Search for: All records

Integrating computational thinking (CT) in the science classroom presents the opportunity to simultaneously broaden participation in computing, enhance science content learning, and engage students in authentic scientific practice. However, there is a lot more to learn on how teachers might integrate CT activities within their existing curricula. In this work, we describe a process of co-design with researchers and teachers to develop CT-infused science curricula. Specifically, we present a case study of one veteran physics teacher whose conception of CT during a professional development institute changed over time. We use this case study to explore how CT is perceived in physics instruction, a field that has a long history of computational learning opportunities. We also discuss how a co-design process led to the development of a lens through which to identify fruitful opportunities to integrate CT activities in physics curricula which we term computational transparency–purposefully revealing the inner workings of computational tools that students already use in the classroom. 

Next Generation Science Standards foreground science practices as important goals of science education. In this paper, we discuss the design of block-based modeling environments for learning experiences that ask students to actively explore complex systems via computer programming. Specifically, we discuss the implications of the design and selection of the types of blocks given to learners in these environments and how they may affect students’ thinking about the process of modeling and theorizing. We conclude with a discussion of some preliminary findings in this design based research to inform design principles for block-based programming of science phenomena as a medium for learning to build theory. 

Abstract This paper reports on the first iteration of the Computational Thinking Summer Institute, a month‐long programme in which high school teachers co‐designed computationally enhanced mathematics and science curricula with researchers. The co‐design process itself was a constructionist learning experience for teachers resulting in constructionist curricula to be used in their own classrooms. We present three case studies to illustrate different ways teachers and researchers divided the labour of co‐design and the implications of these different co‐design styles for teacher learning and classroom enactment. Specifically, some teachers programmed their own computational tools, while others helped to conceptualise them but left the construction to their co‐design partners. Results indicate that constructionist co‐design is a promising dual approach to curriculum and professional development but that sometimes these two goals are in tension. Most teachers gained considerable confidence and skills in computational thinking, but sometimes the pressure to finish curriculum development during the institute led teachers to leave construction of computational tools to their co‐design partners, limiting their own opportunities for computational learning. Practitioner notesWhat is already known about this topic?Computational tools can support constructionist science and math learning by making powerful ideas tangible.Supporting teachers to learn computational thinking and to use constructionist pedagogies is challenging.What this paper adds?Constructionist co‐design is a promising approach to simultaneously support curriculum development and professional development, but there are tensions to navigate in trying to accomplish both goals simultaneously.Implications for practice and/or policyDesigners of professional development should consider constructionist co‐design as an approach but should be aware of potential tensions and prepare for them.