Building District Computing Infrastructure by Mapping K-12 CT Pathways (Poster 7)

• In Event: Advancing Methods, Theories, and Conceptualizations of Infrastructuring in the Learning Sciences

Abstract

Background:
The past decade have seen tremendous gains in U.S K-12 computing education (Code.org, 2023). Yet, despite nearly all fifty states having mandated K-12 computer science (CS) standards, there remain significant disparities in school districts’ adoption of them (Nguiffo, Blazquez, & Werne, 2024). Research (Lee et al., 2020; Mouza et al., 2016) clearly points to the essential role of increasing K-8 computing offerings, but research (Coburn, 2004; Cuban, 2013) likewise cautions that standards-based reform alone has only modest impact on increasing such offerings .

Objectives:
This work turns from state standards to specifically examine the need for district-level infrastructure around computational thinking (CT) in the form of clear, enactable CT Pathways for sustained equitable student access to computing. Our four-year research-practice-partnership (RPP) explores how districts are creating K-12 CT Pathways that are specific to their own contexts and how such mappings will broaden student access through a continuum of learning opportunities.

Methods and Data Sources:
We examine this process with six districts who used backwards-design learning outcomes to design, implement, and iterate their respective CT Pathways (Wiggins & McTighe, 2005). We draw on district mappings and a series of hour-long interviews with district leaders regarding their efforts. For analysis, we identified excerpts in which the district leaders discussed creating, utilizing, and/or updating their CT Pathway map and reviewed the transcript excerpts to inductively identify common themes across districts.

Results:
Initially, it took districts between six and twelve months to create a functional CT Pathway map. District maps are typically divided by grade band (e.g., K-2, 3-5) and focus on three to six CT competencies based on state standards. The maps include definitions of key terms, worked examples/ lessons, and connections to standards. The Pathway maps run between 13 and 64 pages (mean = 33).

In interviews, although all six districts report having active and robust CT/CS student learning opportunities, they also reflected that their mappings can feel incomplete as a “continuum”. In some cases, their own teachers had not consulted the Pathways document, or were unaware of it. Often this was due to the mappings having become “unwieldy” in scope, highly detailed but cumbersome for individual teacher interpretation. Multiple districts discussed the need to revisit their mapping to simplify/streamline them. As such, it is clear that creating CT Pathways maps is an ongoing process and the exact format of these maps requires continued design and research. The progress districts report however suggests that this iterative and collaborative work is necessary for genuine district ownership of state standards.

Scientific or scholarly significance of the study or work:
A growing body of research (Izu et al., 2019; Roschelle & Burke., 2019; Shaw and Kafai, 2020) suggests that episodic or sporadic learning activities devoid of learning trajectories in CS/CT will not create sustained change in making computing more inclusive. There is a need for clear learning trajectories that ensure students are receiving consistent and cumulative learning opportunities. CT Pathways maps are one such means for these learning trajectories.

Authors

• Merijke Coenraad, Digital Promise Global

• Quinn Burke, Digital Promise