Journal of the Korean earth science society (한국지구과학회지)

The Korean Earth Science Society (한국지구과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Exploring Students Competencies to be Creative Problem Solvers With Computational Thinking Practices

  • Park, Young-Shin (Department of Earth Science Education, Chosun University) ;
  • Park, Miso (Science and Culture Exhibition Department, National Science Museum)
  • Received : 2018.07.16
  • Accepted : 2018.08.27
  • Published : 2018.08.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to explore the nine components of computational thinking (CT) practices and their operational definitions from the view of science education and to develop a CT practice framework that is going to be used as a planning and assessing tool for CT practice, as it is required for students to equip with in order to become creative problem solvers in $21^{st}$ century. We employed this framework into the earlier developed STEAM programs to see how it was valid and reliable. We first reviewed theoretical articles about CT from computer science and technology education field. We then proposed 9 components of CT as defined in technology education but modified operational definitions in each component from the perspective of science education. This preliminary CTPF (computational thinking practice framework) from the viewpoint of science education consisting of 9 components including data collection, data analysis, data representation, decomposing, abstraction, algorithm and procedures, automation, simulation, and parallelization. We discussed each component with operational definition to check if those components were useful in and applicable for science programs. We employed this CTPF into two different topics of STEAM programs to see if those components were observable with operational definitions. The profile of CT components within the selected STEAM programs for this study showed one sequential spectrum covering from data collection to simulation as the grade level went higher. The first three data related CT components were dominating at elementary level, all components of CT except parallelization were found at middle school level, and finally more frequencies in every component of CT except parallelization were also found at high school level than middle school level. On the basis of the result of CT usage in STEAM programs, we included 'generalization' in CTPF of science education instead of 'parallelization' which was not found. The implication about teacher education was made based on the CTPF in terms of science education.

Keywords

References

  1. Barr, V. and Stephenson, C., 2011, Bringing computational thinking to K-12: what is Involved and what is the role of the computer science education community? ACM Inroads, 2(1), 48-54 p. https://doi.org/10.1145/1929887.1929905
  2. Computer Science Teacher Association, 2011, Computational Thinking Leadership Toolkit.
  3. Ministry of Education, 2015, 2015 revised information curriculum
  4. National Research Council, 2012, A framework for K-12 Science education, Washington. D.C: The National Academies Press.
  5. NGSS Lead States, 2013, Next Generation Science Standards: For states, by states. Washington, DC: The National Academy Press.
  6. Park, Y-S., 2010, Secondary beginning teachers' views of scientific inquiry: With the view of hands-on, minds-on, and hearts-on. Journal of the Korean Earth Science Society, 31(7), 798-812 p. https://doi.org/10.5467/JKESS.2010.31.7.798
  7. Park, Y-S. and Hwang, J., 2017, The preliminary study of developing computational thinking practice analysis tool and its implementation. Journal of Korean Society of Earth Science Education, 19(2), 140-160 p.
  8. Park, Y-S., May, 2018, The study of elementary science program with computational thinking practices and its understandings by elementary teachers, The 1st Korean Geoscience Union conference 2018, Hong-Cheon, Kangwon-Do, Korea.
  9. Park, M., Park, G., Green, J., and Park, Y-S., September, 2017, Development of computational thinking practice tool and its application in science education, The biannual KESS conference 2017, G & R Hub, Chonnam National University, Korea.
  10. Park, Y-S. and Park, M., July, 2017, Exploring the characteristics of computational thinking included in STEAM program, The 72nd KASE conference 2017, Gyungsang National University, Tong-Young campus, Tong-Young, Korea.
  11. Park, Y-S. and Lawrence, B. F., October, 2015, The development of computational thinking practice observational protocol and its application, The 8th International EASE (East-Asian Association for Science Education) Conference 2015, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China Mainland.
  12. Song, J. and Na, J., 2014, The meaning of science fusion of window and direction of science classroom culture. Journal of Research in Curriculum Instruction, 18(3), 827-845 p. https://doi.org/10.24231/rici.2014.18.3.827
  13. Stohlmann, M., Moore, T. J., and Roehrig, G. H., 2012, Considerations for teaching integrated STEM education. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research, 2(1), 28-34 p. https://doi.org/10.5703/1288284314653
  14. The International Society for Technology in Education, 2011, Computational Thinking teacher resources second edition.
  15. The International Society for Technology in Education & Computer Science Teacher Association, 2011, Computational Thinking leadership toolkit.
  16. Weintrop, D., Beheshti, E., Horn, M., Orton, K., Jona, K., Trouille, L., and Wilensky, U., 2016, Defining computational thinking for mathematics and science classrooms. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 21(1), 127-147 p.
  17. Wing, J. M., 2006, Computational thinking, Communication of the ACM, 49(3), 33-35 p. https://doi.org/10.1145/1118178.1118215
  18. Wing, J.M., 2008, Computational thinking and thinking about computing. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 366(1881), 3717-3725 p. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2008.0118