What’s Computational Thinking?: Secondary Science Teachers’ Conceptualizations of Computational Thinking (CT) and Perceived Barriers to CT Integration

High school biology teachers’ integration of computational thinking into data practices to support student investigations

“…Student data practices have always been an integral part of science education, however, research on ways to explicitly teach data skills is perhaps not proportional to its importance in learning about reliable and valid evidence (Sadler, 2004). This study and others (e.g., Kite & Park, 2020;Yadav et al, 2016) demonstrate there is potential for CT practices to aid in improving data skills. Future research can clarify how and when CT practices can enhance data skills and create learning efficiencies across the two areas.…”

“…Researchers recommend that in order to diversify CT across disciplines and students, educators need to first have the opportunity to engage in professional development of what CT is and how it can be implemented in curriculum (Kite & Park, 2020) and that these professional development experiences be ongoing (Yadav et al, 2016). In addition to these findings, we found that science teachers easily integrated decomposition and pattern recognition, and found algorithmic thinking, abstraction, and automation to be more difficult to integrate.…”

“…Misconceptions (i.e., that computational thinking is simply computer science, algorithm design, solving problems, doing mathematics, logical thinking, and algorithms) might contribute to how science teachers incorporate computational thinking within the classroom (Alfayez & Lambert, 2019; Bower et al, 2015; Fletcher & Lu, 2009; Sadik et al, 2017; Sands et al, 2018). Therefore, professional development programs need to help science educators create curriculum centered on computational thinking within their content area (Kite & Park, 2020). By defining interactions between their current curricula and computational thinking, educators might be able to identify effective methods for integrating computational thinking into their teaching.…”

Context matters: Secondary science teachers' integration of process‐based, unplugged computational thinking into science curriculum

“…Secondary science teachers are generally unfamiliar with both CT and CT/science integration (Kite & Park, 2022a) and have concerns about integrating technology into their science instruction (Cetin, 2016). The CT-UP-S PD program was designed to provide inservice science teachers with non-technological (i.e., unplugged) strategies for integrating CT in their science curriculum.…”

“…Creation and implementation of CT‐integrated science curriculum depends, however, on clear frameworks to guide CT integration (Grover et al, 2020), an understanding of CT/Science integration best practices (Li, Schoenfeld, et al, 2020), CT/Science integration strategies that address teachers' discomfort with technology and inequitable access to technology (Peel et al, 2022), and teachers who are adequately prepared and have sufficient self‐efficacy to integrate CT into their science curriculum on an ongoing basis (Yadav et al, 2017). Additionally, effective CT professional development (CT‐PD) programs are necessary to prepare teachers to cope with challenges that might hinder their implementation of CT‐integrated curriculum (Kite & Park, 2022a). Unfortunately, material to guide the development of these programs is sparse because there is not an agreed upon CT integration framework, there are very few classroom examples of CT integration in science education, even fewer examples that attend to persistent tech‐centric concerns, and little research on barriers teachers encounter when integrating CT into science classes (Grover et al, 2020; Li, Schoenfeld, et al, 2020; Ogegbo & Ramnarain, 2021; Peel et al, 2022).…”