Enhancing computational thinking in preservice elementary math teachers through Design-Based Learning
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.29352/mill0227.40841Keywords:
coding, computational thinking; Design-Based Learning; preservice teacher; self-efficacyAbstract
Introduction: Computational thinking and coding are essential competencies for future mathematics educators, fostering problem-solving and logical reasoning. Integrating these skills into teacher training requires innovative approaches that actively engage preservice teachers. Design-Based Learning (DBL) is a promising methodology that enhances computational thinking through iterative problem-solving and creative design processes.
Objective: Analysing the impact of a Design-Based Learning (DBL) curriculum on preservice elementary mathematics teachers' computational thinking and coding abilities.
Methods: The study employed an intervention-based mixed-methods design with 40 preservice mathematics teachers enrolled in an undergraduate program. The experimental group followed a curriculum consisting of four modules and 24 sessions. Data collection tools included the Computational Thinking Scale, Self-Efficacy Perception Scale towards Teaching Computational Thinking, and semi-structured interviews. Quantitative data were analysed using Multivariate Analysis of Variance (MANOVA) and independent-sample t-tests, while qualitative data were examined through content analysis.
Results: Findings indicate that the DBL approach significantly improved preservice teachers' computational thinking and coding skills. Participants also highlighted that this methodology made learning more engaging, interactive, and effective.
Conclusion: The study shows that Design-Based Learning is a valuable instructional approach for developing computational thinking in mathematics education. Implementing DBL in teacher training programs can enhance future educators' ability to integrate computational thinking into their teaching practices.
Downloads
References
Avşar, M. (2023). Supporting preschool teachers’ computational thinking skills: The effect of design-based in-service training [Tese de doutoramento, Hacettepe University]. Council of Higher Education National Thesis Center.
Barab, S., & Squire, K. (2004). Design-based research: Putting a stake in the ground. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls1301_1
Boom, K. D., Bower, M., Siemon, J., & Arguel, A. (2022). Relationships between computational thinking and the quality of computer programs. Education and Information Technologies, 27(6), 8289–8310. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-10921-z
Brennan, K., & Resnick, M. (2012). New frameworks for studying and assessing the development of computational thinking. In Proceedings of the 2012 Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association (pp. 1–25). American Educational Research Association. https://web.media.mit.edu/~kbrennan/files/Brennan_Resnick_AERA2012_CT.pdf
Ching, Y. H., & Hsu, Y. C. (2024). Educational robotics for developing computational thinking in young learners: A systematic review. TechTrends, 68(3), 423–434. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-023-00841-1
Creswell, J. W. (2014). A concise introduction to mixed methods research. SAGE Publications.
Gadanidis, G., Hughes, J., Minniti, L., & White, B. (2017). Computational thinking, grade 1 students and the binomial theorem. Digital Experiences in Mathematics Education, 3(2), 77–96. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40751-016-0019-3
Gresalfi, M., Barab, S., Siyahhan, S., & Christensen, T. (2009). Virtual worlds, conceptual understanding, and me: Designing for consequential engagement. On the Horizon, 17(1), 21–34. https://doi.org/10.1108/10748120910936126
Grover, S., & Pea, R. (2013). Computational thinking in K–12: A review of the state of the field. Educational Researcher, 42(1), 38–43. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X12463051
Harel, I., & Papert, S. (Eds.). (1991). Constructionism. Ablex Publishing. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/220040743_Constructionism
Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2004). Problem-based learning: What and how do students learn? Educational Psychology Review, 16(3), 235–266. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:EDPR.0000034022.16470.f3
International Society for Technology in Education, & Computer Science Teachers Association. (2011). Operational definition of computational thinking for K–12 education. https://cdn.iste.org/www-root/Computational_Thinking_Operational_Definition_ISTE.pdf
Israel, M., & Lash, T. (2020). From classroom lessons to exploratory learning progressions: Mathematics + computational thinking. Interactive Learning Environments, 28, 362–382. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2019.1674879
Kafai, Y., Proctor, C., & Lui, D. (2019). From theory bias to theory dialogue: Embracing cognitive, situated and critical framings of computational thinking for K–12 CS education. In Proceedings of the 2019 ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research (pp. 101–109). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3291279.3339400
Kaya, D. (2024). Computational thinking from the past to the present: A retrospective using bibliometric analysis. Hacettepe University Journal of Education, 39(2), 195–219. https://doi.org/10.16986/HUJE.2024.520
Kolodner, J. L., Camp, P. J., Crismond, D., Fasse, B., Gray, J., Holbrook, J., Puntambekar, S., & Ryan, M. (2003). Problem-based learning meets case-based reasoning in the middle-school science classroom: Putting learning by design™ into practice. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(4), 495–547. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327809JLS1204_2
Korkmaz, Ö., Çakir, R., & Özden, M. Y. (2017). A validity and reliability study of the computational thinking scales (CTS). Computers in Human Behavior, 72, 558–569. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.01.005
Lockwood, J., & Mooney, A. (2018). Computational thinking in secondary education: Where does it fit? A systematic literary review. International Journal of Computer Science Education in Schools, 2(1), 41–60. https://doi.org/10.21585/ijcses.v2i1.26
Looi, C. K., Chan, S. W., Wu, L., Huang, W., Kim, M. S., & Sun, D. (2024). Exploring computational thinking in the context of mathematics learning in secondary schools: Dispositions, engagement and learning performance. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 22, 993–1011. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-023-10419-1
Lye, S. Y., & Koh, J. H. L. (2014). Review on teaching and learning of computational thinking through programming: What is next for K–12. Computers in Human Behavior, 41(4), 51–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.09.012
Mehalik, M. M., & Schunn, C. (2006). What constitutes good design? A review of empirical studies of design processes. International Journal of Engineering Education, 22(3), 519–532.
National Research Council. (2010). Report of a workshop on the scope and nature of computational thinking. National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/12840
Navarro, E. R., & de Sousa, M. d. C. (2023). The concept of computational thinking in mathematics education. Journal of Mathematics and Science Teacher, 3(2), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.29333/mathsciteacher/13630
Ng, O. L., & Cui, Z. (2021). Examining primary students’ mathematical problem-solving in a programming context: Towards computationally enhanced mathematics education. ZDM Mathematics Education, 53(4), 847–860. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-020-01200-7
Özçınar, H., & Öztürk, E. (2018). The scale of self-efficacy perception towards teaching computational thinking: A validity and reliability study. Pamukkale University Journal of Social Sciences Institute, 30, 173–195. https://doi.org/10.5505/pausbed.2018.82574
Özyurt, Ö., & Aslan, A. (2023). A broad view of the problem-based learning field based on machine learning: A large-scale study based on topic modeling. International e-Journal of Educational Studies, 7(15), 608–626. https://doi.org/10.31458/iejes.1320491
Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms: Children, computers, and powerful ideas. Basic Books.
Partnership for 21st Century Skills. (2019). Framework for 21st century learning. https://www.battelleforkids.org/networks/p21/frameworks-resources
Pei, C., Weintrop, D., & Wilensky, U. (2018). Cultivating computational thinking practices and mathematical habits of mind in Lattice Land. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 20(1), 75–89. https://doi.org/10.1080/10986065.2018.1403543
Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. Basic Books.
Shute, V., Sun, C., & Asbell-Clarke, J. (2017). Demystifying computational thinking. Educational Research Review, 22, 142–158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2017.09.003
Shulman, L. S., & Shulman, J. H. (2009). How and what teachers learn: A shifting perspective. Journal of Education, 189(1–2), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022057409189001-202
Sneider, C., Stephenson, C., Schafer, B., & Flick, L. (2014). Computational thinking in high school science classrooms. The Science Teacher, 81(5), 10–15. https://doi.org/10.2505/4/tst14_081_05_53
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2013). Using multivariate statistics (6th ed.). Pearson Publishing.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1986). Thought and language. The MIT Press. (Original work published 1934)
Weintrop, D., Beheshti, E., Horn, M., Orton, K., Jona, K., Trouille, L., & Wilensky, U. (2016). Defining computational thinking for mathematics and science classrooms. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 25(1), 127–147. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-015-9581-5
Wing, J. M. (2006). Computational thinking. Communications of the ACM, 49(3), 33–35. https://doi.org/10.1145/1118178.1118215
Wing, J. M. (2008). Computational thinking and thinking about computing. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 366(1881), 3717–3725. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2008.0118
Yadav, A., Stephenson, C., & Hong, H. (2017). Computational thinking for teacher education. Communications of the ACM, 60(4), 55–62. https://doi.org/10.1145/2994591
Ye, H., Liang, B., Ng, O. L., & Chai, C. S. (2023). Integration of computational thinking in K–12 mathematics education: A systematic review on CT-based mathematics instruction and student learning. International Journal of STEM Education, 10(1), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-023-00396-w
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Millenium - Journal of Education, Technologies, and Health
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who submit proposals for this journal agree to the following terms:
a) Articles are published under the Licença Creative Commons (CC BY 4.0), in full open-access, without any cost or fees of any kind to the author or the reader;
b) The authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication, allowing the free sharing of work, provided it is correctly attributed the authorship and initial publication in this journal;
c) The authors are permitted to take on additional contracts separately for non-exclusive distribution of the version of the work published in this journal (eg, post it to an institutional repository or as a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal;
d) Authors are permitted and encouraged to publish and distribute their work online (eg, in institutional repositories or on their website) as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as increase the impact and citation of published work
Documents required for submission
Article template (Editable format)
