EXPLORING THE IMPACT OF A COMPUTATIONAL THINKING MODULE FOR MATHEMATICS AND SCIENCE METHODS COURSES

Abstract

Computational thinking (CT) has great potential for enhancing mathematics and science lessons in K-12 education. Numerous studies demonstrate that under the right circumstances, CT integration in math and science can improve student learning and promote deeper understanding. However, teacher education currently does not include preparation for using CT in the classroom on a widespread scale. Instead, most current CT courses or professional development (PD) opportunities for teachers are taught by a local CT researcher who can only reach a limited number of teachers. This qualitative three-article dissertation summarizes the development, implementation, and effects of a five-lesson module on CT designed to be integrated within a math & science methods course or a similar course for teachers. The goal of this module is to provide learning about CT within most teacher education programs without substantially affecting that program’s requirements for teachers (i.e., adding a new course). In Study 1, “Module Implementation in a Mathematics and Science Methods Course,” I describe the module activities, the CT knowledge of the teacher candidates who participated in the study, and how that knowledge evolved. I argue that participants’ understanding of CT expanded from a limited scope to a wide variety of practices and skills, and that the experience-first design helped them build knowledge of CT as distinct from knowledge of their discipline. In Study 2, “Use of CT Knowledge as Classroom Teachers,” I discuss sets of interviews with two teachers who had previously participated in the CT module in different years, analyzing commonalities and differences in their organization and use of CT knowledge. I argue that the Preparation for Future Learning (PFL) (Bransford & Schwartz, 1999) perspective is particularly important when considering the impact of the CT module. In Study 3, “A Faculty Workshop on CT Implementation with Mathematics and Science Methods Courses,” I discuss the effects of a summer workshop with methods instructors from universities throughout Maryland, noting different perspectives around what “counts” as a CT activity, and two implementation profiles for CT that instructors used that fall. I argue that the PFL perspective is important to consider for methods instructors’ CT integration.