Project moveSMART: When Physical Education Meets Computational Thinking in Elementary Classrooms
In this episode I unpack Fritz et al.’s (2021) publication titled “Project moveSMART: When physical education meets computational thinking in elementary classrooms,” which summarizes pilot study findings and activities that integrate CS/CT with physical education through a micro:bit.
-
welcome back to another episode of the
csk8 podcast my name is jared o'leary
each week of this podcast is either an
interview with a guest or multiple
guests or a solo episode where i unpack
some scholarship in relation to computer
science education in this week's
particular episode i'm unpacking a paper
titled project move smart colon when
physical education meets computational
thinking in elementary classrooms this
paper was written by colin fritz dylan
bray grace lee christine julene sherry
burson darla castelli carol ramsey and
jamie payton apologies if i
mispronounced any names here's the
abstract for this particular paper quote
although computing skills are
increasingly required for success in
high school college and beyond there's
little emphasis on improving
computational thinking in elementary
curricula computer science pathways that
do exist often fail to engage students
populations that are traditionally
underserved project move smart uses a
web-based platform to integrate
opportunities for physical education
with computer science and computational
thinking csct learning activities
project move smart was developed through
a research practitioner partnership
involving computer scientists
educational researchers and teachers
this article describes a series of
tutorials from project movesmart
designed to introduce elementary
students to csct by making connections
to physical activity and grade level
curricula in other subjects through
these tutorials students create a
physical activity monitor using the bbc
microbit fourth grade students that
underwent a single day intervention
experience a significant improvement in
their interest in coding and in their
perceptions of coders end quote if i
were to summarize this paper into a
single sentence i would say that this
article summarizes pilot study findings
and activities that integrate cs and ct
with physical education through a
microbit now as always in the show notes
i include a direct link to this
particular paper which is found for free
on google scholar and if you click the
author last names it'll actually send
you to their google scholar profile so
you can read more papers by the authors
you can find those show notes by
clicking the link in the app that you're
listening to this on or by visiting
jarredoleary.com and clicking on the
podcast tab and while you're there
you'll find hundreds if not thousands of
free computer science education
resources as well as a bunch of drumming
and gaming content because i do stream
and i am a content creator at heart
professionally and for leisure and while
you're at it if you're looking for more
free computer science education
resources make sure you check out
bootuppd.org which is the nonprofit that
i work for and that powers this podcast
all right so in the introduction of this
paper the authors begin by discussing
how there are different inequalities in
terms of different demographics
receiving more or less access to
computer science and computational
thinking instruction and experience time
and how this is also the case for
physical education as well for example
here's a quote from page two quote
despite the benefits of physical
activity eighty percent of adolescents
fail to meet the recommended hour of
daily physical activity end quote so the
author cites some studies that say that
elementary school is the best place to
help develop habits of physical activity
that will carry over into the later
grades and later on in life so in order
to address these gaps in both of these
subject areas i decided to combine
physical education with computer science
education through project move smart so
here's a quote from page two that kind
of discusses this quote project move
smart is a collaborative educational
game built around a researcher
practitioner partnership rpp that
includes teachers from multiple schools
and school districts project movesmart
promotes increased physical activity and
cs and ct while also delivering content
aligns with state learning standards in
many cases these three facets are
integrated into the same content for
instance in one learning activity
students program their own step counter
measure their steps as they complete a
physical activity then finish an
assessment that includes questions
involving inequalities a topic covered
in state learning standards project
movesmart also promotes physical
activity through the online platform
used to deliver educational content as
students increase their classes score by
logging higher rates of physical
activity end quote so the next section
of this paper is on related work so i
highly recommend checking it out if
you're interested in reading more about
some different studies that talk about
similar things then the third section is
titled the pilot study so in the section
they talk about the demographics of the
students like where they are located and
discusses how the participants were from
fourth and fifth grade classes and then
it gives an outline of the platform that
is being used so it's basically an
online platform where students are able
to kind of log their activities go
through some lessons and instructional
content like in mate code where they can
learn how to program their micro bits
and then submit their assignments and
whatnot and like daily activities and
data et cetera now these lessons are
scaffolded from simple to more complex
where they reveal different aspects
concepts practices etc over time so
starting on page five is kind of like a
little explanation of each one of the
different learning experiences so for
example the very first one is a walk
through to show you how to create a
timer with micro bits you might use a
timer to figure out how fast you can run
or i don't know reaction time or
something the second learning activity
or experience is all about sensing so
this is about using an accelerometer to
create a step counter with micro bit and
the third one focuses on variables so
refactoring and iterative development
and whatnot so they'll go back to a
previous project add some variables into
it then the fourth activity is all about
control flow so they're going to create
or modify a step counter that has an on
and off button so using an if
conditional to create that on and off
button then in the fifth activity
students are going to modify their
program to include a step rate so how
many steps you take per unit of time
like how many steps are you taking per
minute or per hour or whatever in the
sixth activity they get into some
complex conditionals so instead of just
if they might have if else conditionals
so then they can compare something like
the step rate and the intensity of an
activity level and use that data to
inform like how well they think they're
exercising or whatever and then the
seventh activity is all about
communication so using the broadcast or
the radio to be able to
communicate through rfid from a micro
bit to the classes raspberry pi so that
way they can like check in now i just
very quickly went over all the
activities it's almost like
three pages worth of content so if you
want to learn more about well what did
they actually do in this and like what
are some example questions and whatnot
make sure you check out those pages
starting on page five and so the next
section on page eight is titled physical
activity and cs interest so
unfortunately covet had an impact on
this particular pilot study so it made
it so that only nine of the fourth grade
students were in attendance in person
and most of the fourth grade students
were able to complete the first two
learning activities however the fifth
grade students at least most of them
only completed the first one and none of
them completed any of the other
activities so that means for the results
for this particular study for the fifth
graders they only created a micro bit
timer and then for the fourth graders
they created a microbit timer and then a
step counter so here's a quote from page
eight that kind of summarizes two main
findings quote we made the following
observations one even a short
intervention using the microbit based
learning activities has the potential to
improve students as coding attitudes and
two incremental deployment of features
helped maintain engagement in quote okay
so if we look at the data which has
statistical significance but not
necessarily like huge gains we can ins
we can see an increase for the fourth
graders in coding confidence coding
interest coding utility social value of
coding and perceptions of coders some of
these are relatively small but it
appears as though the coding confidence
and perceptions of coders are
statistically significant now when you
compare this with the fifth graders
there's really not much change like very
small amount of increase in coding
confidence there's actually a decrease
in coding interest which is interesting
the coding utility remained about the
same there is an increase in social
value of coding that was the largest
increase and then there's a slight
decrease in perceptions of coders so
those are interesting findings now
here's a quote from page nine that kind
of
elaborates on why that might be for the
fifth graders quote there were no
statistically significant changes for
the fifth grade students coding
attitudes but a large portion of the
fifth grade class period was spent
introducing movesmart so many students
did not make significant progress
through the learning activities because
the fourth grade students had been more
engaged with the platform throughout the
year they were able to make greater
progress because they had less trouble
logging into and navigating through the
platform this highlights the importance
of incrementally introducing platform
features end quote yeah and that's
something that i totally agree with it's
like the studies on testing demonstrate
that the more you practice taking the
test the higher you're going to score
because they're going to be more
familiar with it especially if it's an
online platform etc which reminds me of
like tpack which is a framework that
stands for technological knowledge
pedagogical knowledge and content
knowledge and so if you think of like a
venn diagram of three circles all kind
of intersecting with each other in this
case you need to think of how to teach
the lessons that's a pedagogical
knowledge you need to know the content
knowledge in two different subject areas
so that's the content knowledge and then
the technological knowledge is you need
to know how to introduce the platform so
getting kids comfortable with it so from
a user standpoint like students not only
need to understand the content knowledge
that they are learning but also the
platforms they're using to demonstrate
their understanding or to even just
learn like to be able to figure out how
do i log in and watch these videos and
whatnot and that's something that i
often see a lot of
new like technology and cs teachers not
really understand especially when you
get into like the primary grades like
kids don't know how to log into devices
you often have to teach them how to do
that it's just one of those things that
like
is so commonplace for adults most adults
that we often forget about having to
teach the technology like here's what a
left click is here's what a right click
is it's the same thing for here's how to
navigate through this website on the
left hand side is your menu tree on the
right hand side is what you're going to
learn etc so there are ways to do that
that are interesting and there are ways
to do that that are not and that's where
the pedagogical knowledge comes into
play etc alright but here's one more
quote that i want to read from page nine
quote one teacher a physical education
teacher told us initially i thought
computer science in elementary school it
doesn't matter after watching the
students do it i was fascinated with how
much they love this activity they
initially didn't think they were capable
of doing it they had so much fun this
opened their minds to doing computer
science and they really believed in
themselves end quote that's a great
quote i do however wonder how much of
that is selection bias and like maybe
not reading off quotes of like hey i
hated this and that's not an accusation
made at the authors or anything i just
know that there is a tendency for some
researchers to promote this hey here's
this wonderful thing that we've created
you should do it too we're gonna ignore
all the data that says it's not
wonderful they're outliers ignore them
but that's just me being a critical
skeptic of all research alright so i
know this is a relatively short paper so
a relatively short podcast but i at the
end of these like to talk about my
lingering thoughts and questions i
actually have a few for this one these
questions are not meant as critiques of
the paper or of the authors or anything
like that this is just me sharing my
thoughts that i had while i was reading
through this to hopefully spark some
discussion with others in the field so
if you hear a question on here and
you're like oh i want to talk with jared
about that join me on a podcast there's
a contact me button on my website
jaredaler.com just let me know here's
the first question that i have how much
of the jump in interest is due to the
novelty having not worn off yet so the
fourth graders had two lessons and the
fifth graders only had one lesson what
would have happened if they went through
all seven lessons or 20 lessons how
would the interest change over time so
if you were to do
a test beforehand and then after every
single one of the lessons would it look
like a bell curve of interest where it
starts off not very interested gain some
interest gain some interest and then
plateaus and then eventually students
start to lose interest we don't know
because of the length of this particular
study and we also don't know what
happens with that because most do pre
and post only and not any kind of
midterm assessments but i asked this
because i had experience
where the district that i previously
worked in basically gave me everything
that they wanted to test out in the
makerspace and they just let my classes
try it out so i had a middle school
makerspace and we'd get like every robot
every device etc that the district
wanted to see hey should we give this to
other schools and students often for
most things would think it was really
cool for a week or two and then they
lose interest in it it was only the
stuff that students consistently wanted
to engage with throughout the quarter
and semester that i was like hey i
highly recommend buying more of these
things so for example the makey makey in
my coding classes kids had like a dozen
or so that they could pick up use some
play-doh use some
aluminum foil some conductive thread
wires etc to like create things that
they would use in their scratch projects
or whatever students loved it for about
two weeks and then they got bored with
it and then they realized it was too
much of a hassle or they just like
preferred to just code their projects so
what i don't know is with a study like
this that's on the intersections of cs
and physical education at what point
does the novelty wear off but speaking
of the intersection of cs and physical
education the fact that we are having to
find ways to combine subject areas
together just to meet the minimum
recommended daily amounts is an
indicator that we have too many subject
requirements and not enough time in the
school day to learn them so when might
this approach be a disservice to
everybody in other words when might this
approach diminish both subject areas by
forcing people to focus on the
intersections of each subject area and
not the other areas outside of those
intersections so for example there are
many interesting intersections with
music and cs i've done podcasts on them
i'll include a link to them in the
episode as well as some publications
that i've done on that intersection but
what about areas specific to each domain
like the stress relief that can come
with playing the drums or the
affordances and constraints of different
sorting techniques these are beneficial
and interesting on their own but they
don't necessarily intersect well with
each other like i would not be
interested in learning how to sort my
drums that makes no sense so at what
point are we putting on blinders to
everything that doesn't align well with
such an intersection often when i see
these intersections of two different
subject areas it's in short activities
maybe a unit if we're lucky but then
after that the ideas are repetitive or
just non-existent so there's only so
much we can do at the intersections of
different subject areas but it still
gets at the heart of the issue of i
think we have too many required subject
areas the fact that 80 of students are
not getting the recommended daily amount
of physical education of one hour is
setting up for a potential lifetime of
physical and mental health problems and
that's alarming but then we have
recommended daily amounts for other
subject areas like math and reading i
think reading's like 90 minutes in my
school if we keep piling on all these
recommended amounts like hey this is
really beneficial for you eventually
we're going to run out of enough time in
the week to do it so all these
intersections can help to make it so you
can do both at the same time it also
makes it so that we are ignoring
everything else that's interesting in
those subject areas but it also just
doesn't address the larger issue of we
have too many required subject areas in
my opinion but i know that's
controversial and again you can come on
this podcast and disagree with me i'm
happy to chat last question that i got
from reading this particular paper is
how might we explore integrated cs
curricula through an interest driven
approach so there's a bunch of other
episodes where i talk about this i'll
include a link to some of those episodes
in the show notes for example the
interview with mitch resnick where we
talk about why it's important to use an
interest-driven approach in mandatory cs
classes where we cannot assume buy-in
from everyone forced to attend now ask
this question because a lot of the
integrated curricula that i see is very
focused it's everybody's doing the same
thing and creating the same thing and
this can create some problems in that
kids who don't have an interest in that
particular activity might lose interest
in both subject areas but if you instead
take an approach like a rhizomatic
approach or an interest-driven approach
again links in the show notes that talk
about those then when a student is
forced to be in this class that explores
these intersections maybe they will
develop an interest in those subject
areas because they're exploring
something they're already inherently
interested in it just so happens to
include cs and something else but we
need more studies on that so stay tuned
anyways i know this was a shorter
episode but i thought it was a really
interesting idea i was like ooh physical
education in cs let's learn more so
hopefully more studies will come out in
the future that aren't just pilot
studies that are negatively impacted by
kovid but thank you so much for
listening to this episode stay tuned
next week for another episode and until
then i hope you're staying safe and are
having a wonderful week
Article
Fritz, C., Bray, D., Lee, G., Julien, C., Burson, S., Castelli, D., Ramsey, C., & Payton, J. (2021). Project moveSMART: When physical education meets computational thinking in elementary classrooms. Computer, May/June, 1–11.
Abstract
“Although computing skills are increasingly required for success in high school, college, and beyond, there is little emphasis on improving computational thinking in elementary curricula. Computer science pathways that do exist often fail to engage student populations that are traditionally underserved. Project moveSMART uses a web-based platform to integrate opportunities for physical education with computer science and computational thinking (CS/CT) learning activities. Project moveSMART was developed through a researcher-practicioner [sic] partnership involving computer scientists, educational researchers, and teachers. This article describes a series of tutorials from Project moveSMART designed to introduce elementary students to CS/CT by making connections to physical activity and grade-level curricula in other subjects. Through these tutorials, students create a physical activity monitor using the BBC micro:bit. Fourth grade students that underwent a single day intervention experienced a significant improvement in their interest in coding and in their perceptions of coders.”
Author Keywords
Computer science education, serious games, pervasive computing
My One Sentence Summary
This article summarizes pilot study findings and activities that integrate CS/CT with physical education through a micro:bit.
Some Of My Lingering Questions/Thoughts
How much of the jump in interest is due to the novelty having not worn off yet?
The fact that we are having to find ways to combine subject areas together just to meet the minimum recommended daily amount is an indicator that we have too many requirements and not enough time in the school day to do them
When might this approach be a disservice to everyone?
When might this approach diminish both subject areas by forcing people to focus on the intersections of each subject area and not the other areas outside of those intersections?
How might we explore integrated CS curricula through an interest-driven approach?
Resources/Links Relevant to This Episode
Other podcast episodes that were mentioned or are relevant to this episode
How to Get Started with Computer Science Education
In this episode I provide a framework for how districts and educators can get started with computer science education for free.
Intersections of Popular Musicianship and Computer Science Practices
In this episode I unpack my (2020) publication titled “Intersections of popular musicianship and computer science practices,” which discusses potential implications of hardware and software practices that blur the boundaries between music making and computer science.
Lifelong Kindergarten with Mitch Resnick
In this interview with Mitch Resnick, we discuss misconceptions people have around the four P’s (Projects, Passion, Peers, and Play) in Mitch’s book, encouraging depth of understanding while playing, what has surprised Mitch during his career, encouraging online communication and collaboration without creating artificial engagement, what Mitch wishes we’d see more of and discuss in CS education, our pet peeves with unplugged activities and computational thinking, accounting for survivorship bias with Scratch, expanding our focus on equity and inclusion to include both the “who” and the “how,” the importance of experimenting and learning through play, and much more.
micro:bit, Rhizomatic Learning, and CS for Healing with Katie Henry
In this interview with Katie Henry, we discuss the micro:bit and the do your :bit challenge, rhizomatic learning, the potential for CS for healing, and much more.
Performing Algorithms: Weaving as Promising Context for Computational Learning
In this episode I unpack Keune’s (2022) publication titled “Performing algorithms: Weaving as promising context for computational learning,” which explores weaving as a potential practice for exploring computer science concepts.
Rhizomatic Learning with Catherine Bornhorst, Jon Stapleton, and Katie Henry
In this panel discussion with Catherine Bornhorst, Jon Stapleton, and Katie Henry, we discuss what rhizomatic learning is and looks like in formalized educational spaces, affordances and constraints of rhizomatic learning, how to support individual students within a group setting, standards and rhizomatic learning, why few people know and use rhizomatic learning approaches, how to advocate for and learn more about rhizomatic learning, and much more.
In this episode I unpack Kumar and Worsley’s (2023) publication titled “Scratch for sports: Athletic drills as a platform for experiencing, understanding, and developing AI-driven apps,” which summarizes explorations of the intersections of computer science and physical education.
In this episode I unpack Bresler’s (1995) publication titled “The subservient, co-equal, affective, and social integration styles and their implications for the arts,” which “examines the different manifestations of arts integration in the operational, day-to-day curriculum in ordinary schools, focusing on the how, the what, and the toward what” (p. 33).
Find other CS educators and resources by using the #CSK8 hashtag on Twitter
Free CS Resources I Have Created
More Content
