Supporting Computational Design Thinking for Personally Relevant Computing and Making Education (Poster 9)

• In Event: Reconceptualizing Designerly Thinking and Participatory Design With Students, Teachers, Administrators, and Community Members

Abstract

Objectives. The objective of this structured poster is to introduce attendees to the concept of computational design thinking, an approach to computing and engineering/maker education that supports students to become empowered problem solvers with computing.

Theoretical Framework. Within computing education, there is a need to transition from simply "teaching kids to code", towards a model that empowers students to use computing to design solutions for personally-relevant needs (Tissenbaum et al., 2021). This is particularly important for BIPOC and female students who have been alienated by code-centric computing education (Taheri et al., 2019). Such designs require flexibility and opportunities for students to alter the flow of initial planning, enabling them to exhibit agency in what they envision building (Escudé et al.,2020). To this end, we advance the concept of computational design thinking (CDT), an approach for supporting students to develop their design thinking skills within the unique contexts of computing (and engineering/maker) education. CDT combines design thinking (e.g., brainstorming, feedback, iteration - Bequette & Bequette, 2012) and computational thinking (e.g., formulation, decomposition, debugging - Grover & Pea, 2013), to support students developing their computational identities and digital empowerment (Tissenbaum et al., 2019).

Methods. This poster discusses how CDT was designed as part of a six-week summer camp for young black boys (ages 10-15), using the popular MicroBit platform (microbit.org) twice a week for two hours a day. The first three weeks had students explore, play, and iterate with the MicroBit across a range of personally-relevant applications. Alongside the electrical components, the activities used items such as cardboard that allowed for flexible design changes. The final three weeks were dedicated to the boys coming up with issues or opportunities for which they designed computational solutions. These processes were scaffolded using CDT worksheets and small group feedback sessions.

Data sources. Data sources included the worksheets completed by the boys throughout the camp, video recordings of their making sessions, their final products, and post-camp interviews.

Results. Drawing from the data sources above, we will discuss the ways that students succeeded (and struggled) in engaging in CDT. We will highlight specific moments where the activity design and/or scaffolded worksheets supported them in engaging in specific CDT practices. We will also show how CDT manifested in their final project designs, making direct connections between their worksheets, built artifacts, and interviews. Ways of improving future iterations of the project and scaffolding materials will also be discussed.

Scholarly significance of the study or work. The significance of this work sits an important intersection for computing and engineering education: 1) Supporting students in developing the skills and perspectives for recognizing opportunities to create with computing; 2) Situating this in personally relevant contexts to support their computational identities and digital empowerment development; 3) Outlining a set of activities, tools, and supports that enable the combining of design thinking and computational thinking in pedagogically rich ways; and 4) Methodological approaches for capturing and understanding how these practices manifest themselves in students' work.

Authors

• Mike Tissenbaum, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

• Kevin Hall, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign