1,144
Views
16
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Articles

Equitable approaches: opportunities for computational thinking with emphasis on creative production and connections to community

, ORCID Icon &
Pages 347-361 | Received 30 Nov 2017, Accepted 12 Jun 2019, Published online: 27 Jul 2019

References

  • 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. doi: 10.1145/1929887.1929905
  • Barron, B. (2006). Interest and self-sustained learning as catalysts of development: A learning ecologies perspective. Human Development, 49, 193–224. doi: 10.1159/000094368
  • Barron, B., & Bell, P. (2015). Learning environments in and out of school. In L. Corno & E. M. Anderman (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (3rd ed., pp. 323–336). New York, NY: Routledge.
  • Barron, B., & Darling-Hammond, L. (2010). Prospects and challenges for inquiry-based approaches to learning. In H. Dumont, D. Istance & F. Benavides (Eds.), The nature of learning: Using research to inspire practice (pp. 199–225). Paris: OECD Publishing.
  • Barron, B., Gomez, K., Pinkard, N., & Martin, C. K. (2014). The digital youth network: Cultivating digital media citizenship in urban communities. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  • Barron, B., & Martin, C. K. (2016). Making Matters: A framework for assessing digital media citizenship. In K. Peppler, E. R. Halverson, & Y. Kafai (Eds.), Makeology Vol 2: Makers as learners (pp. 45–71). New York, NY: Routledge.
  • Barron, B., Martin, C. K., Takeuchi, L., & Fithian, R. (2009). Parents as learning partners in the development of technological fluency. The International Journal of Learning and Media, 1(2), 55–77. doi: 10.1162/ijlm.2009.0021
  • Barton, A. C., Tan, E., & Greenberg, D. (2016). The makerspace movement: Sites of possibilities for equitable opportunities to engage underrepresented youth in STEM. Teachers College Record, 119(6), 11–44.
  • Bevan, B., & Michalchik, V. (2013). Where it gets interesting: Competing models of STEM learning after school. Afterschool Matters, 17, 1–8.
  • Brennan, K., & Resnick, M. (2012, April). New frameworks for studying and assessing the development of computational thinking. In Proceedings of the 2012 annual meeting of the AERA, Vancouver, CA (pp 1–25).
  • Buechley, L., Eisenberg, M., & Elumeze, N. (2007). Towards a curriculum for electronic textiles in the high school classroom. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 39(3), 28–32. doi: 10.1145/1269900.1268795
  • Champion, D. N. (2018). The STEAM dance makerspace: A context for integration: An investigation of learning at the intersections of STEM, art, making and embodiment (Doctoral dissertation). Northwestern University.
  • Cheryan, S., Davies, P., Plaut, V., & Steele, C. (2009). Ambient belonging: How stereotypical cues impact gender participation in computer science. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97(6), 1045–1060. doi: 10.1037/a0016239
  • Dabney, K. P., Chakraverty, D., & Tai, R. H. (2013). The association of family influence and initial interest in science. Science Education, 97(3), 395–409. doi: 10.1002/sce.21060
  • Daily, S. D., Leonard, A. E., Jörg, S., Babu, S., Gundersen, K., & Parmar, D. (2014). Embodying computational thinking: Initial design of an emerging technological learning tool. Technology, Knowledge, & Learning, 20, 79–84. doi: 10.1007/s10758-014-9237-1
  • DiSessa, A. A. (2001). Changing minds: Computers, learning, and literacy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  • Erete, S., Martin, C. K., & Pinkard, N. (2017). Digital Youth Divas: A program model for increasing knowledge, confidence, and perceptions of fit in STEM amongst black and brown middle school girls. In Y. Rankin & J. Thomas (Eds.), Moving students of color from consumers to producers of technology (pp. 152–173). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
  • Fields, D. A., Kafai, Y., Nakajima, T., Goode, J., & Margolis, J. (2018). Putting making into high school computer science classrooms: Promoting equity in teaching and learning with electronic textiles. Exploring ComputerScience, Equity & Excellence in Education, 51(1), 21–35. doi: 10.1080/10665684.2018.1436998
  • Fields, D., Giang, M., & Kafai, Y. (2014). Programing in the wild: Patterns of computational participation in the Scratch online social networking forum. In Proceedings of the 9th workshops in primary and Secondary computing education (pp. 2–11). New York, NY: ACM.
  • Fields, D., Kafai, Y., & Giang, M. (2017). Coding by choice: A transitional analysis of social participation patterns and programming contributions in the online Scratch community. In U. Cress, J. Moskaliuk, & J. Heisawn (Eds.), Mass collaboration and education (pp. 209–240). New York, NY: Springer.
  • Goode, J., & Chapman, G. (2016). Exploring computer science, v7. University of Oregon. Retrieved from http://www.exploringcs.org/archives
  • Grover, S., & Pea, R. (2013). Computational thinking in K-12. A review of the state of the field. Educational Researcher, 42(1), 38–43. doi: 10.3102/0013189X12463051
  • Gutiérrez, K. D., & Rogoff, B. (2003). Cultural ways of learning: Individual traits or repertoires of practice. Educational Researcher, 32(5), 19–25. doi: 10.3102/0013189X032005019
  • Heath, S. B. (2012). Seeing our way into learning science in informal environments. In W. F. Tate (Ed.), Research on schools, neighborhoods, and communities: Toward civic responsibility (pp. 249–267). Blue Ridge Summit, PA: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
  • Hidi, S., & Renninger, K. A. (2006). The four-phase model of interest development. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 111–127. doi: 10.1207/s15326985ep4102_4
  • Hine, C. (2008). Virtual ethnography: Modes, varieties, affordances. In N. Fielding, R. M. Lee, & G. Blank (Eds.), SAGE handbook of online methods (pp. 257–270). Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications, Ltd.
  • Hour of Code. (2017). Retrieved from https://hourofcode.com/us
  • Kafai, Y. B., & Burke, W. (2014). Connected code. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  • Kelleher, C., Pausch, R., Pausch, R., & , Kiesler, S. (2007, April). Storytelling Alice motivates middle school girls to learn computer programming. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems (pp. 1455–1464). New York, NY: ACM.
  • Lin, L., Parmar, D., Babu, S. V., Leonard, A. E., Daily, S. B., & Jörg, S. (2017). How character customization affects learning in computational thinking. In Proceedings of SAP 17, Cottbus, Germany, September 16–17, 2017, 8 pages. doi:10.1145/3119881.3119884.
  • Litts, B. K., Kafai, Y. B., Searle, K. A., & Dieckmeyer, E. (2016). Perceptions of productive failure in design projects: High school students’ challenges in making electronic textiles. Singapore: International Society of the Learning Sciences.
  • Margolis, J., Estrella, R., Goode, J., Jellison Holme, J., & Nao, K. (2008). Stuck in the shallow end: Education, race, and computing. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  • Margolis, J., Goode, J., & Chapman, G. (2015). An equity lens for scaling: A critical juncture for exploring computer science. ACM Inroads, 6(3), 58–66. doi: 10.1145/2794294
  • Martin, C. K., Pinkard, N., Erete, S., & Sandherr, J. (2017). Connections at the family level: Supporting parents and caring adults to engage youth in learning about computers and technology. In Y. Rankin & J. Thomas (Eds.), Moving students of color from consumers to producers of technology (pp. 220–244). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
  • McKinsey Global Institute. (2017). Jobs lost, jobs gained: Workforce transitions in a time of automation. San Francisco, CA: Author.
  • Nasir, N. I. S., & Hand, V. (2008). From the court to the classroom: Opportunities for engagement, learning, and identity in basketball and classroom mathematics. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 17(2), 143–179. doi: 10.1080/10508400801986108
  • Nasir, N. I. S., Rosebery, A. S., Warren, B., & Lee, C. D. (2006). Learning as a cultural process: Achieving equity through diversity. In The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (2nd ed., pp. 686–706). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
  • National Science Foundation, National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics. (2017). Women, Minorities, and Persons with Disabilities in Science and Engineering: 2017 (Special Report NSF 17-310). Arlington, VA.
  • Peppler, K., & Glosson, D. (2013). Stitching circuits: Learning about circuitry through e-textile. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 22(5), 751–763. doi: 10.1007/s10956-012-9428-2
  • Peppler, K., Gresalfi, M., Tekinbas, K. S., & Santo, R. (2014). Soft circuits: Crafting e-fashion with DIY Electronics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  • Pinkard, N., et al. (2016). Mapping and modeling the abundance, diversity, and accessibility of summer learning opportunities at the scale of a city. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Washington, DC.
  • Pinkard, N., Erete, S., Martin, C. K., & McKinney deRoyston, M. (2017). Digital Youth Divas: Exploring narrative-driven curriculum to spark middle school girls’ interest in computational activities. Journal of Learning Sciences, 41(1), 477–516. doi: 10.1080/10508406.2017.1307199
  • Roque, R. (2016). Family creative learning. In K. Peppler, Y. Kafai, & E. Halverson (Eds.), Makeology in K-12, higher, and informal education (pp. 47–63). New York, NY: Routledge.
  • Searle, K. A., & Kafai, Y. B. (2015, April). Culturally responsive making with American Indian girls: Bridging the identity gap in crafting and computing with electronic textiles. In Proceedings of the Third Conference on GenderIT (pp. 9–16). ACM.
  • Searle, K. A., & Kafai, Y. B. (2015, July). Boys’ Needlework: Understanding Gendered and Indigenous Perspectives on Computing and Crafting with Electronic Textiles. In ICER (pp. 31–39).
  • Tan, E., & Barton, A. C. (2016). Hacking a path in and through STEM: Unpacking the STEM identity work of historically underrepresented youth in STEM. Singapore: International Society of the Learning Sciences.
  • Tan, E., Calabrese-Barton, A., Kang, H., & O’Neill, T. (2013). Desiring a career in STEM-related fields: How middle school girls articulate and negotiate identities-in-practice in science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 50(10), 1143–1179. doi: 10.1002/tea.21123
  • Tissenbaum, M., Sheldon, J., Soep, L., Lee, C. H., & Lao, N. (2017). Critical computational empowerment: Engaging youth as shapers of the digital future. In Proceedings of the IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference, Athens Greece, April 2017 (pp 1705–1708).
  • UC Berkeley and EDC, Inc. (2017). Beauty and joy of computing. Berkeley: University of California.
  • US Civil Rights Data Collection. (2014). Retrieved from: http://ocrdata.ed.gov/SpecialReports
  • Vossoughi, S., Hooper, P. K., & Escudé, M. (2016). Making through the lens of culture and power: Toward transformative visions for educational equity. Harvard Educational Review, 86(2), 206–232. doi: 10.17763/0017-8055.86.2.206
  • Wing, J. (2006). Computational thinking. Communications of the ACM, 49(3), 33–35. doi: 10.1145/1118178.1118215
  • Wing, J. (2008). Computational thinking and thinking about computing. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A, 366, 3717–3725. doi: 10.1098/rsta.2008.0118

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.