as what knowledge teachers require in order to deliver a program that
models computational thinking in K-6. The authors agree that Janette Wing’s definition is best
suited for the K-12 curriculum. The framework follows the major tenets of Computational
Thinking Practices and the set of seven Big Ideas of computer science. The authors take the five
computational thinking skills of Abstraction, Generalization, decomposition, algorithmic
thinking, and debugging and situate these points within a framework that motivates, engages and
encourages students. Overall, the authors point to a holistic approach in implementing
computational thinking rather than one that isolates and teaches concepts individually. The
authors stress that thinking does not occur in isolation, that students need to be able to synthesize
their skillset and utilize computational thinking holistically. Therefore, through the design of
real-world problem solving students can demonstrate curiosity, creativity, motivation, and
determination in solving these problems.

The main arguments presented in this article support my framing issue of how do teachers and
edtech integrators implement computational thinking within math classes at the elementary level
because it is situated within the framework of TPCK. This framework is effective in the younger
years because it provides clear guidelines and requirements for educators on how best to adopt
and apply computer science practices and big ideas into the curriculum and classroom. Essential
to successful implementation is ensuring that schools create communities of experts and use a
variety of resources made available online. These resources do not need to be implemented with
technology tools such as computers, but rather can be unplugged lessons as well. When teachers
model collaboration and communication skills amongst networks of experts, students will be
able to benefit from this community as well.

Article Two
Barr, V., & Stevenson, C. (2011, 02). Bringing computational thinking to K-12. ​ACM Inroads,
2​(1), 48. doi:10.1145/1929887.1929905

Barr and Stephenson’s article brings to light the importance of educating students, as early as
kindergarten, with the necessary skills in problem solving and computational ways of thinking.
Running Head: READY OR NOT: TEACHER PREPAREDNESS & COMPUTATIONAL
THINKING
4

The authors suggest that in order to bring computational thinking into the K-12 curriculum
educational policy, infrastructure, and resources need to be changed. The authors focus on
highlighting how K-12 educators can teach students to identify, apply and use technology for
algorithmic and computational thinking, and the manipulation of data. Consistent with many of
the articles explored throughout the research for this framing paper is the discussion of clearly
defining computer science and computational thinking within an educational framework.
Working from Wing’s definition, the goal in implementing computational thinking into the K-12
curriculum looks to point that educators try not to teach thinking like a computer scientist but
rather to apply the elements of problem solving and inquiry through a transdisciplinary approach.
Barr and Stephenson propose ways of envisioning computational thinking within the K-12
classroom, as well as the strategies for achieving systemic change. Reinforced in this article is
the need for continued research and inquiry into the ways in which computational thinking
promotes learning and problem solving in the classroom.

This article was selected because it is relevant in the discussion of policy changes in integration,
implementation, and leadership within K-12 curriculum in regards to computational thinking.
Within the math curriculum students can learn mathematical concepts while also learning to code
or program robotics for example. No longer should students wait until they reach post-secondary
institutions to begin learning about these complex concepts in thinking, but rather be exposed to
new ways of learning, thinking and applying knowledge in the K-12 curriculum. Students need
opportunities to practice skill development in classrooms with like minded students, and teachers
who are able to access a variety of resources and other curriculum experts, whether it be content
or computer science experts. When students are exposed to computational thinking early they
learn to collaborate and communicate in a rich environment that stresses innovation, creativity,
and critical thinking.

Article Three

Calao, L. A., Moreno-León, J., Correa, H. E., & Robles, G. (2015). Developing Mathematical
Thinking with Scratch. ​Design for Teaching and Learning in a Networked World Lecture Notes
in Computer Science,​ 17-27. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-24258-3_2

Calao et al. analyzed the effects of implementing Scratch programing within a Grade 6
classroom to Colombian students to foster the development computational thinking. The design
of the study conducted followed a quantitative research approach with a sample population of 42
students utilizing a rubric to collect data. Evidence from the study revealed that students who
received Scratch programming intervention, in conjunction with their regular math class
outperformed the control group in problem-solving and exercising understanding. Students were
forced to use their new knowledge and take meaningful action in their learning, fostering
risk-taking and problem solving. The research is relevant as it encourages further study to
explore how specific goals in computational thinking can be designed through Scratch
programming. According to the study, there is current research being conducted to see the
parallels between programming with Scratch and the positive benefits it can have in other
scholarly disciplines, such as english and humanities.
Running Head: READY OR NOT: TEACHER PREPAREDNESS & COMPUTATIONAL
THINKING
5

This article was selected because it is relevant to the understanding of how educational
technology integrators can foster computational thinking within K-12 classrooms through the use
of programming tools such as Scratch. By focusing on utilizing programming (Scratch) in the
mathematics classroom, data was collected to determine the improvements within reasoning and
problem solving skills. This qualitative study focused on the use of programming in math classes
to improve modeling, reasoning, problem-solving and exercising skills, which aid in the
implementation of instruction for both edtech integrators and classroom teachers. When
classroom teachers work with edtech integrators, forming a network of content experts, students
will benefit from these resources within the classroom. Teachers can extend thinking in students
by challenging them to take-risks, and engage in exciting learning engagements such as Scratch.
Finally, this article again reinforced the importance of continued research into the uses of
programming to build computational thinking and skill development with the younger student
population (K-6).

Article Four

Yadav, Aman, Chris Stephenson, and Hai Hong. "Computational Thinking for Teacher
Education." ​Communications of the ACM​ 60.4 (2017): 55-62. Print.

Yadav, Stephenson, and Hong’s article proposes their idea that in order to effectively implement
computational thinking in the K-12 classroom, greater instruction at the pre-service level is
required. By targeting pre-service teachers while at education institutions, these teachers will
have greater access to resources, communities of experts and increased collaborative team
building opportunities which will be translated into the K-12 classroom once they enter the
workforce. The authors go on to discuss the importance of redesigning educational technology
courses at the university level to provide a framework that focuses on methodology, core tenets
of computational thinking and computer science. By developing a clear definition of
computational thinking, a strong network of computer and teacher educators, pre-service
teachers will be able to implement computational thinking within their own classrooms.

This article is directly related to my framing issue question on how edtech integrators support the
implementation of computational thinking into the new curriculum because it addresses that
teachers need to be able to provide a trans-disciplinary approach that weaves computational
thinking with specific content knowledge, in particular math. However, brief discussion is
mentioned in the article to address teachers who are already in the classroom (K-12). This article
was selected because it suggests that professional development is a critical component in
ensuring computational thinking is not only understood, but implemented in the K-12
curriculum. Finally, the article makes reference to the Technological Pedagogical Content
Knowledge (TPACK) framework as a useful model for both current and pre-service educators
willing to implement computational thinking routines in the math and science classroom.
Running Head: READY OR NOT: TEACHER PREPAREDNESS & COMPUTATIONAL
THINKING
6

Conclusion

Understanding the ways in which educational technology experts can implement computational
thinking in the elementary curriculum is vital in K-12 classrooms. Action must be taken now so
that students have abundant opportunities to engage in learning activities that are not only
challenging but provide opportunities for robust skill development. Within a TPCK framework,
educators including edtech integrators, need to be aware of best practice while participating in
networked expert communities in order to collaborate together to ensure students are introduced
to the best resources. Based upon the early work of Seymour Papert, Janette Wing and Mitchel
Resnick, computational thinking deployment in education must begin with teachers willing to
take-risks in their own learning and implement changes. When educators begin to do so,
increased opportunity for further research and study will provide global perspectives that can be
further explored. As discussed in the annotated bibliographies until this happens, universities
must do a better job of preparing pre-service teachers in understanding what computational
thinking is, and the role it plays in the K-12 curriculum, including math classrooms; universities
must go beyond the study of educational technology. Educators must also understand that it is
okay for their role in the classroom to shift from purveyors of expert knowledge to that of
coaches, working alongside students. In order to meet the current demands of BCs new
curriculum and 21st century skill development, teachers must begin to take the first step in
making computational thinking visible in the classroom.
Running Head: READY OR NOT: TEACHER PREPAREDNESS & COMPUTATIONAL
THINKING
7

References

Angeli, C., Voogt, J., Fluck, A., Webb, M., Cox, M., Malyn-Smith, J., & Zagami, J. (2016). A

K-6 computational thinking curriculum framework: Implications for teacher knowledge.

Journal of Educational Technology & Society​, ​19​(3), 47.

Barr, V., & Stevenson, C. (2011, 02). Bringing computational thinking to K-12. ​ACM Inroads,

2​(1), 48. doi:10.1145/1929887.1929905

Calao, L. A., Moreno-León, J., Correa, H. E., & Robles, G. (2015). Developing Mathematical

Thinking with Scratch. ​Design for Teaching and Learning in a Networked World Lecture

Notes in Computer Science,​ 17-27. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-24258-3_2

Yadav, Aman, Chris Stephenson, and Hai Hong. "Computational Thinking for Teacher

Education." ​Communications of the ACM​ 60.4 (2017): 55-62. Print.