Infusing Computational Thinking into the Middle and HighSchool

Infusing Computational Thinking into the Middle- and High-School Curriculum Amber Settle De. Paul University 17 th Annual Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education (ITi. CSE): July 3, 2012 Joint work with Baker Franke, Ruth Hansen, Frances Spaltro, Cynthia Jurisson, Colin Rennert-May, and Brian Wildeman

Computational thinking • What is computational thinking? • “To reading, writing, and arithmetic, we should add computational thinking to every child’s analytical ability” (Wing, 2006) • Computational thinking is “the thought processes involved in formulating problems and their solutions so that the solutions are represented in a form that can be effectively carried out by an information-processing agent. ” (Wing, 2011) • Infusion into the curriculum • Undergraduate: NSF CPATH (CISE Pathways to Revitalized Undergraduate Computing Education) Program • Drawback: Only a minority of people worldwide attend college or university • K-12 curriculum: NSF Computing Education for the 21 st Century (CE 21) Program • Drawback: (In U. S. ) Computer science is not a core topic

CT across the curriculum § Three-year project: 2008 – 2011 § NSF CPATH Program § Denning’s Great Principles of Computing § Computation, communication, coordination, recollection, automation, evaluation, and design (abstraction) § De. Paul University § Liberal Studies Program § Eighteen faculty in eight different departments/schools (including geography, history, art and art history, and anthropology) § Nineteen courses § Extension into K-12 § Research Experience for Teachers (RET) supplement § Six teachers in five departments (computer science, English, fine arts, history, and world languages)

The Lab Schools § The University of Chicago Laboratory Schools § Nursery through 12 th grade § Founded in 1896 § Approximately 1700 students § Ideal environment for experimentation § Private § Selective enrollment § Diverse racial, ethnic, and socio-economic backgrounds § Strong faculty development support § Computer science department with four teachers § Teacher-to-teacher outreach

Courses modified Course Level Grade(s) Ages Computational thinking across the curriculum English High school 10 15 – 16 Graphic arts High school 9 – 12 14 – 18 History High school 11 – 12 16 – 18 Latin High school 10 – 12 15 – 18 Interdisciplinary computational thinking Computer science Middle school 5 10 – 11 Varied pedagogical approaches Computer science High school 9 14 – 15

English § 10 th grade English class § 9 th grade: “Hamlet” and sonnets § Ten-week term: “Romeo and Juliet” § Central focus: Close reading of the text § Word choice, imagery, and syntax § Address a problem § Students make generalizations based on few data points § “Macbeth is the most violent character in the play” (single text) § “Shakespeare’s plays are violent” (multiple texts) § Handling incorrect generalizations § Common: Instructor correction, directly or by asking for support § Better: Provide a method for testing hypotheses § Encourages broad thinking about texts

English § Method: Digital text analysis tools 1. 2. 3. Form or identify intuitions Hypothesize results – What results would confirm/deny your claims? Apply the tool(s) § TAPor (http: //portal. tapor. ca) § Tag. Crowd (http: //tagcrowd. com) 4. 5. Analyze results and assess the intuition Form conclusions § Three phases: Instructor demonstration, in-class group work, individual assignment § Types of CT § Abstraction: Distill ideas from text § Evaluation: Connect intuition and hypothesis; Assess results

History § 11 th and 12 th grade American history § Required, year-long course § Build a skill: Effective note taking § Not a passive activity § Include diverse information § Teacher comments § Student comments/questions § Allow easy recall of detailed information § Technique: Use hashtags while note taking § Types of CT: § Abstraction: Identify appropriate tags § Evaluation/Recollection: Consider effectiveness of tags

History 1. Formal presentation on note taking 2. Introduce hashtagging § Thoughtful abstraction § No proper nouns or words from lecture 3. Short, formal lecture for practice § Instructor: Identify hash tags in advance § Students: Note taking + in-class work (identification of hashtags + group evaluation + summary report) 4. Longer, formal lecture § Instructor: Identify hash tags in advance § Students: Note taking + at-home assignment (identification of hashtags) + in-class work (group evaluation)

Graphic arts § Digital Design for Communication § Year-long graphic design class § Grades 9 – 12 § New project: Design a prototype for a 3 D object § Aspects of the unit: § § Understand designer/client relationship Explore prototypes Experience design team dynamics Learn 3 D modeling software § One-month duration § Types of CT: § Abstraction: Graphic reduction § Communication: Necessity of precision

Graphic arts 1. Introduction to prototypes § Ideas for objects § Simple sketches and critique 2. Introduce Google’s Sketchup software § Practice sessions 3. Implement prototypes § Trade sketches with each other § No communication about sketches § Implement using Sketchup 4. (Optional) Introduction to package design 5. Compare sketches and 3 D prototypes

Thanks § Acknowledgements § National Science Foundation § Grant number 0829671 § CT across the Curriculum § Co-PI: Ljubomir Perković § More information § Amber Settle, asettle@cdm. depaul. edu § http: //compthink. cs. depaul. edu/ § Questions?