Drivers for the development of computational thinking in Costa Rican students

 Karol Picado-Arce, San José (Costa Rica)

 Stefani Matarrita-Muñoz, San José (Costa Rica)

 Olmer Núñez-Sosa, San José (Costa Rica)

 Magaly Zúñiga-Céspedes, San José (Costa Rica)

https://doi.org/10.3916/C68-2021-07

Keywords

Learning, computational thinking, assessment, elementary education, informatics, programming

Abstract

This study provides evidence about factors that facilitate the development of computational thinking (CT) in Costa Rican elementary school students, including the description of the contribution of the LIE++ proposal that addresses CT knowledge and practices through programming and physical computing projects. A quasi-experimental design was used to compare a group of students from the LIE++ educational proposal with a group of students from another proposal called LIE-Guides, which emphasizes learning with digital technologies. The study sample comprised 14,795 voluntary students, who answered an online test that was constructed and validated to estimate the scores achieved in CT. The results showed that the students participating in the LIE++ proposal obtained better scores compared to the LIE-Guides group. A multilevel regression model demonstrated that students’ personal and social variables, as well as the proposal’s execution scheme, positively affected student learning in CT. This research is a first approach to the subject in this context. It refers to the importance of providing educational opportunities that focus on more advanced computing knowledge and skills, as well as the relevance of continuing to develop tools and methodologies that help generate evidence about CT in education in order to improve educational interventions.

References

Ambrosio, A.P., Xavier, C., & Georges, F. (2014). Digital ink for cognitive assessment of computational thinking [Conference]. Education Conference (FIE) Proceedings. https://doi.org/10.1109/FIE.2014.7044237

Link DOI | Link Google Scholar

Atmatzidou, S., & Demetriadis, S. (2016). Advancing students’ computational thinking skills through educational robotics: A study on age and gender relevant differences. Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 75, 661-670. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.robot.2015.10.008

Link DOI | Link Google Scholar

Bocconi, S., Chioccariello, A., Dettori, G., Ferrari, A., & Engelhardt, K. (2016). Developing computational thinking in compulsory education-implications for policy and practice. European Union. https://bit.ly/3jpc7Ut

Link Google Scholar

Bourdieu, P. (1998). Capital cultural, escuela y espacio social. Siglo XXI.

Link Google Scholar

Brennan, K., & Resnick, M. (2012). Entrevistas basadas en artefactos para estudiar el desarrollo del Pensamiento Computacional (PC) en el diseño de medios interactivos [Conference]. American Educational Research Association (AERA). https://bit.ly/3qNPw81

Link Google Scholar

Caballero-González, Y.A., & García-Valcárcel, A. (2020). Learning with robotics in primary education? A means of stimulating computa-tional thinkin. Education in the Knowledge Society, 21(10), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.14201/eks.21443

Link DOI | Link Google Scholar

Chen, G., Shen, J., Barth-Cohen, L., Jiang, S., Huang, X., & Eltoukhy, M. (2017). Assessing elementary students’ computational thinking in everyday reasoning and robotics programming. Computers & Education, 109, 162-175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.03.001

Link DOI | Link Google Scholar

Dagiene, V., & Stupuriene, G. (2016). Bebras - A sustainable community building model for the concept-based learning of informatics and computational thinking. Informatics in Education, 15(1), 25-44. https://doi.org/10.15388/infedu.2016.02

Link DOI | Link Google Scholar

Dagiene, V., Mannila, L., Poranen, T., Rolandsson, L., & Stupuriene, G. (2014). Reasoning on children’s cognitive skills in an informatics contest: findings and discoveries from Finland, Lithuania, and Sweden. In Y. Gülbahar & E. Karata? (Eds.), Informatics in schools. Teaching and learning perspectives (pp. 66-77). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-09958-3_7

Link DOI | Link Google Scholar

Desjardins, R., & Ederer, P. (2015). Socio-demographic and practice-oriented factors related to proficiency in problem solving: A lifelong learning perspective. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 34(4), 468-486. https://doi.org/10.1080/02601370.2015.1060027

Link DOI | Link Google Scholar

Espino, E.E., & González, C. (2016). Gender and computational thinking: Review of the literature and applications [Conference]. Proceedings of the XVII International Conference on Human Computer Interaction. https://doi.org/10.1145/2998626.2998665

Link DOI | Link Google Scholar

Fallas, I., & Zúñiga, M. (2010). Las tecnologías digitales de la información y la comunicación en la educación costarricense: informe final. In Programa Estado de la Nación (Ed.), Tercer Informe Estado de la Educación [Conference]. PEN. https://bit.ly/37J7kK3

Link Google Scholar

Fundación Omar Dengo (Ed.) (2009). Estándares de desempeño de estudiantes en el aprendizaje con tecnologías digitales. FOD. https://bit.ly/30nteOU

Link Google Scholar

Fundación Omar Dengo (Ed.) (2016). Tecnologías digitales y capacidades para construir el futuro: Aportes del Programa Nacional de Informática Educativa MEP-FOD. Área de Investigación y Evaluación, FOD.

Link Google Scholar

García-Válcarcel, A., & Caballero-González, Y. (2019). Robotics to develop computational thinking in early Childhood Education. [Robótica para desarrollar el pensamiento computacional en Educación Infantil]. Comunicar, 59, 63-72. https://doi.org/10.3916/C59-2019-06

Link DOI | Link Google Scholar

Grover, S., & Pea, R. (2013). Computational thinking in K-12: A review of the state of the field. Educational Researcher, 42(1), 38-43. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X12463051

Link DOI | Link Google Scholar

Grover, S., Pea, R., & Cooper, S. (2015). Designing for deeper learning in a blended computer science course for middle school students. Computer Science Education, 25(2), 199-237. https://doi.org/10.1080/08993408.2015.1033142

Link DOI | Link Google Scholar

Holmes, W., Bolin, J.E., & Kelley, K. (2014). Multilevel modeling using R. CRC Press. https://bit.ly/30lEPOz

Link Google Scholar

Jara, I., Claro, M., Hinostroza, J.E., San-Martín, E., Rodríguez, P., Cabello, T., Ibieta, A., & Labbé, C. (2015). Understanding factors related to Chilean students’ digital skills: A mixed methods analysis. Computers & Education, 88, 387-398. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.07.016

Link DOI | Link Google Scholar

Jun, S., Han, S., & Kim, S. (2017). Effect of design-based learning on improving computational thinking. Behaviour & Information Technology, 36(1), 43-53. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2016.1188415

Link DOI | Link Google Scholar

Kalas, I., & Tomcsányiová, M. (2009). Students’ attitude to programming in modern informatics [Conference]. 9th IFIP TC 3 World Conference on Computers in Education (WCCE). https://bit.ly/35IZ8b7

Link Google Scholar

Leonard, J., Buss, A., Gamboa, R., Mitchell, M., Fashola, O.S., Hubert, T., & Almughyirah, S. (2016). Using robotics and game design to enhance children’s self-efficacy, STEM attitudes, and computational thinking skills. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 25, 860-876. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-016-9628-2

Link DOI | Link Google Scholar

Linacre, J.M. (2002). What do infit and outfit, mean-square and standardized mean? Rasch Measurement Transactions, 16, 878. https://bit.ly/3hEFZvC

Link Google Scholar

Magis, D., Béland, S., Tuerlinckx, F., & De-Boeck, P. (2010). A general framework and an R package for the detection of dichotomous differential item functioning. Behavior research methods, 42(3), 847-862. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.42.3.847

Link DOI | Link Google Scholar

Martínez-Restrepo, S., Ramos-Jaimes, L., Maya, N., & Parra, L. (2018). Guía metodológica para medir las TIC en educación. IDRC – FEDESARROLLO. https://bit.ly/2ZKqHhu

Link Google Scholar

Ministerio de Educación Pública (Ed.) (2019). Exclusión intra anual en el sistema educativo costarricense. MEP. https://bit.ly/2TegPt7

Link Google Scholar

Ministerio de Planificación Nacional y Política Económica (Ed.) (2018). Costa Rica índice de desarrollo social (IDS) 2017. MIDEPLAN. https://bit.ly/34fEq2R

Link Google Scholar

Muñoz, L., Brenes, M., Bujanda, M., Mora, M., Núñez, O., & Zúñiga, M. (2014). Las políticas TIC en los sistemas educativos de América Latina: Caso Costa Rica. UNICEF. https://bit.ly/3kpZydg

Link Google Scholar

Palts, T., Pedaste, M., Vene, V., & Vinikien?, L. (2017). Tasks for assessing skills of computational thinking [Conference]. 10th annual International Conference of Education, Research and Innovation. https://doi.org/10.21125/iceri.2017.0784

Link DOI | Link Google Scholar

Papert, S. (1987). Information technology and education: Computer criticism vs. technocentric thinking. Educational Researcher, 16(1), 22-30. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X016001022

Link DOI | Link Google Scholar

Papert, S. (1998). Child power: Keys to the new learning of the digital century [Conference].11th Colin Cherry Memorial Lecture on Communication. https://bit.ly/2QB2BB7

Link Google Scholar

Resnick, M. (2013, May 8). Learn to code, code to learn. EdSurge. https://bit.ly/3m3gtlo

Link Google Scholar

Román-González, M. (2015). Test de pensamiento computacional: Principios de diseño, validación de contenido y análisis de ítems Computational Thinking Test: design guidelines, content validation and item analysis [Conference]. EDULEARN15 the 7th International Conference on Education and New Learning Technologies. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.1.3056.5521

Link DOI | Link Google Scholar

Román-González, M. (2016). Código alfabetización y pensamiento computacional en Educación Primaria y Secundaria: validación de un instrumento y evaluación de programas. [Doctoral Dissertion, Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia]. UNED e-Spacio. https://bit.ly/32kzhDD

Link Google Scholar

Salkind, N. (2010). Encyclopedia of research design. SAGE. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412961288.n381

Link DOI | Link Google Scholar

Sullivan, A., & Bers, M.U. (2018). Dancing robots: Integrating art, music, and robotics in Singapore’s early childhood centers. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 28(2), 325-346. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-017-9397-0

Link DOI | Link Google Scholar

Tang, X., Yin, Y., Lin, Q., Hadad, R., & Zhai, X. (2020). Assessing computational thinking: A systematic review of empirical studies. Computers & Education, 148, 1-22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103798

Link DOI | Link Google Scholar

Webb, M., Davis, N., Bell, T., Katz, Y.J., Reynolds, N., Chambers, D.P., & Sys?o, M.M. (2017). Computer science in K-12 school curricula of the 21st century: Why, what and when? Education and Information Technologies, 22, 445-468. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-016-9493-x

Link DOI | Link Google Scholar

Wing, J. (2006). Computational thinking. Communications of the ACM, 49(3), 33-36. https://doi.org/10.1145/1118178.1118215

Link DOI | Link Google Scholar

Zapata-Ros, M. (2015). Pensamiento computacional: Una nueva alfabetización digital. Revista de Educación a Distancia, 46 (4). https://doi.org/10.6018/red/46/4

Link DOI | Link Google Scholar

Zhang, L., & Nouri, J. (2019). A systematic review of learning computational thinking through Scratch in K-9. Computers & Education, 141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103607

Link DOI | Link Google Scholar

Fundref

This study received economic support from PRONIE MEP-FOD.

Crossmark

Technical information

Received: 03-11-2020

Revised: 15-12-2020

Accepted: 15-02-2021

OnlineFirst: 15-04-2021

Publication date: 01-07-2021

Article revision time: 42 days | Average time revision issue 68: 37 days

Article acceptance time: 104 days | Average time of acceptance issue 68: 78 days

Preprint editing time: 194 days | Average editing time preprint issue 68: 168 days

Article editing time: 239 days | Average editing time issue 68: 213 days

Metrics

Metrics of this article

Views: 28765

Abstract readings: 26243

PDF downloads: 2522

Full metrics of Comunicar 68

Views: 315611

Abstract readings: 273695

PDF downloads: 41916

Cited by