skip to main content

Title: Finding Balance: The Tradeoffs in Ambition and Specificity When Creating an Inclusive Computing Pathway
Over the last three years, we have worked in a research practice partnership (RPP) between a research non-profit and three school districts to establish system-wide K-12 pathways that support equitable participation in computational thinking (CT) that is consistent across classrooms, cumulative from year to year, and competency-based. Reflecting on the work done over the last three years, we have identified tensions related to ambition and specificity within our RPP and the development, implementation, and spread of inclusive computing pathways. Ambitions can waver between grandiose upheaval in curriculum and classes and the identification of CT solely in what is already happening. While it is relatively easy to adopt and spread programs that propose modest change, these programs are not necessarily worth an investment nor do they produce CT skills in alignment with the district's overall vision. Similarly, the specificity in which computational thinking is operationalized can teeter between prescriptive lesson plans and broadly-stated curricular standards. Vague initiatives are difficult to implement, but teachers are also resistant to overly prescriptive programs. In this paper, we explore these tensions balancing ambition and specificity using examples from our partner districts. Drawing on our experiences co-designing the inclusive computing pathways as well as interviews with more » and open-ended questionnaire responses from our district partners, we discuss implications related to these issues and the ongoing tensions around ambition and specificity that need to be considered and overcome in terms of meeting the national call to develop more inclusive computing pathways for schools and districts. « less
Authors:
; ; ; ; ; ; ;
Award ID(s):
1837386
Publication Date:
NSF-PAR ID:
10297027
Journal Name:
Intersection of RPP and Broadening Participation in Computing White Paper Compendium
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. For the last three years the CS for All initiative at the National Science Foundation has had a call for research-practice partnership (RPP) projects. The goal of the program is to advance both knowledge and practice in creating inclusive, responsive computer science/computational thinking programs for all K-12 youth. RPPs represent an approach to research that, by design, is both more equitable and more ethical because it leverages community stakeholder experiences and perspectives to inform research questions, methods, and meaning-making. RPPs are thus potentially powerful tools for equity-oriented initiatives such as CS for All. Beginning in December 2016, the Research + Practice Collaboratory, an NSF-funded initiative based at the University of Washington, has led ten RPP development workshops for CS for All, collectively serving over 700 members of the community. At these workshops we have collected data about how the community sees itself benefiting from the adoption of RPP approaches to the work. In this experience paper we describe what we have learned about the field’s interests with respect to adopting RPP approaches to the work.
  2. Despite limited success in broadening participation in engineering with rural and Appalachian youth, there remain challenges such as misunderstandings around engineering careers, misalignments with youth’s sociocultural background, and other environmental barriers. In addition, middle school science teachers may be unfamiliar with engineering or how to integrate engineering concepts into science lessons. Furthermore, teachers interested in incorporating engineering into their curriculum may not have the time or resources to do so. The result may be single interventions such as a professional development workshop for teachers or a career day for students. However, those are unlikely to cause major change or sustained interest development. To address these challenges, we have undertaken our NSF ITEST project titled, Virginia Tech Partnering with Educators and Engineers in Rural Schools (VT PEERS). Through this project, we sought to improve youth awareness of and preparation for engineering related careers and educational pathways. Utilizing regular engagement in engineering-aligned classroom activities and culturally relevant programming, we sought to spark an interest with some students. In addition, our project involves a partnership with teachers, school districts, and local industry to provide a holistic and, hopefully, sustainable influence. By engaging over time we aspired to promote sustainability beyond this NSF projectmore »via increased teacher confidence with engineering related activities, continued integration within their science curriculum, and continued relationships with local industry. From the 2017-2020 school years the project has been in seven schools across three rural counties. Each year a grade level was added; that is, the teachers and students from the first year remained for all three years. Year 1 included eight 6th grade science teachers, year 2 added eight 7th grade science teachers, and year 3 added three 8th grade science teachers and a career and technology teacher. The number of students increased from over 500 students in year 1 to over 2500 in year 3. Our three industry partners have remained active throughout the project. During the third and final year in the classrooms, we focused on the sustainable aspects of the project. In particular, on how the intervention support has evolved each year based on data, support requests from the school divisions, and in scaffolding “ownership” of the engineering activities. Qualitative data were used to support our understanding of teachers’ confidence to incorporate engineering into their lessons plans and how their confidence changed over time. Noteworthy, our student data analysis resulted in an instrument change for the third year; however due to COVID, pre and post data was limited to schools who taught on a semester basis. Throughout the project we have utilized the ITEST STEM Workforce Education Helix model to support a pragmatic approach of our research informing our practice to enable an “iterative relationship between STEM content development and STEM career development activities… within the cultural context of schools, with teachers supported by professional development, and through programs supported by effective partnerships.” For example, over the course of the project, scaffolding from the University leading interventions to teachers leading interventions occurred.« less
  3. Teaming is a core part of engineering education, especially in the first and last years of engineering when project work is a prevalent focus. The literature on the effects of working in diverse teams is mixed. Negative findings include decreased affect, increased frustration, and sustained conflict in teams. Positive findings include increased productivity, production of high quality products, and divergent-thinking and idea generation. Given these mixed findings, it becomes important to not only understand the practical outputs of working in diverse teams, but also how the experience of working in diverse teams influences whether students see themselves as engineers and whether or not they feel they belong in engineering. Our project, Building Supports for Diversity through Engineering Teams, investigates how students’ attitudes towards diversity influence how students experience work in diverse teams through addressing two main research questions: 1) What changes occur in students’ diversity sensitivity, multicultural effectiveness, and engineering practices as a result of working in diverse teams? 2) How do students’ perceptions of diversity, affect, and engineering practices change because of working on diverse teams? Using a multi-method approach, we deployed survey instruments to determine changes in student’s attitudes about teaming, diversity sensitivity, and openness attitudes. We alsomore »observed students working in teams and interviewed these students about their perceptions of diversity and experiences in their teams. Preliminary results of the quantitative phase show that variance in students’ attitudes about diversity significantly increase over the semester, further reflecting the mixed results that have been seen previously in the literature. Additionally, Social Network Analysis was used to characterize the social structure practices of a multi-section, large-enrollment first-year engineering course. This reveals the underlying social structure of the environment, its inclusiveness, and how diverse students work with others on engineering. Initial results indicate that students are included in social networks regardless of gender and race. Preliminary results of the qualitative phase, using Interpretive Phenomenological Analysis, have yielded relationships between student’s definitions, valuation, and enactment of diversity in engineering spaces. Individual student’s incoming attitudes of diversity and previous experiences interact with practical needs in first-year engineering classrooms to create different microclimates within each team. These microclimates depict tensions between what instructors emphasize about diversity, stereotypes of engineering as focused on technical instead of social skills, and pragmatic forces of “getting the job done.” This knowledge can help explain some of the complexity behind the conflicting literature on diversity in teams. Ultimately, this research can help us understand how to build inclusive and diverse environments that guide students to learn how to understand their own complex relationship, understanding, and enactment of diversity in engineering. By understanding how students make sense of diversity in engineering spaces, educators and researchers can figure out how to introduce these concepts in relevant ways so that students can inclusively meet the grand challenges in engineering. This curriculum integration, in turn, can improve team interactions and the climate of engineering for underrepresented groups.« less
  4. This research paper presents a literature review of Computational Thinking (CT) frameworks and assessment practices. CT is a 21st century way of solving a problem. It refers specifically to the methods that are effective when trying to solve a problem with a machine or other computational tools. In the past few years, CT researchers and educationists' significant movement started to look for a formal definition and composition of CT in K-12 and higher education. From this effort, over 20 different definitions and frameworks for CT have emerged. Although the availability of literature on CT has been increasing over the last decade, there is limited research synthesis available on how to assess CT better. Besides, it is known that in higher education designing assessments for CT is challenging and one of the primary reasons is that the precise meaning of CT is still unknown. This research paper, therefore, presents a systematized literature review on CT frameworks and assessment practice. We search three different databases and review 19 journal articles that address the assessment of CT in higher education to answer the following two research questions: 1) What does the literature inform us about practices and types of assessments used to evaluatemore »CT in higher education? 2) Which frameworks of CT are present in literature to support CT assessment in higher education? The critical components of this review focus on frameworks and assessment practices based on CT. We develop a synthesis of suggestions and explanations to answer the proposed questions based on literature from recent research in CT. Based on our initial synthesis, we found a disconnect between theory and practice. Specifically, neither the ideas within CT frameworks nor those from CT assessment research are being utilized by the other. Therefore, there is a dire need to connect the two for practical implementation and further research in CT in higher education.« less
  5. Background: Researcher-practitioner partnerships (RPPs) have gained increasing prominence within education, since they are crucial for identifying partners’ problems of practice and seeking solutions for improving district (or school) problems. The CS Pathways RPP project brought together researchers and practitioners, including middle school teachers and administrators from three urban school districts, to build teachers’ capacity to implement an inclusive computer science and digital literacy (CSDL) curriculum for all students in their middle schools. Objective: This study explored the teachers’ self-efficacy development in teaching a middle school CSDL curriculum under the project’s RPP framework. The ultimate goal was to gain insights into how the project’s RPP framework and its professional development (PD) program supported teachers’ self-efficacy development, in particular its challenges and success of the partnership. Method: Teacher participants attended the first-year PD program and were surveyed and/or interviewed about their self-efficacy in teaching CSDL curriculum, spanning topics ranging from digital literacy skills to app creation ability and curriculum implementation. Both survey and interview data were collected and analyzed using mixed methods 1) to examine the reach of the RPP PD program in terms of teachers’ self-efficacy; 2) to produce insightful understandings of the PD program impact on the project’s goal ofmore »building teachers’ self-efficacy. Results and Discussion: We reported the teachers’ self-efficacy profiles based on the survey data. A post-survey indicated that a majority of the teachers have high self-efficacy in teaching the CSDL curriculum addressed by the RPP PD program. Our analysis identified five critical benefits the project’s RPP PD program provided, namely collaborative efforts on resource and infrastructure building, content and pedagogical knowledge growth, collaboration and communication, and building teacher identity. All five features have shown direct impacts on teachers' self-efficacy. The study also reported teachers’ perceptions on the challenges they faced and potential areas for improvements. These findings indicate some important features of an effective PD program, informing the primary design of an RPP CS PD program.« less