How teachers practice computational thinking assessment in mathematics classrooms

AINO UKKONEN, KATARINA PAJCHEL, CONSTANTINOS XENOFONTOS

Abstract

The integration of computational thinking (CT) into school mathematics presents both pedagogical opportunities and assessment challenges. This case study investigates how two Norwegian mathematics teachers, Stephen and Lena, practice CT assessment in primary and lower secondary classrooms. Drawing on classroom observations and interviews, the study explores how formative assessment through feedback supports student learning during CT-integrated mathematics lessons. The findings reveal that debugging, decomposition, abstraction, and algorithms are central to CT assessment but are interpreted and enacted differently by the two teachers. Stephen employed structured tools such as decomposition checklists and feedback on functions and variables to scaffold problem solving, while Lena used exploratory reasoning, productive failure, and geometric representations to elicit student thinking. Both used feedback to bridge CT constructs and mathematical understanding, and a significant finding in this study is that CT feedback and assessment in mathematics are deeply intertwined, reflecting the integration of CT and mathematics. The study highlights the importance of strategic feedback and the need for clearer frameworks connecting CT and mathematics in assessment.

Keywords

Computational thinking, formative assessment, feedback, mathematics teachers, assessment practices

Full Text:

PDF

References

Barefoot Computing. (2016). Computational thinking concepts and approaches. https://www.barefootcomputing.org/

Björklund Boistrup, L. (2017). Assessment in mathematics education: A gatekeeping dispositive. In H. Straehler-Pohl, N. Bohlmann & A. Pais (Eds), The disorder of mathematics education (pp. 209-226). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-34006-7_13

Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5(1), 7-74. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969595980050102

Bocconi, S., Chioccariello, A., Kampylis, P., Dagienė, V., Wastiau, P., Engelhardt, K., Earp, J., Horvath, M. A., Jasutė, E., Malagoli, C., Masiulionytė-Dagienė, V., & Stupurienė, G. (2022). Reviewing computational thinking in compulsory education (JRC128347). Publications Office of the European Union.

Bonner, S., Chen, P., Jones, K., & Milonovich, B. (2021). Formative assessment of computational thinking: Cognitive and metacognitive processes. Applied Measurement in Education, 34(1), 27-45. https://doi.org/10.1080/08957347.2020.1835912

Boud, D. (2008). How can practice reshape assessment? In G. Joughin (Ed.), Assessment, learning and judgement in higher education (pp. 31-44). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-8905-3

Bråting, K., & Kilhamn, C. (2021). Exploring the intersection of algebraic and computational thinking. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 23(2), 170-185. https://doi.org/10.1080/10986065.2020.1779012

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2019). Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis. Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health, 11(4), 589-597. https://doi.org/10.1080/2159676X.2019.1628806

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, Vol. 1, Vancouver, 13-17 April 2012. http://scratched.gse.harvard.edu/ct/files/AERA2012.pdf

Chevalier, M., Giang, C., El-Hamamsy, L., Bonnet, E., Papaspyros, V., Pellet, J.-P., Audrin, C., Romero, M., Baumberger, B., & Mondada, F. (2022). The role of feedback and guidance as intervention methods to foster computational thinking in educational robotics learning activities for primary school. Computers & Education, 180, 104431. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104431

Clarke-Midura, J., Lee, V. R., Shumway, J. F., Silvis, D., Kozlowski, J. S., & Peterson, R. (2023). Designing formative assessments of early childhood computational thinking. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 65, 68-80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2023.05.013

Creswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative inquiry & research design: Choosing among five approaches (3rd ed.). Sage.

Doleck, T., Bazelais, P., Lemay, D., Saxena, A., & Basnet, R. (2017). Algorithmic thinking, cooperativity, creativity, critical thinking, and problem solving: Exploring the relationship between computational thinking skills and academic performance. Journal of Computers in Education, 4(4), 355-369. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-017-0090-9

Drijvers, P., & Sinclair, N. (2024). The role of digital technologies in mathematics education: Purposes and perspectives. ZDM Mathematics Education, 56(2), 239-248. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-023-01535-x

Fang, J. W., Shao, D., Hwang, G. J., & Chang, S. C. (2022). From critique to computational thinking: A peer-assessment-supported problem identification, flow definition, coding, and testing approach for computer programming instruction. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 60(5), 1301-1324. https://doi.org/10.1177/07356331211060470

Fitzgerald, S., Lewandowski, G., McCauley, R., Murphy, L., Simon, B., Thomas, L., & Zander, C. (2008). Debugging: Finding, fixing and flailing, a multi-institutional study of novice debuggers. Computer Science Education, 18(2), 93-116. https://doi.org/10.1080/08993400802114508

Forskningsetikkloven. (2017). Lov om organisering av forskningsetisk arbeid (LOV-2017-04-28-23) [Law about the organization of research ethics]. Lovdata. https://lovdata.no/lov/2017-04-28-23

Gadanidis, G., Hughes, J. M., Minniti, L., & White, B. J. G. (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

Grover, S. (2017). Assessing algorithmic and computational thinking in K-12: Lessons from a middle school classroom. In P. J. Rich & C. B. Hodges (Eds), Emerging Research, Practice, and Policy on Computational Thinking (pp. 269-290). Springer.

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

Hadad, R., Thomas, K., Kachovska, M., & Yin, Y. (2020). Practicing formative assessment for computational thinking in making environments. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 29(1), 162-173. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-019-09796-6

Hansen, N. K., & Hadjerrouit, S. (2022). Analyzing students’ computational thinking and programming skills for mathematical problem solving. In D. Ifenthaler, D. G. Sampson & P. Isaías (Eds), Open and inclusive educational practice in the digital world (pp. 155-173). Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-18512-0_10

Haseski, H. I., Ilic, U., & Tugtekin, U. (2018). Defining a new 21st century skill-computational thinking: Concepts and trends. International Education Studies, 11(4), 29. https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v11n4p29

Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81-112. https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487

Hickmott, D., Prieto-Rodriguez, E., & Holmes, K. (2018). A scoping review of studies on computational thinking in K-12 mathematics classrooms. Digital Experiences in Mathematics Education, 4(1), 48-69. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40751-017-0038-8

Hsu, T.-C., Chang, S.-C., & Hung, Y.-T. (2018). How to learn and how to teach computational thinking: Suggestions based on a review of the literature. Computers & Education, 126, 296-310. https://doi.org/10.1016j.compedu.2018.07.004

Jordan, B., & Henderson, A. (1995). Interaction analysis: Foundations and practice. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 4(1), 39-103. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls0401_2

Kalelioglu, F., Gülbahar, Y., & Kukul, V. (2016). A framework for computational thinking based on a systematic research review. Baltic Journal of Modern Computing, 4(3), 583-583.

Kalinec-Craig, C. A. (2017). The rights of the learner: A framework for promoting equity through formative assessment in mathematics education. Democracy & Education, 25(2), 1-9. http://democracyeducationjournal.org/home/vol25/iss2/5

Kallia, M., van Borkulo, S. P., Drijvers, P., Barendsen, E., & Tolboom, J. (2021). Characterising computational thinking in mathematics education: A literature-informed Delphi study. Research in Mathematics Education, 23(2), 159-187. https://doi.org/10.1080/14794802.2020.1852104

Kaufmann, O. T., & Stenseth, B. (2020). Programming in mathematics education. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 52(7), 1029-1048. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2020.1736349

Kwon, K., & Cheon, J. (2019). Exploring problem decomposition and program development through block-based programs. International Journal of Computer Science Education in Schools, 3(1), 3-16.

Lee, S. W. Y., Tu, H. Y., Chen, G. L., & Lin, H. M. (2023). Exploring the multifaceted roles of mathematics learning in predicting students’ computational thinking competency. International Journal of STEM Education, 10(1), Article 64. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-023-00455-2

Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Sage.

Lishinski, A., & Yadav, A. (2021). Self-evaluation interventions: Impact on self-efficacy and performance in introductory programming. ACM Transactions on Computing Education, 21(3), 1-28. https://doi.org/10.1145/3447378

Litherland, K., & Kluge, A. (2024). Learning to program as empirical inquiry: Using a conversation perspective to explore student programming processes. Computer Science Education, 34(3), 495-519. https://doi.org/10.1080/08993408.2023.2290410

Lodi, M., & Martini, S. (2021). Computational thinking, between Papert and Wing. Science & Education, 30(4), 883-908. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-021-00202-5

Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach. Sage.

Mayring, P. (2015). Qualitative content analysis: Theoretical background and procedures. In A. Bikner-Ahsbahs, C. Knipping, & N. Presmeg (Eds), Approaches to qualitative research in mathematics education: Examples of methodology and methods (pp. 365-380). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9181-6_13

McKenney, S., & Reeves, T. C. (2018). Conducting educational design research (2nd ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315105642

Mueller, J., Beckett, D., Hennessey, E., & Shodiev, H. (2017). Assessing computational thinking across the curriculum. In P. Rich, & C. Hodges (Eds), Emerging research, practice, and policy on computational thinking (pp. 251-267). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-52691-1_16

NDET. (2019). Fagfornyelse (Curriculum 2020). https://sokeresultat.udir.no/finn-lareplan.html?fltypefiltermulti=Kunnskapsl%c3%b8ftet%202020

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

Nordby, S. K., Bjerke, A. H., & Mifsud, L. (2022a). Computational thinking in the primary mathematics classroom: A systematic review. Digital Experiences in Mathematics Education, 8(1), 27-49. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40751-022-00102-5

Nordby, S. K., Bjerke, A. H., & Mifsud, L. (2022b). Primary mathematics teachers’ understanding of computational thinking. Künstliche Intelligenz, 36(1), 35-46. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13218-021-00750-6

Nortvedt, G. A., & Buchholtz, N. (2018). Assessment in mathematics education: Responding to issues regarding methodology, policy, and equity. ZDM Mathematics Education, 50(4), 555-570. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-018-0963-z

Norwegian Centre for Research Data. (2021). Barnehage- og skoleforskning, NSD Personverntjenester [Kindergarten and school research, NSD data protection service]. https://www.nsd.no/personverntjenester/oppslagsverk-for-personvern-i-forskning/barnehage-og-skoleforskning

Palm, T., Andersson, C., Boström, E., & Vingsle, C. (2017). A review of the impact of formative assessment on student achievement in mathematics. Nordic Studies in Mathematics Education, 22(3), 25-50.

Pajchel, K., Mifsud, L., Frågåt, T., Rehder, M. M., Juuti, K., Bogar, Y., Lavonen, L., Schrøder, V., Aalbergsjø, S. G., & Rognes, A. (2024). Sign of the times: The framing of computational thinking in Danish, Finnish, and Norwegian curricula. Nordic Journal of Comparative and International Education, 8(4). https://doi.org/10.7577/njcie.5744

Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms: Children, computers, and powerful ideas. Basic Books.

Rich, K. M., & Strickland, C. (2020). Testing and debugging. In S. Grover (Ed.), Computer science in K-12: An a-to-z handbook on teaching programming (pp. 211-218). Edfinity.

Rich, K. M., Yadav, A., & Fessler, C. J. (2022). Computational thinking practices as tools for creating high cognitive demand mathematics instruction. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 27(2), 235-255. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-022-09562-3

Rich, K. M., Yadav, A., & Schwarz, C. V. (2019). Computational thinking, mathematics, and science: Elementary teachers’ perspectives on integration. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 27(2), 165-205. https://doi.org/10.70725/303733vqleui

Saldaña, J. (2016). The coding manual for qualitative researchers (3rd ed.). Sage.

Sands, P., Yadav, A., & Good, J. (2018). Computational Thinking in K-12: In-service Teacher Perceptions of Computational Thinking. In M. S. Khine (Ed.), Computational Thinking in the STEM Disciplines: Foundations and Research Highlights. Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-93566-9_8

Shute, V. J., 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

Sneider, C., Stephenson, C., Schafer, B., & Flick, L. (2014). Exploring the science framework and NGSS: Computational thinking in the science classroom. Science Scope, 38(3), 10-15. http://dx.doi.org/10.2505/4ss14_038_03_10

So, H.-J., Jong, M. S.-Y., & Liu, C.-C. (2020). Computational thinking education in the Asian Pacific region. The Asia–Pacific Education Researcher, 29(1), 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-019-00494-w

Stake, R. (1995). The art of case study research. Sage.

Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1994). Grounded theory methodology: An overview. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 273-285). Sage.

Sun, C., Yang, S., & Becker, B. (2024). Debugging in computational thinking: A meta-analysis on the effects of interventions on debugging skills. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 62(4), 1087-1121. https://doi.org/10.1177/07356331241227793

Suri, H. (2011). Purposeful sampling in qualitative research synthesis. Qualitative Research Journal, 11(2), 63-75. https://doi.org/10.3316/QRJ1102063

Tang, X., Yin, Y., Lin, Q., Hadad, R., & Zhai, X. (2020). Assessing computational thinking: A systematic review of empirical studies. Computers & Education, 148, Article 103798. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103798

Tikva, C., & Tambouris, E. (2021). Mapping computational thinking through programming in K-12 education: A conceptual model based on a systematic literature review. Computers and Education, 162, Article 104083. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.104083

Tracy, S. J. (2010). Qualitative quality: Eight “big-tent” criteria for excellent qualitative research. Qualitative Inquiry, 16(10), 837-851. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800410383121

Ukkonen, A., Pajchel, K., & Mifsud, L. (2024). Teachers’ understanding of assessing computational thinking. Computer Science Education, 1-26. https://doi.org/10.1080/08993408.2024.2365566

Ukkonen, A., Yadav, A., Pajchel, K., & Xenofontos, C. (2024). Elementary Teachers Assessing Computational Thinking. Journal of technology and teacher education, 32(4), 521-546. https://www.learntechlib.org/primaryp/225061/

Wiliam, D., & Thompson, M. (2008). Integrating assessment with learning: What will it take to make it work? In C. A. Dwyer (Ed.), The future of assessment: Shaping teaching and learning (pp. 53-82). Routledge.

Wing, J. M. (2006). Computational Thinking. Communications of the ACM, 49, 33-35. https://doi.org/10.1145/1118178.1118215

Yadav, A., Hong, H., & Stephenson, C. (2016). Computational thinking for all: Pedagogical approaches to embedding 21st century problem solving in K-12 classrooms. TechTrends, 60(6), 565–568. https://doi.org/10.1007s11528-016-0087-7

Yadav, A., Ocak, C. & Oliver, A. (2022). Computational Thinking and Metacognition. TechTrends 66, 405–411. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-022-00695-z

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), 3–26. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-023-00396-w

Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (6th ed.). Sage.

Zhang, L., & Nouri, J. (2019). A systematic review of learning computational thinking through Scratch in K-9. Computers and Education, 141, Article 103607. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103607


DOI: https://doi.org/10.26220/rev.5572

View Counter: Abstract | 765 | times, and PDF | 22 | times



Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Re S M ICT E | ISSN: 1792-3999 (electronic), 1791-261X (print) | Laboratory of Didactics of Sciences, Mathematics and ICT, Department of Educational Sciences and Early Childhood Education - University of Patras.

Pasithee | Library & Information Center | University of Patras