Case Studies of Elementary Children’s Engagement in Computational Thinking Through Scratch Programming

Scratch is a programming environment designed to facilitate children’s engagement in computational thinking through the creation of interactive multimedia products. It is purported that children’s engagement in computational thinking can possibly build their problem-solving skills, which is a key twenty-first-century competency. As such, Scratch programming has attracted considerable attention in the educational field recently, especially through the integration of Scratch programming into the school curriculum. Despite this increased interest, there is limited understanding of the possible achievements and challenges that children with different programming abilities may have when engaging in computational thinking. Such studies are critical for understanding the computational thinking of elementary students and are useful for helping educators to better design programming lessons. To address this gap, this study examines three case studies of how elementary children with different programming abilities approach Scratch programming. Using a multiple case study approach, the narratives of children’s programming moves, utterances, and behaviours during Scratch programming will be compared to understand the possible achievements as well as the challenges that children could face when engaging in computational thinking through Scratch programming. Based on the findings, we proposed some possible instructional implications for supporting children’s engagement in computational thinking through K-12 programming lessons.

[1]  Isabel L. Beck,et al.  Thinking Aloud and Reading Comprehension Research: Inquiry, Instruction, and Social Interaction , 1997 .

[2]  Katerina Ananiadou,et al.  21st Century Skills and Competences for New Millennium Learners in OECD Countries , 2009 .

[3]  Quinn Burke,et al.  The Markings of a New Pencil: Introducing Programming-as-Writing in the Middle School Classroom , 2012, Journal of Media Literacy Education.

[4]  Iris Vessey,et al.  Expertise in Debugging Computer Programs: A Process Analysis , 1984, Int. J. Man Mach. Stud..

[5]  Patricia A. Alexander,et al.  Domain knowledge: Evolving themes and emerging concerns. , 1992 .

[6]  Seymour Papert,et al.  Mindstorms: Children, Computers, and Powerful Ideas , 1981 .

[7]  Sharan B. Merriam,et al.  Qualitative Research: A Guide to Design and Implementation , 2009 .

[8]  Chris Stephenson,et al.  Bringing computational thinking to K-12: what is Involved and what is the role of the computer science education community? , 2011, INROADS.

[9]  H. Salah.  Creswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative inquiry and research design. Choosing among five approaches (3e éd.). London : Sage. , 2015 .

[10]  Hsiu-Fang Hsieh,et al.  Three Approaches to Qualitative Content Analysis , 2005, Qualitative health research.

[11]  Mordechai Ben-Ari,et al.  Learning computer science concepts with Scratch , 2013, Comput. Sci. Educ..

[12]  Ahmet Baytak,et al.  An investigation of the artifacts and process of constructing computers games about environmental science in a fifth grade classroom , 2011 .

[13]  A. Agresti.  An introduction to categorical data analysis , 1997 .

[14]  Cher Ping Lim,et al.  Scaffolding online historical inquiry tasks: A case study of two secondary school classrooms , 2008, Comput. Educ..

[15]  Evangelia Gouli,et al.  Problem solving by 5-6 years old kindergarten children in a computer programming environment: A case study , 2013, Comput. Educ..

[16]  J. Herman,et al.  Defining Twenty-First Century Skills , 2012 .

[17]  Susan M. Land,et al.  Scaffolding students’ problem-solving processes in an ill-structured task using question prompts and peer interactions , 2003 .

[18]  Richard Lehrer,et al.  Reflective Teaching of Logo , 1999 .

[19]  Yasmin B. Kafai,et al.  Computer Programming Goes Back to School , 2013 .

[20]  Susan M. Land,et al.  Scaffolding Peer-questioning Strategies to Facilitate Metacognition During Online Small Group Discussion , 2005 .

[21]  Young-Jin Lee,et al.  Developing computer programming concepts and skills via technology-enriched language-art projects: A case study , 2010 .

[22]  David H. Jonassen,et al.  Learning to Solve Problems : A Handbook for Designing Problem-Solving Learning Environments , 2010 .

[23]  Ming-Puu Chen,et al.  The effects of goal specificity and scaffolding on programming performance and self-regulation in game design , 2014, Br. J. Educ. Technol..

[24]  Peta Wyeth,et al.  How Young Children Learn to Program With Sensor, Action, and Logic Blocks , 2008 .

[25]  Taylor Martin,et al.  Learning Programming with IPRO: The Effects of a Mobile, Social Programming Environment. , 2013 .

[26]  Wu-Yuin Hwang,et al.  Investigating the role of computer-supported annotation in problem-solving-based teaching: An empirical study of a Scratch programming pedagogy , 2014, Br. J. Educ. Technol..

[27]  Colleen M. Lewis.  Is pair programming more effective than other forms of collaboration for young students? , 2011, Comput. Sci. Educ..

[28]  Mitchel Resnick,et al.  Constructionism in Practice: Designing, Thinking, and Learning in A Digital World , 1996 .

[29]  Roman Bednarik,et al.  Expertise-dependent visual attention strategies develop over time during debugging with multiple code representations , 2012, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[30]  Jeannette M. Wing.  An introduction to computer science for non-majors using principles of computation , 2007, SIGCSE.

[31]  Sebastian Spaeth,et al.  Code Reuse in Open Source Software , 2008, Manag. Sci..

[32]  Esteban Vázquez-Cano,et al.  Visual programming languages integrated across the curriculum in elementary school: A two year case study using "Scratch" in five schools , 2016, Comput. Educ..

[33]  J. Kolodner,et al.  Toward implementing distributed scaffolding: Helping students learn science from design , 2005 .

[34]  David B. Palumbo,et al.  Programming Language/Problem-Solving Research: A Review of Relevant Issues , 1990 .

[35]  Stephen Cooper,et al.  The Design of Alice , 2010, TOCE.

[36]  Eric Rosenbaum,et al.  Scratch: programming for all , 2009, Commun. ACM.

[37]  Marina Umaschi Bers,et al.  Computational thinking and tinkering: Exploration of an early childhood robotics curriculum , 2014, Comput. Educ..

[38]  Ann L. Brown,et al.  Reciprocal Teaching of Comprehension-Fostering and Comprehension-Monitoring Activities , 1984 .

[39]  Taylor Martin,et al.  Using Learning Analytics to Understand the Learning Pathways of Novice Programmers , 2013 .

[40]  Doug Baldwin,et al.  Guest Editors’ Introduction: Computer Science in the Liberal Arts , 2010, TOCE.

[41]  Janet Mei-Chuen Lin,et al.  An Investigation into Parent-Child Collaboration in Learning Computer Programming , 2012, J. Educ. Technol. Soc..

[42]  Stephen Barrett,et al.  Pedagogy and Processes for a Computer Programming Outreach Workshop—The Bridge to College Model , 2010, IEEE Transactions on Education.

[43]  Helen R. Quinn,et al.  A Framework for K-12 Science Education: Practices, Crosscutting Concepts, and Core Ideas , 2013 .

[44]  Nina Schünemann,et al.  Integrating self-regulation in whole-class reciprocal teaching: A moderator–mediator analysis of incremental effects on fifth graders’ reading comprehension , 2013 .

[45]  Jean Scholtz,et al.  Characteristics of the Mental Representations of Novice and Expert Programmers: An Empirical Study , 1993, Int. J. Man Mach. Stud..

[46]  Shuchi Grover,et al.  Computational Thinking in K–12 , 2013 .

[47]  Jill Denner,et al.  Computer games created by middle school girls: Can they be used to measure understanding of computer science concepts? , 2012, Comput. Educ..

[48]  Deborah A. Fields,et al.  Entering the Clubhouse: Case Studies of Young Programmers Joining the Online Scratch Communities , 2010, J. Organ. End User Comput..