Early Lessons from Evaluation of Computer Science Teacher Professional Development in Google’s CS4HS Program

Abstract

This article compares self-reported learning gains and experiences of teachers in four professional development courses funded through Google's 2014 Computer Science for High School program. The courses were designed and taught independently at four universities and started late enough in the year to participate in our pre-post study. Two of the courses used a face-to-face approach, one was online only, and one used a hybrid format. Analyses from 314 pre-surveys and 129 post-surveys indicate CS teachers are far from homogenous, suggesting that some customization may benefit professional development. We also saw a stronger sense of community in the two face-to-face courses. Among the outcomes we measured, teacher concerns (Hall and Hord 1977) were more sensitive to change than our measures of self-efficacy, outcome expectations, readiness, or beliefs. Findings illustrate the variety of CS teacher professional development experiences and the need to study the best ways to scale effective CS teacher education.

Formação Continuada de Professores para o Ensino de Algoritmos e Programação na Educação Básica: Um Estudo de Mapeamento Sistemático

“…Além disso, o acesso onipresente as ferramentas de computação levaram a vários modos e formatos de unidades instrucionais (UI), que consistem em um conjunto de aulas planejadas para ensinar determinados objetivos de aprendizagem a um público-alvo específico (Hill et al, 2005). Isso inclui cursos presenciais, por videoconferência, aprendizagem on-line (incluindo MOOC) e/ou instrução combinada (envolvendo uma mistura das aprendizagens presenciais e on-line) (Ravitz et al, 2017). Abordagens não exclusivamente presenciais facilitam o alcance de um número maior (geograficamente disperso) de professores, além de permitir que eles organizem a formação em torno de seu próprio horário na escola (Sardessai & Kamat, 2011).…”

“…Outra forma consiste no desenvolvimento de práticas em grupo (Wenger et al, 2002), nas quais os professores trabalham juntos para um objetivo comum, por exemplo, implementando o ensino em computação, compartilhando suas experiências e ajudando uns aos outros (Ravitz et al, 2017). Outra maneira pode ser por orientação, onde o aprendizado pode ocorrer dentro do ambiente escolar, liderado por professores com competências em computação e capazes de apoiar seus colegas no aprendizado de computação e na aplicação em suas aulas.…”

To Assess or Not to Assess: Tensions Negotiated in Six Years of Teaching Teachers about Computational Thinking

“…Secondly, organisations and governments spend significant funds on PD and, consequently, there is a need to identify whether the PD has had a positive impact on teachers' classroom practices beyond teachers self-reporting. For example, researchers from Google, who have funded the CS4HS (Computer Science 4 High School) program, have recently begun investigating the long-term impacts of their programs on teachers' self-reported knowledge of C&CT and their beliefs about teaching C&CT (Ravitz, Stephenson, Parker, & Blazevski, 2017).…”

Designing a Creative Cybersecurity Microcredential for Educators: Challenges and Successes of K-12 Teacher Professional Development

“…Quantitatively, the researchers present evidence of concerns about the cybersecurity microcredential based on questions 8 and 9 of the perception/attitude survey (see Figures 4 and 5). Question number eight (#8) asked teacher participants to respond to the following: "I am concerned about improving how I teach CS" (Ravitz, Stephenson, Parker, & Blazevski, 2017).…”

“…The attitude survey measured K-12 teachers' attitudes toward computer science utilizing 29 questions (Ravitz, Stephenson, Parker, & Blazevski, 2017). This attitude survey asked the K-12 teachers to respond to statements on a 1 to 5 Likert scale where a response of "1" demonstrated that they strongly disagreed and a response of "5" indicated that they strongly agreed with the statement (1= Strongly Disagree, 2= Disagree, 3= Neutral, 4= Agree and 5= Strongly Agree).…”