A systematic review of computational thinking in science classrooms

References

• Aho, A. V. (2012). Computation and computational thinking. The Computer Journal, 55(7), 832–835. https://doi.org/10.1093/comjnl/bxs074
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aksit, O., & Wiebe, E. N. (2020). Exploring force and motion concepts in middle grades using computational modeling: A classroom intervention study. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 29: 65–82. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-019-09800–z
   Google Scholar
• Barefoot, C. A. S. (2014). Computational thinking. [online]. Available http://barefootcas.org.UK/barefoot-primary-computing-resources/concepts/computational-thinking/ [Accessed 16 February 2019]
   Google Scholar
• Barr, V., & 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. https://doi.org/10.1145/1929887.1929905
   Google Scholar
• Basawapatna, A. (2016). Alexander meets Michotte: A simulation tool based on pattern programming and phenomenology. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 19(1), 277–291. https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/jeductechsoci.19.1.277.pdf?casa_token=YfK0ou5rFFUAAAAA:-Vyf8_bAfk9HISIEEV8u6MNzSaxCK-0sAaFw0NnrXbHrQP3Pe28B91OLMxMY4DMJKUZHCXA3WBKRHfcq_j2ueOtXtr6Q50irBl656yHGr9fh2teBAcSQcg
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Basu, S., Biswas, G., & Kinnebrew, J. S. (2017). Learner modeling for adaptive scaffolding in a computational thinking-based science learning environment. User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction, 27(1), 5–53. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11257-017-9187-0
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Basu, S., Biswas, G., Sengupta, P., Dickes, A., Kinnebrew, J. S., & Clark, D. (2016). Identifying middle school students’ challenges in computational thinking-based science learning. Research and Practice in Technology-enhanced Learning, 11(1), 13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11257-017-9187-0
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Basu, S., Dickes, A., Kinnebrew, J. S., Sengupta, P., & Biswas, G. (2013, May). CTSiM: A computational thinking environment for learning science through simulation and modeling. CSEDU, 369–378. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41039-016-0036–2
   Google Scholar
• Boulden, D. C., Wiebe, E., Akram, B., Aksit, O., Buffum, P. S., Mott, B., Boyer, K. E., & Lester, J. (2018). Computational thinking integration into middle grades science classrooms: Strategies for meeting the challenges. Middle Grades Review, 4(3), n3. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1201235.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Brennan, K., & Resnick, M. (2012). New frameworks for studying and assessing the development of computational thinking. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association (AERA) meeting. Vancouver, BC, Canada.
   Google Scholar
• Bryman, A. (2008). Why do researchers integrate/combine/mesh/blend/mix/merge/fuse quantitative and qualitative research.  In M.M. Bergman (Ed.), Advances in Mixed Methods Research, (pp. 87–100).  Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publications Inc. https://doi.org/10.4135/9780857024329.d9
   Google Scholar
• Cansu, S. K., & Cansu, F. K. (2019). An Overview of Computational Thinking. International Journal of Computer Science Education in Schools, 3(1), n1. https://doi.org/10.21585/ijcses.v3i1.53
   Google Scholar
• Clark, D. B., & Sengupta, P. (2020). Reconceptualizing games for integrating computational thinking and science as practice: Collaborative agent-based disciplinarily integrated games. Interactive Learning Environments, 28(3), 328–346. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2019.1636071
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2018). Research methods in education. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2017). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage publications.
   Google Scholar
• Cutumisu, M., Adams, C., & Lu, C. (2019). A Scoping Review of Empirical Research on Recent Computational Thinking Assessments. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 28(6), 651–676. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-019-09799-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dickes, A. C., Farris, A. V., & Sengupta, P. (2020). Socio-mathematical norms for integrating coding and modeling with elementary science: A dialogical approach. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 29, 35–52. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-019-09795-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Evidence for Policy and Practice Information and Co-ordinating Centre (EPPI Center). (2003). Guidelines for the extraction of information and quality assessment of primary studies in educational research. Available at https://eppi.ioe.ac.uk/cms/Resources/Tools/tabid/184/Default.aspx#Guidelines
   Google Scholar
• Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (2015). How to design and evaluate research in education. McGraw-Hill Education.
   Google Scholar
• García-Peñalvo, F. J., Reimann, D., Tuul, M., Rees, A., & Jormanainen, I. (2016). An overview of the most relevant literature on coding and computational thinking with emphasis on the relevant issues for educators. Belgium: TACCLE3 Consortium. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.165123
   Google Scholar
• Garneli, V., & Chorianopoulos, K. (2019). The effects of video game making within science content on student computational thinking skills and performance. Interactive Technology and Smart Education, 16(4), 301–318. https://doi.org/10.1108/ITSE-11-2018-0097
   Web of Science ®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
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hickmott, D., Prieto-Rodriguez, E., & Holmes, K. (2018). A scoping review of studies on computational thinking in K–12 mathematics classrooms. Digital Experiences in Mathematics Education, 4(1), 48–69. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40751-017-0038-8
   Google Scholar
• Hsu, T. C., Chang, S. C., & Hung, Y. T. (2018). How to learn and how to teach computational thinking: Suggestions based on a review of the literature. Computers & Education, 126, 296–310. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.07.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hutchins, N. M., Biswas, G., Maróti, M., Lédeczi, Á., Grover, S., Wolf, R., Blair, K. P., Chin, D., Conlin, L., Basu, S., & McElhaney, K. (2020). C2STEM: A system for synergistic learning of physics and computational thinking. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 29(1), 83–100. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-019-09804-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Irgens, G. A., Dabholkar, S., Bain, C., Woods, P., Hall, K., Swanson, H., Horn, M., & Wilensky, U. (2020). Modeling and measuring high school students’ computational thinking practices in science. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 29(1), 137–161. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-020-09811-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ISTE & CSTA. (2011). Operational definition of computational thinking for K–12 Education. http://www.iste.org/docs/ctdocuments/computational-thinking-operational-definition-flyer.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Kalelioglu, F., Gülbahar, Y., & Kukul, V. (2016). A framework for computational thinking based on a systematic research review. Baltic Journal of Modern Computing, 4(3), 583–596. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-93566-9_2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaya, E., Newley, A., Yesilyurt, E., & Deniz, H. (2019). Improving preservice elementary teachers’ engineering teaching efficacy beliefs with 3D design and printing. Journal of College Science Teaching, 48(5), 76–83. https://doi.org/10.2505/4/jcst17_047_02_66
   Google Scholar
• Kokotsaki, D., Menzies, V., & Wiggins, A. (2016). Project-based learning: A review of the literature. Improving Schools, 19(3), 267–277. https://doi.org/10.1177/1365480216659733
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee, I., Grover, S., Martin, F., Pillai, S., & Malyn-Smith, J. (2020). computational thinking from a disciplinary perspective: integrating computational thinking in K-12 science, technology, engineering, and mathematics education. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 29(1), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-019-09803-w
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee, I., Martin, F., & Apone, K. (2014). Integrating computational thinking across the K–8 curriculum. Acm Inroads, 5(4), 64–71. https://doi.org/10.1145/2684721.2684736
   Google Scholar
• Li, M. C., & Tsai, C. C. (2013). Game-based learning in science education. A review of relevant research. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 22(6), 877–898. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-013-9436-x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li, Y., & Schoenfeld, A. H. (2019). Problematising teaching and learning mathematics as “given” in STEM education. International Journal of STEM Education, 6(44), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-019-0197-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu, H. P., Perera, S. M., & Klein, J. W. (2017). Using model-based learning to promote computational thinking education. In P. Rich & C. Hodges (Eds.), Emerging research, practice, and policy on computational thinking. educational communications and technology: issues and innovations, (pp. 153–176). Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Lockwood, J., & Mooney, A. (2017). Computational Thinking in Education: Where does it fit? A systematic literary review. Online Submission, 2(1). Available at https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1703/1703.07659.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Louca, L., . T., & Zacharia, Z., . C. (2012). Modeling-based learning in science education: Cognitive, metacognitive, social, material, and epistemological contributions. Educational Review, 64(4), 471–492. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2011.628748
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lu, J. J., & Fletcher, G. H. (2009, March). Thinking about computational thinking. In Proceedings of the 40th ACM technical symposium on Computer science education (pp. 260–264). Tennessee, USA: Association for Computing Machinery.
   Google Scholar
• Lui, D., Fields, D., & Kafai, Y. (2019). Student Maker Portfolios: Promoting Computational Communication and Reflection in Crafting E-Textiles. In Proceedings of FabLearn 2019 (pp. 10–17). New York, United States: Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/3311890.3311892
   Google Scholar
• Lui, D., Walker, J., . T., Hanna, S., Kafai, Y., . B., Fields, D., & Jayathirtha, G. (2020). Communicating computational concepts and practices within high school students’ portfolios of making electronic textiles. Interactive Learning Environments, 28(3), 284–301. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2019.1612446
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Luo, F., Antonenko, P. D., & Davis, E. C. (2020). Exploring the evolution of two girls’ conceptions and practices in computational thinking in science. Computers & Education, 146, 103759. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103759
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lye, S. Y., & Koh, J. H. L. (2014). Review on teaching and learning of computational thinking through programming: What is next for K-12? Computers in Human Behavior, 41, 51–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.09.012
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mannila, L., Dagiene, V., Demo, B., Grgurina, N., Mirolo, C., Rolandsson, L., & Settle, A. (2014, June). Computational thinking in K-9 education. In Proceedings of the working group reports of the 2014 on innovation & technology in computer science education conference (pp. 1–29). Association for Computing Machinery
   Google Scholar
• Maree, K., & Pietersen, J. (2014). Surveys and the use of questionnaires. In K. Maree (Ed.), First steps in research (1st ed., pp. 155–169). Van Schaik
   Google Scholar
• Martin, S., & Jacobsen, M. (2018). Coding and computational thinking in math and science. Alberta Science Education Journal, 45(2), 17-27. https://prism.ucalgary.ca/handle/1880/107763
   Google Scholar
• McGuinness, C. (2011). Becoming confident educators: A guide for academic librarians (pp. 69–120). Elsevier. Chandos Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & Group, P. (2009). Reprint— Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. Physical Therapy, 89(9), 873–880. https://doi.org/10.1093/ptj/89.9.873
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Next Generation Science Standard Lead States. (NGSS). (2013) . Next-generation science standards. For states, by states. National Academies Press.
   Google Scholar
• Nieuwenhuis, J. (2014). Qualitative research designs and data gathering techniques. In K. Maree (Ed.), First steps in research (1st ed., pp. 70–92). Van Schaik
   Google Scholar
• Papert, S. (1980). MINDSTORMS, children, computers, and powerful ideas. Basic Books.
   Google Scholar
• Papert, S. (1996). An exploration in the space of mathematics educations. International Journal of. Computers for Mathematical Learning, 1(1), 95–123. https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.571.4630&rep=rep1&type=pdf
   Google Scholar
• Pedaste, M., Maeots, M., Siiman, L. A., De Jong, T., Van Riesen, S. A., Kamp, E. T., Manoli, C. C., Zacharias, Z. C., & Tsourlidaki, E. (2015). Phases of inquiry-based learning: Definitions and the inquiry cycle. Educational Research Review, 14, 47–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2015.02.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peel, A., & Friedrichsen, P. (2018). Algorithms, abstractions, and iterations: Teaching computational thinking using protein synthesis translation. The American Biology Teacher, 80(1), 21–28. https://doi.org/10.1525/abt.2018.80.1.21
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Royal Society (The). (2012). Shut down or restart? The way forward for computing in UK schools. The Royal Society. http://royalsociety.org/uploadedFiles/Royal_Society_Content/education/policy/computing-in-schools/2012-01-12-Computing-in-Schools.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Sanford, C., & Sokol, V. (2017). Professional Development: Targeted On-the-Job Trainings. In Preparing Informal Science Educators (pp. 289–310). Columbus, USA: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Scheltenaar, K. J., van der Poel, J. E. C., & Bekker, M. M. (2015, September). Design-based learning in classrooms using playful digital toolkits. In International Conference on Entertainment Computing (pp. 126–139). Springer, Cham.
   Google Scholar
• Sengupta, P., Kinnebrew, J. S., Basu, S., Biswas, G., & Clark, D. (2013). Integrating computational thinking with K-12 science education using agent-based computation: A theoretical framework. Education and Information Technologies, 18(2), 351–380. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-012-9240-x
   Google Scholar
• Sneider, C., Stephenson, C., Schafer, B., & Flick, L. (2014). Computational thinking in high school science classrooms. The Science Teacher, 81 (5), 53. cited by 20. https://doi.org/10.2505/4/tst14_081_05_53
   Google Scholar
• Snyder, H. (2019). Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 104, 333–339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.07.039
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spector, M. (2009). Foreword, “Model-based approaches to learning: using systems models and simulations to improve understanding and problem-solving in complex domains„. In P. Blumschein, W.Hung, D. Jonassen, & J. Strobel (Eds.), Modelling and Simulations for Learning and Instrucion, 4. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Sense Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Sullivan, F. R., & Heffernan, J. (2016). Robotic construction kits as computational manipulatives for learning in the STEM disciplines. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 48(2), 105–128. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2016.1146563
   Web of Science ®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, 103798. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103798
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tucker-Raymond, E., Puttick, G., Cassidy, M., Harteveld, C., & Troiano, G. M. (2019). “I Broke Your Game!”: Critique among middle schoolers designing computer games about climate change. International Journal of STEM Education, 6(1), 41. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-019-0194-z
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Voogt, J., Fisser, P., Good, J., Mishra, P., & Yadav, A. (2015). Computational thinking in compulsory education: Towards an agenda for research and practice. Education and Information Technologies, 20(4), 715–728. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-015-9412-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Waterman, K. P., Goldsmith, L., & Pasquale, M. (2020). Integrating computational thinking into elementary science curriculum: An examination of activities that support students’ computational thinking in the service of disciplinary learning. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 29(1), 53–64. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-019-09801-y
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weintrop, D., Beheshti, E., Horn, M., Orton, K., Jona, K., Trouille, L., & Wilensky, U. (2016). Defining computational thinking for mathematics and science classrooms. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 25(1), 127–147. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-015-9581-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilensky, U., Brady, C. E., & Horn, M. S. (2014). Fostering computational literacy in science classrooms. Communications of the ACM, 57(8), 24–218. https://doi.org/10.1145/2633031
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilkerson, M.H., & Fenwick, M. (2017). Using mathematics and computational thinking. In C. V. Schwarz, C. Passmore, & B. J. Reiser (Eds.), Helping Students Make Sense of the World Using Next Generation Science and Engineering Practices. Arlington, VA: National Science Teachers’ Association Press
   Google Scholar
• Wing, J. M. (2006). Computational thinking. Communications of the ACM, 49(3), 33–35. https://doi.org/10.1145/1118178.1118215
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wing, J. M. (2008). Computational thinking and thinking about computing. Philosophical: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 366(1881), 3717–3725. https://doi.org/10.1109/ipdps.2008.4536091
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wing, J.M. (2011), Research Notebook: Computational thinking -what and why? Th Link Magazine, 20–23. https://www.cs.cmu.edu/link/research-notebook-computational-thinking-what-and-why
   Google Scholar
• Yadav, A., Hong, H., & Stephenson, C. (2016). Computational thinking for all: Pedagogical approaches to embedding 21st-century problem-solving in K-12 classrooms. TechTrends, 60 (6), 565–568. cited by 158. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-016-0087-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yadav, A., Krist, C., Good, J., & Caeli, E. N. (2018). Computational thinking in elementary classrooms: Measuring teacher understanding of computational ideas for teaching science. Computer Science Education, 28(4), 371–400. https://doi.org/10.1080/08993408.2018.1560550
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yadav, A., Mayfield, C., Zhou, N., Hambrusch, S., & Korb, J. T. (2014). Computational thinking in elementary and secondary teacher education. ACM Transactions on Computing Education (TOCE), 14(1), 1–16.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yin, Y., Hadad, R., Tang, X., & Lin, Q. (2020). Improving and assessing computational thinking in maker activities: The integration with physics and engineering learning. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 29(2), 189–214. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-019-09794-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar