Computational Thinking—More Than a Variant of Scientific Inquiry!

The essence of Computational Thinking (CT) lies in the creation of “logical artifacts” that externalize and reify human ideas in a form that can be interpreted and “run” on computers. Various approaches to scientific inquiry (learning) also make use of models that are construed as logical artifacts, but here the main focus is on the correspondence of such models with natural phenomena that exist prior to these models. To pinpoint the different perspectives on CT, we have analyzed the terminology of articles from different backgrounds and periods. This survey is followed by a discussion of aspects that are specifically relevant to a computer science perspective. Abstraction in terms of data and process structures is a core feature in this context. As compared to a “free choice” of computational abstractions based on expressive and powerful formal languages, models used in scientific inquiry learning typically have limited “representational flexibility” within the boundaries of a predetermined computational approach. For the progress of CT and CT education, it is important to underline the nature of logical artifacts as the primary concern. As an example from our own work, we elaborate on “reactive rule-based programming” as an entry point that enables learners to start with situational specifications of action that can be further expanded into more standard block-based iterative programs and thus allows for a transition between different computational approaches. As an outlook beyond current practice, we finally envisage the potential of meta-level programming and program analysis techniques as a computational counterpart of metacognitive strategies.

[1]  Gregory Schraw Promoting general metacognitive awareness , 1998 .

[2]  John S. Kinnebrew,et al.  A science learning environment using a computational thinking approach , 2012, ICCE 2012.

[3]  Joyce Malyn-Smith,et al.  Computational thinking for youth in practice , 2011, INROADS.

[4]  H. Ulrich Hoppe,et al.  Deductive error diagnosis and inductive error generalization for intelligent tutoring systems , 1994 .

[5]  David N. Perkins,et al.  Patterns of Misunderstanding: An Integrative Model for Science, Math, and Programming , 1988 .

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

[7]  Ellen T. Kamp,et al.  Phases of inquiry-based learning: Definitions and the inquiry cycle , 2015 .

[8]  Ton de Jong,et al.  Regulative support for collaborative scientific inquiry learning , 2006, J. Comput. Assist. Learn..

[9]  Aidan Mooney,et al.  Computational Thinking in Secondary Education: Where does it fit? A systematic literary review , 2018, Int. J. Comput. Sci. Educ. Sch..

[10]  Aidan Mooney,et al.  Computational Thinking in Education: Where does it Fit? A systematic literary review , 2017, ArXiv.

[11]  Jeannette M. Wing Computational thinking and thinking about computing , 2008, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences.

[12]  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.

[13]  Seymour Papert,et al.  An exploration in the space of mathematics educations , 1996, Int. J. Comput. Math. Learn..

[14]  Astrid Wichmann,et al.  Inquiry Learning: Multilevel Support with Respect to Inquiry, Explanations and Regulation During an Inquiry Cycle , 2009 .

[15]  Abigail Jurist Levy,et al.  Inquiry-based science instruction—what is it and does it matter? Results from a research synthesis years 1984 to 2002 , 2010 .

[16]  Filiz KALELİOĞLU,et al.  A Framework for Computational Thinking Based on a Systematic Research Review , 2016 .

[17]  Andrea A. diSessa,et al.  Changing Minds: Computers, Learning, and Literacy , 2000 .

[18]  Alfred V. Aho,et al.  Computation and Computational Thinking , 2012, Comput. J..

[19]  Yoshiaki Matsuzawa,et al.  A Demonstration of Evidence-Based Action Research Using Information Dashboard in Introductory Programming Education , 2017, WCCE.

[20]  Benedict du Boulay Programming Environments for Novices , 1992, Intelligent Tutoring Systems.

[21]  P. Stern,et al.  Public Participation in Environmental Assessment and Decision Making , 2008 .

[22]  Deborah G. Tatar,et al.  Initial experience with a computational thinking course for computer science students , 2011, SIGCSE.

[23]  Judy Kay,et al.  Open Learner Models , 2010, Advances in Intelligent Tutoring Systems.

[24]  Chenglie Hu,et al.  Computational thinking: what it might mean and what we might do about it , 2011, ITiCSE '11.

[25]  A. Bundy Computational Thinking is Pervasive , 2007 .

[26]  Arie van Deursen,et al.  Domain-specific languages: an annotated bibliography , 2000, SIGP.

[27]  L. Schauble,et al.  Scientific Thinking and Science Literacy , 2007 .

[28]  Jürg Nievergelt,et al.  Kara, finite state machines, and the case for programming as part of general education , 2001, Proceedings IEEE Symposia on Human-Centric Computing Languages and Environments (Cat. No.01TH8587).

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

[30]  J. Frederiksen,et al.  Enabling Students to Construct Theories of Collaborative Inquiry and Reflective Learning: Computer Support for Metacognitive Development , 1999 .

[31]  J. W. Lloyd Declarative error diagnosis , 2009, New Generation Computing.

[32]  Paul Curzon,et al.  The Power of Computational Thinking:Games, Magic and Puzzles to Help You Become a Computational Thinker , 2017 .

[33]  David Weintrop,et al.  To block or not to block, that is the question: students' perceptions of blocks-based programming , 2015, IDC.

[34]  Heinz Ulrich Hoppe,et al.  Automated Indicators to Assess the Creativity of Solutions to Programming Exercises , 2014, 2014 IEEE 14th International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies.