The Role of Emotion in Computing Education, and Computing Education in Primary School: ICER 2017 Recap

September 1, 2017 at 7:00 am 1 comment

I wrote my Blog@CACM post in August about the two ICER 2017 paper awards:

  • Danielsiek et al’s development of a new test of student self-efficacy in algorithms classes;
  • Rich et al.’s trajectories of K-5 CS learning, which constitute an important new set of theories about how young students learn computing.

Rich et al.’s paper is particularly significant to me because it has me re-thinking my beliefs about elementary school computer science. I have expressed significant doubt about teaching computer science in early primary grades — it’s expensive, there are even more teachers to prepare than in secondary schools, and it’s not clear that it does any longterm good. If a third grader learns something about Scratch, will they have learned something that they can use later in high school? Katie Rich presented not just trajectories but Big Ideas. Like Big Ideas for sequential programming include precision and ordering. It’s certainly plausible that a third grader who learns that precision and ordering in programs matters, might still remember that years later. I can believe that Big Ideas might transfer (at least, within computing) over years.

I was struck by a recurring theme of emotion in the papers at ICER 2017. We have certainly had years where cognition has been a critical discussion, or objects, or programming languages, or student’s process. This year, I noticed that many of these papers were thinking about beliefs and feelings.

I find this set of papers interesting for highlight an important research question: What’s the most significant issue influencing student success or withdrawal from computer science? Is it the programming language they use (blocks vs text, anyone?), the kind of error messages they see, the context in which the instruction is situated, or whether they use pair programming? Or is the most significant issue what the students believe about what they’re doing? And maybe all of those other issues (from blocks to pairs) are really just inputs to the function of student belief?

(Be sure to check out Andy Ko’s summary of ICER 2017.)

Entry filed under: Uncategorized. Tags: , , , .

The Problems with Coding Bootcamps: Allure with little Payoff Google study on the challenges for rural communities in teaching CS

1 Comment Add your own

  • 1. Big M, little m – Katie the Curious  |  September 1, 2017 at 10:52 pm

    […] afternoon I read a blog post by Dr. Mark Guzdial, a computer science education researcher at Georgia Tech. He mentioned a paper […]

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed


Recent Posts

September 2017
M T W T F S S
« Aug   Oct »
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930  

Feeds

Blog Stats

  • 1,452,948 hits

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 5,181 other followers

CS Teaching Tips


%d bloggers like this: