(CZ) Unplugged Programming: The future of teaching computational thinking?
(EN) Unplugged Programming: The future of teaching computational thinking?

We currently live in digital times, with educators increasingly coming to realise the need to prepare students to productively participate in such a coding-infused society. Computational Thinking (CT) has emerged as an essential skill in this regard. As with any new skill, the ways it is theorised and practiced vary greatly. In this paper, we argue for the importance of Unplugged Programming (UP) as a hands-on and practical approach to teaching and learning, which emphasises embodied and distributed cognition. UP has the potential to open up what it means to enact CT in the classroom when computational devices are put to the side. Preparing for the issues of the future is a matter of reconnecting with the past, in particular with ideas such as epistemological pluralism. By appreciating the diversity of ways that students can undertake CT and teachers can support them in doing so – from coding with digital devices to pencil-and-paper programming – we can work to make the classroom a place in which students can explore and undertake CT in rich and diverse ways.

We currently live in digital times, with educators increasingly coming to realise the need to prepare students to productively participate in such a coding-infused society. Computational Thinking (CT) has emerged as an essential skill in this regard. As with any new skill, the ways it is theorised and practiced vary greatly. In this paper, we argue for the importance of Unplugged Programming (UP) as a hands-on and practical approach to teaching and learning, which emphasises embodied and distributed cognition. UP has the potential to open up what it means to enact CT in the classroom when computational devices are put to the side. Preparing for the issues of the future is a matter of reconnecting with the past, in particular with ideas such as epistemological pluralism. By appreciating the diversity of ways that students can undertake CT and teachers can support them in doing so – from coding with digital devices to pencil-and-paper programming – we can work to make the classroom a place in which students can explore and undertake CT in rich and diverse ways.

ACER (2016). Unplugging computer science. Retrieved from https://rd.acer.org

AlAmer, R. A., Al-Doweesh, W. A., Al-Khalifa, H. S., & Al-Razgan, M. S. (2015). Programming unplugged: Bridging CS Unplugged activities gap for learning key programming concepts. Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on e-Learning (97-103). Manama, Bahrain, October 18-20.
https://doi.org/10.1109/ECONF.2015.27

Atit, K., Weisberg, S. M., Newcombe, N. S., & Shipley, T. F. (2016). Learning to interpret topographic maps: Understanding layered spatial information. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, 1(1), 1-18.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s41235-016-0002-y

Barr, V., & Stephenson, C. (2011). Bringing computational thinking to K-12: What is involved and what is the role of the computer science education community? ACM Inroads, 2(1), 48-54.
https://doi.org/10.1145/1929887.1929905

Bell, T., Alexander, J., Freeman, I., & Grimley, M. (2009). Computer science unplugged: School students doing real computing without computers. New Zealand Journal of Applied Computing and Information Technology, 13(1), 20-29.

Bers, M. U. (2012) Designing digital experiences for positive youth development: From playpen to playground. Cary, NC: Oxford.

Bers, M. U. (2018). Coding as a playground: Programming and computational thinking in the early childhood classroom. New York: Routledge.

Blum, L., & Cortina, T. (2007). CS4HS: An outreach program for high school CS teachers. In Proceedings of the 38th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (pp. 19-23). New York, March 7-11.
https://doi.org/10.1145/1227310.1227320
https://doi.org/10.1145/1227504.1227320

Brackman, C. P., Roman-Gonzalez, M., Robles, G., Moreno-Leon, J., Casali, A., & Barone, D. (2017). Development of computational thinking skills through unplugged activities in primary school. In Proceedings of the 12th Workshop on Primary and Secondary Computer Education (pp. 65-72). Nijmegen, Netherlands, November 8-10.
https://doi.org/10.1145/3137065.3137069

Britton, J. (1980). Shaping at the point of utterance. In A. Freedman & I. Pringle (Eds.), Reinventing the rhetorical tradition (pp. 61-65). Conway, AR: L & S Books.

Cortez, M. B. (2017). How will AR transform education? [#Infographic]. EdTech Magazine.Retrieved from https://edtechmagazine.com

CSUnplugged.org. (2015). Computer Science Unplugged. Retrieved from https://csunplugged.org

Earp, J. (2016). The research files special episode: Professor Tim Bell. [on-line] Retrieved from https://www.teachermagazine.com.au

Ericson, B., & McKlin, T. (2012). Effective and sustainable computing summer camps. In Proceedings of the 43rd ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (pp. 289-294). Raleigh, North Carolina, February 29 - March 3.
https://doi.org/10.1145/2157136.2157223

Fadjo, C. L. (2012). Developing computational thinking through grounded embodied cognition. Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, Columbia University. Doctoral dissertation. Retrieved from https://academiccommons.columbia.edu

Feaster, Y., Segars, L., Wahba, S., & Hallstrom, J. (2011). Teaching CS unplugged in the high school (with limited success). In Proceedings of the 16th annual joint conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education (pp. 248-252). Darmstadt, Germany, June 27-29.
https://doi.org/10.1145/1999747.1999817

Gibson, J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception. Boston: Mifflin.

Hayes, J. C., & Kraemer, D. J. M. (2017). Grounded understanding of abstract concepts: The case of STEM learning. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, 2(1), 1-7.
https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog0201_1

Hollan, J., Hutchins, E., & Kirsh, D. (2000). Distributed cognition: Toward a new foundation for human-computer interaction research. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 7(2), 174-196.
https://doi.org/10.1145/353485.353487

Hutchins, E. (1995). Cognition in the wild. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
PMCid:PMC40279

Jaeger, A. J., Wiley, J., & Moher, T. (2016). Leveling the playing field: Grounding learning with embedded simulations in geoscience. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, 1(1), 1-23.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s41235-016-0026-3

Johnson-Glenberg, M. C., & Megowan-Romanowicz, C. (2017). Embodied science and mixed reality: How gesture and motion capture affect physics education. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, 2(1), 1-24.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s41235-017-0060-9

Kim, B., Kim, T., & Kim, J. (2013). Paper-and-pencil programming strategy toward computational thinking for non-majors: Design your solution. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 49(4), 437-459.
https://doi.org/10.2190/EC.49.4.b

Lambert, L., & Guiffre, H. (2009). Computer science outreach in an elementary school. Journal of Computing Sciences in Colleges archive, 24(3), 118-124.

Latour, B. (1986). Visualisation and cognition: Drawing things together. In H. Kuklick (Ed.), Knowledge and society. Studies in the sociology of culture past and present (vol. 6, pp. 1-40). Stamford, CT: Jai Press.

Lockwood, J., & Mooney, A. (2018). Computational Thinking in 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

Magnani, L. (2013). Thinking through drawing. The Knowledge Engineering Review, 28(3), 303-326.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S026988891300026X

Mano, C., Allan, V., & Colley, D. (2010). Effective in-class activities for middle school outreach programs. In Proceedings of the 40th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (pp. F2E1-6). Washington, D.C., 27-30 October.
https://doi.org/10.1109/FIE.2010.5673587

Marghetis, T., Landy, D., & Goldstone, R. L. (2016). Mastering algebra retrains the visual system to perceive hierarchical structure in equations. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, 1(1), 1-25.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s41235-016-0020-9

Michal, A. L., & Franconeri, S. L. (2017). Visual routines are associated with specific graph interpretations. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, 2(1), 1-20.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s41235-017-0059-2

Norman, D. (1988). The design of everyday things. New York: Doubleday.

Nú-ez, R. (2012). On the science of embodied cognition in the 2010s: Research questions, appropriate reductionism, and testable explanations. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 21(2), 324-336.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2011.614325

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

Papert, S. (1991). Situating constructionism. In I. Harel & S. Papert (Eds.), Constructionism (pp. 193-206). Norwood, New Jersey: Ablex.

Rueckert, L., Church, R. B., Avila, A., & Trejo, T. (2017). Gesture enhances learning of a complex statistical concept. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, 2(2), 1-6.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s41235-016-0036-1

Selby, C., & Woollard, J. (2014). Computational Thinking: The developing definition. Paper presented at the 45th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, Atlanta, Georgia, March 5-8.

Sentance, S., & Csizmadia, A. (2017) Computing in the curriculum: Challenges and strategies from a teacher's perspective. Education and Information Technologies, 22(2), 469-495.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-016-9482-0

Sung, W., Ahn, J., & Black, J. B. (2017). Introducing computational thinking to young learners: Practicing computational perspectives through embodiment in mathematics education. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 22(3), 443-463.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-017-9328-x

Taub, R., Ben-Ari, M. & Armoni, M. (2009). The effect of CS Unplugged on middle-school students' view of CS. In Proceedings of the 14th ACM Annual Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education (pp. 99-103). Paris, July 6-9.
https://doi.org/10.1145/1562877.1562912
https://doi.org/10.1145/1595496.1562912

Tran, C., Smith, B., & Buschkuehl, M. (2017). Support of mathematical thinking through embodied cognition: Nondigital and digital approaches. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, 2(1), 1-16.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s41235-017-0053-8

Turkle, S., & Papert, S. (1990). Epistemological pluralism: Styles and voices within the computer culture. Signs, 16(1), 128-157.
https://doi.org/10.1086/494648

Turkle, S., & Papert, S. (1992). Epistemological pluralism and the revaluation of the concrete. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 11(1), 3-33.

Tytler, R., Prain, V., Hubber, P., & Waldrip, B. (Eds.) (2013). Constructing representations to learn in science. Rotterdam: Sense.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6209-203-7

Urness, T., & Manley, E. D. (2013). Generating interest in computer science through middle-school Android summer camps. Journal of Computing Sciences in Colleges, 28(5), 211-217.

Vallée-Tourangeau, F., Sirota, M., & Vallée-Tourangeau, G. (2016). Interactivity mitigates the impact of working memory depletion on mental arithmetic performance. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, 1(1), 1-26.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s41235-016-0027-2

Weisberg, S. M., & Newcombe, N. S. (2017). Embodied cognition and STEM learning: Overview of a topical collection in CR:PI. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, 2(1), 1-6.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s41235-017-0071-6

Wertheim, M. (2018). Virtual reality: from Giotto to VRporn. The Monthly, February 2018, accessed on May 2, 2018. Retrieved from https://www.themonthly.com.au

Wing, J. M. (2014). Computational thinking benefits society [blog post]. Retrieved from http://socialissues.cs.toronto.edu

Wohl, B., Porter, B., & Clinch, S. (2015). Teaching computer science to 5-7 year-olds: An initial study with Scratch, Cubelets and unplugged computing. In Proceedings of the Workshop in Primary and Secondary Computing Education (pp. 55-60). London, United Kingdom, November 9-11.
https://doi.org/10.1145/2818314.2818340

Xu, L., & Clarke, D. (2012). What does distributed cognition tell us about student learning of science? Research in Science Education, 42(3), 491-510.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-011-9207-8

Zhang, J. (1996). A representational analysis of relational information displays. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 45(1), 59-74.
https://doi.org/10.1006/ijhc.1996.0042

Zhang, J. (1997). Distributed representation as a principle for the analysis of cockpit information displays. International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 7(2), 105-121.
https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327108ijap0702_1
PMid:11541073

Zhang, J., & Patel, V. L. (2006). Distributed cognition, representation, and affordance. Pragmatics and Cognition, 14(2), 333-341.
https://doi.org/10.1075/pc.14.2.12zha

Zhang, J., & Wang, H. (2009). An exploration of the relations between external representations and working memory. PLoS One, 4(8), 1-10.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0006513
PMid:19652712 PMCid:PMC2714979