Elementary Students’ Understanding of CS Terms

The language and concepts used by curriculum designers are not always interpreted by children as designers intended. This can be problematic when researchers use self-reported survey instruments in concert with curricula, which often rely on the implicit belief that students’ understanding aligns with their own. We report on our refinement of a validated survey to measure upper elementary students’ attitudes and perspectives about computer science (CS), using an iterative, design-based research approach informed by educational and psychological cognitive interview processes. We interviewed six groups of students over three iterations of the instrument on their understanding of CS concepts and attitudes toward coding. Our findings indicated that students could not explain the terms computer programs nor computer science as expected. Furthermore, they struggled to understand how coding may support their learning in other domains. These results may guide the development of appropriate CS-related survey instruments and curricular materials for K–6 students.

[1]  J. Piaget.  Judgement and Reasoning in the Child , 1962 .

[2]  L. Vygotsky.  Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes: Harvard University Press , 1978 .

[3]  L. S. Vygotskiĭ,et al.  Mind in society : the development of higher psychological processes , 1978 .

[4]  E. Guba,et al.  Naturalistic inquiry: Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications, 1985, 416 pp., $25.00 (Cloth) , 1985 .

[5]  Leo H. T. West,et al.  Conceptual understanding and science learning: An interpretation of research within a sources‐of‐knowledge framework , 1986 .

[6]  John Sweller,et al.  Cognitive Load During Problem Solving: Effects on Learning , 1988, Cogn. Sci..

[7]  V. John-Steiner,et al.  Sociocultural approaches to learning and development: A Vygotskian framework , 1996 .

[8]  Jorge Larreamendy-Joerns,et al.  Making Explicit the Implicit: Classroom Explanations and Conversational Implicatures , 1998 .

[9]  N. Schwarz.  Self-reports: How the questions shape the answers. , 1999 .

[10]  J. Eccles,et al.  Expectancy-Value Theory of Achievement Motivation. , 2000, Contemporary educational psychology.

[11]  Richard F. Catalano,et al.  Measuring risk and protective factors for substance use, delinquency, and other adolescent problem behaviors. The Communities That Care Youth Survey. , 2002 .

[12]  Richard F. Catalano,et al.  Measuring Risk and Protective Factors for Use, Delinquency, and Other Adolescent Problem Behaviors , 2002 .

[13]  P. Bourdieu.  Forms of Capital , 2002 .

[14]  Carolyn P. Panofsky.  Vygotsky's Educational Theory in Cultural Context: The Relations of Learning and Student Social Class , 2003 .

[15]  N. C. Schaeffer,et al.  The Science of Asking Questions , 2003 .

[16]  Ann B. Heller.  When Kids Can't Read--What Teachers Can Do: A Guide for Teachers 6-12 , 2003 .

[17]  V. Ageyev,et al.  Mediation in cognitive socialization: The influence of socioeconomic status , 2003 .

[18]  Michael E. Woolley,et al.  Cognitive Pretesting and the Developmental Validity of Child Self-Report Instruments: Theory and Applications , 2004, Research on social work practice.

[19]  M. Bullinger,et al.  The European DISABKIDS project: development of seven condition-specific modules to measure health related quality of life in children and adolescents , 2005, Health and quality of life outcomes.

[20]  Mary B. McVee,et al.  Schema Theory Revisited , 2005 .

[21]  CarterLori.  Why students with an apparent aptitude for computer science don't choose to major in computer science , 2006 .

[22]  L. Carter.  Why students with an apparent aptitude for computer science don't choose to major in computer science , 2006, SIGCSE.

[23]  Amy M. Witherspoon,et al.  Detection of Emotions during Learning with AutoTutor , 2006 .

[24]  V. Braun,et al.  Using thematic analysis in psychology , 2006 .

[25]  N. Schwarz.  ATTITUDE CONSTRUCTION: EVALUATION IN CONTEXT , 2007 .

[26]  Stuart A. Karabenick,et al.  Cognitive Processing of Self-Report Items in Educational Research: Do They Think What We Mean? , 2007 .

[27]  Mark Guzdial,et al.  Attitudes about computing in postsecondary graduates , 2008, ICER '08.

[28]  Arthur C. Graesser,et al.  Better to be frustrated than bored: The incidence, persistence, and impact of learners' cognitive-affective states during interactions with three different computer-based learning environments , 2010, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[29]  W. Crano,et al.  Attitudes and the Prediction of Behavior , 2011 .

[30]  George C. Thornton,et al.  An Investigation of Alpha, Beta, and Gamma Change in Developmental Assessment Center Participants. , 2011 .

[31]  Gautam Biswas,et al.  Integrating computational thinking with K-12 science education using agent-based computation: A theoretical framework , 2013, Education and Information Technologies.

[32]  Michael Hewner,et al.  Undergraduate conceptions of the field of computer science , 2013, ICER.

[33]  Roy D. Pea,et al.  Remedying misperceptions of computer science among middle school students , 2014, SIGCSE.

[34]  Dana L. Zeidler,et al.  Socioscientific Issues as a Curriculum Emphasis: Theory, Research, and Practice , 2014 .

[35]  D. Zeidler.  Socioscientific Issues as a Curriculum Emphasis , 2014 .

[36]  Eric N. Wiebe,et al.  The Development and Validation of a Measure of Student Attitudes Toward Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (S-STEM) , 2015 .

[37]  Noah Weeth Feinstein,et al.  Education, communication, and science in the public sphere , 2015 .

[38]  Emily Dawson,et al.  “Science capital”: A conceptual, methodological, and empirical argument for extending bourdieusian notions of capital beyond the arts , 2015 .

[39]  Özcan Özyurt,et al.  A study for determining computer programming students’ attitudes towards programming and their programming self-efficacy / Bilgisayar programcılığı öğrencilerinin programlamaya karşı tutum ve programlama öz-yeterliklerinin belirlenmesine yönelik bir çalı , 2015 .

[40]  Michael S. Horn,et al.  Defining Computational Thinking for Mathematics and Science Classrooms , 2016 .

[41]  David Weintrop,et al.  Modality Matters: Understanding the Effects of Programming Language Representation in High School Computer Science Classrooms , 2016 .

[42]  Colleen M. Lewis,et al.  "I Don't Code All Day": Fitting in Computer Science When the Stereotypes Don't Fit , 2016, ICER.

[43]  Sarantos Psycharis,et al.  The effects of computer programming on high school students’ reasoning skills and mathematical self-efficacy and problem solving , 2017 .

[44]  Volkan Kukul,et al.  COMPUTER PROGRAMMING SELF-EFFICACY SCALE (CPSES) FOR SECONDARY SCHOOL STUDENTS: DEVELOPMENT, VALIDATION AND RELIABILITY , 2017 .

[45]  Eric N. Wiebe,et al.  The Relationship of STEM Attitudes and Career Interest , 2018, EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education.

[46]  Patrícia Augustin Jaques,et al.  Affective states in computer-supported collaborative learning: Studying the past to drive the future , 2018, Comput. Educ..

[47]  Meng-Jung Tsai,et al.  Developing the Computer Programming Self-Efficacy Scale for Computer Literacy Education , 2019 .

[48]  Yune Tran,et al.  Computational Thinking Equity in Elementary Classrooms: What Third-Grade Students Know and Can Do , 2019 .

[49]  J. Nunnally,et al.  Psychometric Theory , 2020, Encyclopedia of Behavioral Medicine.