Computational Thinking

doi:10.1017/9781108654555.018

17 - Computational Thinking

from New Milieux

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 15 February 2019

Paul Curzon ,

Tim Bell ,

Jane Waite and

Mark Dorling

Edited by

Sally A. Fincher and

Anthony V. Robins

Show author details

Sally A. Fincher: Affiliation:
University of Kent, Canterbury
Anthony V. Robins: Affiliation:
University of Otago, New Zealand

Book contents

Get access

Summary

Since its popularisation by Wing as a general skill set developed by those studying computing, computational thinking has been incorporated in to curriculum worldwide. The idea has also generated a lot of argument, most notably over what it actually is or should be. We review the varying definitions and views, drawing out the agreement. We argue that despite the differences, even between contrasting views, there is a solid core that is agreed on. This still provides a firm foundation for gaining practical benefits from its introduction and from actively teaching it from an early age. We review the research to date based on the varying definitions offered. The differing views have different implications for practice which we also outline. The concept itself is relatively new, however, and given its wide scope, solid research to date is relatively limited. We therefore outline a range of open questions that need answering. Most notably, the question of which definition is the most appropriate to take depends on the answers to open questions. We need more research to move the debate away from personal opinions to being founded on a solid evidence-base.

Information

Type: Chapter
Information: The Cambridge Handbook of Computing Education Research , pp. 513 - 546

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108654555.018 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2019

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Aharoni, D. (2000). Cogito, ergo sum! Cognitive processes of students dealing with data structures. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 32(1), 26–30.Google Scholar

Aho, A. V. (2012). Computation and computational thinking. The Computer Journal, 55(7), 832–835.Google Scholar

al-Khwārizmī, M. (c. 825). On the Calculation with Hindu Numerals.Google Scholar

Armoni, M. (2013). On teaching abstraction in computer science to novices. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 32(3) 265–284.Google Scholar

Barefoot (2014a). Barefoot Computing. Retrieved from http://barefootcas.org.uk/Google Scholar

Barefoot (2014b). Computational thinking: What does computational thinking look like in the primary curriculum? Retrieved from https://barefootcas.org.uk/barefoot-primary-computing-resources/concepts/computational-thinking/Google Scholar

Bebras (n.d.). Bebras International Challenge on Informatics and Computational Thinking. Retrieved from www.bebras.org Google Scholar

Bell, T., Alexander, J., Freeman, I., & Grimley, M. (2009). Computer science unplugged: School students doing real computing without computers. New Zealand Journal of Applied Computing and Information Technology, 13(1), 20–29.Google Scholar

Bell, T., Rosamond, F., & Casey, N. (2012). Computer Science Unplugged and related projects in math and computer science popularization. In Bodlaender, H. L., Downey, R., Fomin, F. V, & Marx, D. (Eds.), The Multivariate Algorithmic Revolution and Beyond: Essays Dedicated to Michael R. Fellows on the Occasion of His 60th Birthday, Lecture Notes in Computer Science (pp. 398–456). Berlin, Germany: Springer.Google Scholar

Berry, M. (2014). Computational Thinking in Primary Schools. Retrieved from http://milesberry.net/2014/03/computational-thinking-in-primary-schools/Google Scholar

Bers, M. U. (2017). Coding as a Playground: Programming and Computational Thinking in the Early Childhood Classroom. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Bers, M. U. (2008). Blocks to Robots: Learning with Technology in the Early Childhood Classroom. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar

Biggs, J. B., & Collis, K. F. (1982). Evaluating the Quality of Learning: The SOLO Taxonomy (Structure of the Observed Learning Outcome). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Böhm, C., & Jacopini, G. (1966). Flow diagrams, Turing machines and languages with only two formation rules. Communications of the ACM, 9(5), 366–371.Google Scholar

Brennan, K., & Resnick, M. (2012). New frameworks for studying and assessing the development of computational thinking. Vancouver, Canada: Educational Research Association. Retrieved from https://scholar.harvard.edu/kbrennan/publications/new-frameworks-studying-and-assessing-development-computational-thinking Google Scholar

Computing at School (2012). Computer science: A curriculum for schools. Computing at School Working Group. Retrieved from www.computingatschool.org.uk/data/uploads/ComputingCurric.pdf Google Scholar

CSE (2017). Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Computational Thinking Education, July, Hong Kong. Retrieved from www.eduhk.hk/cte2017/Google Scholar

Csizmadia, A., Curzon, P., Dorling, M., Humphreys, S., Ng, T., Selby, C., & Woollard, J. (2015). Computational thinking: A guide for teachers. Retrieved from http://computingatschool.org.uk/computationalthinking Google Scholar

Curzon, P. (2002). Computing without Computers: A Gentle Introduction to Computer Programming, Data Structures and Algorithms. Retrieved from https://teachinglondoncomputing.org/resources/inspiring-computing-stories/computingwithoutcomputers/Google Scholar

Curzon, P. (2014). Unplugged computational thinking for fun. In Brinda, T., Reynolds, N., & Romeike, R. (Eds.), KEYCIT – Key Competencies in Informatics and ICT, Commentarii Informaticae Didacticae (pp. 15–28). Potsdam, Germany: Universitätsverlag Potsdam.Google Scholar

Curzon, P., & McOwan, P. W. (2017). The Power of Computational Thinking: Games, Magic and Puzzles to Help You Become a Computational Thinker. Hackensack, NJ: World Scientific.CrossRef Google Scholar

Curzon, P., McOwan, P. W., Donohue, J., Wright, S., & Marsh, D. W. R. (2018). Teaching of concepts. In Sentance, S., Barendsen, E., & Schulte, C. (Eds.), Computer Science Education: Perspectives on Learning and Teaching in School (pp. 91–108). London, UK: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar

Cutts, Q., Esper, S., Fecho, M., Foster, S., & Simon, B. (2012). The abstraction transition taxonomy: developing desired learning outcomes through the lens of situated cognition. In Proceedings of the Ninth Annual International Conference on International Computing Education Research (pp. 63–70). New York: ACM.Google Scholar

Dagienė, V., & Sentance, S. (2016). It’s computational thinking! Bebras tasks in the curriculum. In Brodnik, A. & Tort, F. (Eds.), Informatics in Schools: Improvement of Informatics Knowledge and Perception (ISSEP 2016). Lecture Notes in Computer Science (pp 28–39). Berlin, Germany: Springer.Google Scholar

Dagienė, V., Sentance, S., & Stupienė, G. (2017). Developing a two-dimensional categorization system for educational tasks in informatics. Informatica 28(1), 23–44.Google Scholar

Dagiene, V., & Futschek, G. (2008). Bebras international contest on informatics and computer literacy: Criteria for good tasks. In Mittermeir, R. T. & Sysło, M. M. (Eds.), Informatics Education – Supporting Computational Thinking. ISSEP 2008. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (pp. 19–30). Berlin, Germany: Springer.Google Scholar

Denning, P. (2017). Remaining trouble spots with computational thinking. Communications of the ACM, 60(6), 33–39.CrossRef Google Scholar

Denning, P., & Tedre, M. (2019). Computational Thinking. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Department for Education (2013). National Curriculum in England: Computing programmes of study. Retrieved from www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-curriculum-in-england-computing-programmes-of-study Google Scholar

Dorling, M., Selby, C., & Woollard, J. (2015). Evidence of assessing computational thinking. In Brodnik, A. & Lewin, C. (Eds.), IFIP 2015: A New Culture of Learning: Computing and Next Generations (pp. 1–11). Laxenburg, Austria: IFIP.Google Scholar

Dorling, M., & Walker, M. (2014). Computing Progression Pathways. Retrieved from http://community.computingatschool.org.uk/files/5098/original.xlsx Google Scholar

Dorling, M., & Stephens, T. (2016). Computational Thinking Rubric: Dispositions, Attitudes and Perspectives, Retrieved from https://community.computingatschool.org.uk/resources/4793/Google Scholar

Euclid, (1997). Elements [c. 300 BCE]. Joyce, D. E. (Ed.). Retrieved from http://aleph0.clarku.edu/~djoyce/java/elements/toc.html Google Scholar

Fuller, U., Johnson, C. G., Ahoniemi, T., Cukierman, D., Hernán-Losada, I., Jackova, , Lahtinen, J., Lewis, E., Thompson, T. L., Riedesel, D. M., , C., & Thompson, E. (2007). Developing a computer science-specific learning taxonomy. In Proceedings of the ITiCSE-WGR ‘07 Working Group Reports on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education (pp. 152–170). New York: ACM.Google Scholar

Google (n.d.). Exploring Computational Thinking, Google for Education. Retrieved from https://edu.google.com/resources/programs/exploring-computational-thinking/Google Scholar

Grover, S., & Pea, R. (2013). Using a discourse-intensive pedagogy and Android’s App inventor for introducing computational concepts to middle school students. In Proceedings of the 44th SIGCSE Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (pp. 723–728). New York: ACM.Google Scholar

Guzdial, M. (2008). Education: Paving the way for computational thinking. Communications of the ACM, 51(8), 25–27.Google Scholar

Harel, D. (2003). Computers Ltd: What They REALLY Can’t Do. Oxford, UK: Oxford Paperbacks.Google Scholar

Hazzan, O. (2003). How students attempt to reduce abstraction in the learning of mathematics and in the learning of computer science. Computer Science Education, 13(2), 95–122.Google Scholar

Hubwieser, P., & Mühling, A. (2014). Playing PISA with Bebras. In Proceedings of the 9th Workshop in Primary and Secondary Computing Education (pp. 128–129). New York: ACM.Google Scholar

Hubwieser, P., Giannakos, M. N., Berges, M., Brinda, T., Diethelm, I., Magenheim, J., Pal, J., Jackova, J., & Jasute, E.(2015) A global snapshot of computer science education in K–12 schools. In Proceedings of the 2015 ITiCSE on Working Group Reports (pp. 65–83). New York: ACM.Google Scholar

Hutchins, E. (1995). Cognition in the Wild. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

ISTE/CSTA (2014). Operational Definition of Computational Thinking for K–12 Education. Retrieved from www.iste.org/docs/ct-documents/computational-thinking-operational-definition-flyer.pdf Google Scholar

Kafai, Y. B. (2016). From computational thinking to computational participation in K–12 education, Communications of the ACM, 59(8), 26–27.Google Scholar

Kalelioglu, K., Gülbahar, Y., & Kukul, V. (2016). A framework for computational thinking based on a systematic research review. Baltic Journal of Modern Computing, 4(3), 583–596.Google Scholar

Korkmaz, Ö., Çakir, R., & Özden, M. Y. (2017). A validity and reliability study of the Computational Thinking Scales (CTS). Computers in Human Behavior, 72, 558–569.Google Scholar

Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy: An overview. Theory into Practice, 41(4), 212–218.Google Scholar

Lee, I. (2016). Reclaiming the roots of CT. CSTA Voice: The Voice of K–12 Computer Science Education and Its Educators, 12(1), 3–4.Google Scholar

Lister, R., Adams, E. S., Fitzgerald, S., Fone, W., Hamer, J., Lindholm, M., McCartney, R., Moström, J. E., Sanders, K., Seppälä, O., & Simon, B. (2004). A multi-national study of reading and tracing skills in novice programmers. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 36(4), 119–150.Google Scholar

Lister, R. (2011). Concrete and other neo-Piagetian forms of reasoning in the novice programmer. In Proceedings of the Thirteenth Australasian Computing Education Conference (pp. 9–18). Darlinghurst, Australia: Australian Computer Society, Inc.Google Scholar

Lopez, M., Whalley, J., Robbins, P., & Lister, R. (2008). Relationships between reading, tracing and writing skills in introductory programming. In Proceedings of the Fourth International Workshop on Computing Education Research (pp. 101–112). New York: ACM.Google Scholar

Lu, J. J., & Fletcher, G. H. (2009). Thinking about computational thinking. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 41(1), 260–264.Google Scholar

Maton, K. (2013). Making semantic waves: A key to cumulative knowledge-building. Linguistics and Education, 24(1), 8–22.Google Scholar

Macnaught, L., Maton, K., Martin, J. R., & Matruglio, E. (2013). Jointly constructing semantic waves: implications for teacher training. Linguistics and Education, 24, 50–63.Google Scholar

McCracken, M., Almstrum, V., Diaz, D., Guzdial, M., Hagen, D., Kolikant, Y. B., Laxer, C., Thomas, L., Utting, I., & Wilusz, T. (2001). A Multi-National, Multi-Institutional Study of Assessment of Programming Skills of First-year CS Students. In Proceedings of the 6th Annual Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education, Working Group Reports (ITiCSE-WGR ’01) (pp. 125–180). New York: ACM.Google Scholar

Meagher, L. (2017). Teaching London Computing Follow-up Evaluation through Interviews with Teachers, Technology Development Group, Summer. Retrieved from https://teachinglondoncomputing.org/evaluation/Google Scholar

Millican, P., & Clark, A. (Eds.) (1996). The Legacy of Alan Turing, Volume 1: Machines and Thought. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Millican, P. (n.d.). A New Paradigm of Explanation? Retrieved from www.philocomp.net/home/paradigm.htm Google Scholar

Moreno-León, J., & Robles, G. (2015). Dr. Scratch: A web tool to automatically evaluate Scratch projects. In Proceedings of the Workshop in Primary and Secondary Computing Education (pp. 132–133). New York: ACM.Google Scholar

Moreno-León, J., Robles, G., & Román-González, M. (2015). Dr. Scratch: Automatic analysis of scratch projects to assess and foster computational thinking. RED. Revista de Educación a Distancia, 46(10), 1–23.Google Scholar

National Research Council (2011). Committee for the Workshops on Computational Thinking: Report of a Workshop of Pedagogical Aspects of Computational Thinking, Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar

NZ Ministry of Education (2017). The New Zealand Curriculum Online: Technology: Learning area structure. Retrieved from http://nzcurriculum.tki.org.nz/The-New-Zealand-Curriculum/Technology/Learning-area-structure Google Scholar

Oates, T., Coe, R., Peyton-Jones, S., Scratcherd, T., & Woodhead, S. (2016). Quantum: Tests worth teaching. White Paper, March, Computing at School. Retrieved from http://community.computingatschool.org.uk/files/7256/original.pdf Google Scholar

OED (1993). The New Shorter Oxford English Dictionary. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms: Children, Computers and Powerful Ideas. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar

Piaget, J. (2001). Studies in Reflecting Abstraction. Edited and translated by Campbell, R. L.. Hove, UK: Psychology Press.Google Scholar

Resnick, M. (2013). Learn to Code, Code to Learn. Edsurge, May 8. Retrieved from www.edsurge.com/news/2013-05-08-learn-to-code-code-to-learn Google Scholar

Rich, K. M., Strickland, C., Binkowski, T. A, Moran, C., & Franklin, D. (2017). K–8 learning trajectories derived from research literature: Sequence, repetition, conditionals. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research (ICER’17) (pp. 182–190). New York: ACM.Google Scholar

Román-González, M. (2015). Computational thinking test: Design guidelines and content validation. In Proceedings of the 7th Annual International Conference on Education and New Learning Technologies (EDULEARN 2015) (pp. 2436–2444). Valencia, Spain: IATED Academy.Google Scholar

Román-Gonzáles, M., Moreno-León, J., & Robles, G. (2017). Complementary tools for computational thinking assessment. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Computational Thinking Education (CTE2017) (pp. 154–159). Ting Kok, Hong Kong: The Education University of Hong Kong.Google Scholar

Royal Society (2012). Shut Down or Restart? The Way Forward for Computing in UK Schools. London, UK: The Royal Society.Google Scholar

Royal Society (2017a). After the Reboot: Computing Education in UK Schools. London, UK: The Royal Society.Google Scholar

Royal Society (2017b). Machine Learning: The Power and Promise of Computers That Learn by Example. London, UK: The Royal Society.Google Scholar

Schocken, S., & Nisan, N. (2004). From NAND to Tetris in 12 easy steps. In Proceedings of the 34th Annual Conference on Frontiers in Education (p. 1461). New York: IEEE.Google Scholar

Seiter, L., & Foreman, B. (2013). Modeling the learning progressions of computational thinking of primary grade students. In Proceedings of the 9th Annual International ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research (ICER’13) (pp. 59–66). New York: ACM.Google Scholar

Seiter, L. (2015). Using SOLO to classify the programming responses of primary grade students. In Proceedings of the 46th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (pp. 540–545). New York: ACM.Google Scholar

Selby, C., & Woollard, J. (2013). Computational thinking: The developing definition. Retrieved from http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/356481 Google Scholar

Sentance, S., & Csizmadia, A. (2017). Computing in the curriculum: Challenges and strategies from a teacher’s perspective. Education and Information Technologies, 22(2), 469–495.Google Scholar

Statter, D., & Armoni, M. (2016). Teaching abstract thinking in introduction to computer science for 7th graders. In Proceedings of the 11th Workshop in Primary and Secondary Computing Education (pp. 80–83). New York: ACM.Google Scholar

Susskind, R. (2017). Tomorrow’s Lawyers: An Introduction to Your Future, 2nd edn. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Sykora, C. (2014). Computational thinking for all. Arlington: ISTE. Retrieved from www.iste.org/explore/articleDetail?articleid=152&category=Solutions&article=Computational-thinking-for-all Google Scholar

Tedre, M., & Denning, P. J. (2016). The long quest for computational thinking. In Proceedings of the 16th Koli Calling Conference on Computing Education Research (pp. 120–129). New York, NY: ACM.Google Scholar

Thimbleby, H. (2018). Misunderstanding IT: Hospital cybersecurity and IT problems reach the courts. Digital Evidence and Electronic Signature Law Review, 15, 11–32.Google Scholar

Turing, A. M. (1936) (published 1937). On computable numbers, with an application to the Entscheidungs problem. Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society, 2(42), 230–265.Google Scholar

Waite, J., Curzon, P., Marsh, D. W., & Sentance, S. (2016). Abstraction and common classroom activities. In Proceedings of the 11th Workshop in Primary and Secondary Computing Education (pp. 112–113). New York: ACM.CrossRef Google Scholar

Waite, J., Curzon, P., Marsh, W., & Sentance, S. (2017). Teachers’ uses of levels of abstraction focusing on design. In Proceedings of the 12th Workshop in Primary and Secondary Computing Education (pp. 115–116). New York: ACM.Google Scholar

Wing, J. (2006). Computational thinking. Communications of the ACM, 49(3), 33–35.Google Scholar

Wolz, U., Stone, M., Pearson, K., Pulimood, S. M., & Switzer, M. (2011). Computational thinking and expository writing in the middle school. ACM Transactions on Computing Education (TOCE), 11(2), 9.Google Scholar

Accessibility standard: Unknown

Why this information is here

This section outlines the accessibility features of this content - including support for screen readers, full keyboard navigation and high-contrast display options. This may not be relevant for you.

Accessibility Information

Accessibility compliance for the HTML of this chapter is currently unknown and may be updated in the future.