Defining and Designing Computer Science Education in a K12 Public School District
In this episode I unpack Proctor, Bigman, and Blikstein’s (2019) publication titled “Defining and designing computer science education in a K12 public school district,” which serves as a case study of a district’s processes and tensions developing a plan for implementing computer science across K-12.
-
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 today's episode I'm
unpacking a paper titled defining and
designing Computer Science Education in
the K-12 Public School District this
paper is written by Chris Proctor
Maxwell bigman and Paulo blickstein
apologies if I mispronounced any names
here's the abstract for this paper quote
computer science is poised to become a
core discipline in K-12 education
however there are unresolved tensions
between the definitions and purposes of
computer science and public education
this study's goal is to explore how
logistical and conceptual challenges
emerge while designing a comprehensive
K-12 computer science program in a
public school district while the policy
infrastructure for K-12 Computer Science
Education is rapidly developing few
districts have yet implemented computer
science as a core discipline in their
K-12 programs and very little research
has explored the challenges involved in
putting ideas into practice this study
reports on a committee designing a
comprehensive K-12 computer science
education program at a small Public
School District in California through a
grounded Theory qualitative
interpretation of Committee Member
interviews and board meeting transcripts
we surfaced three themes which were the
primary points of attention how Computer
Science Education is defined how ought
to be taught and what process ought to
be used to answer these questions
grounding these tensions in the academic
discourse of K-12 Computer Science
Education this study offers
recommendations to other districts
designing comprehensive Computer Science
Education and suggest future directions
of Computer Science Education research
that will be most useful to stakeholders
of these processes end quote prior to
summarize this paper into a single
sentence I'd say that this study serves
as a case study of a District's
processes intentions developing a plan
for implementing computer science across
K-12 so if you are brand new to Computer
Science Education or your district is
brand new and you really want to expand
across the entire District this case
study might serve as kind of a tale with
some things to consider before going in
into it as there are some interesting
lessons that can be drawn from this and
considerations that can be made if you
are going to work with a district on
developing implementation across K-12
but note that this is just one example
and there are many ways of doing this
and I say that as somebody who works for
a non-profit that has worked with many
districts Across the Nation everybody
does it in a different way but it's
important to hear other perspectives and
go oh that's an interesting idea I want
to do it that way or oh I really don't
want to do it that way Etc now in the
introduction of this paper the authors
mentioned that there is a thriving
economy around Ed Tech and out-of-school
learning opportunities that are relevant
to Computer Science Education and the
reason for this is because of the social
value placed on understanding Computing
whether it be as specific as coding or
as broad as computational thinking or
computer science as a domain many
companies are saying they want more
people with background in computer
science whatever that may mean or look
like and many states or districts are
adopting computer science education
standards that are then being required
of teachers and school districts however
at the moment not every district and
every student is receiving Computer
Science Education instruction by the way
code.org actually released a state of Cs
report recently I'll include a link to
that in the show notes so if you want to
see how is your state doing check it out
really simple easy to understand and
it's got some interesting data and you
can be like oh well how does my state
compare to the state next door or the
state I previously taught in now in the
introduction the authors also know that
there's not enough discussion on how
other people end up doing implementation
in K-12 districts probably the most
frequently discussed approach for this
that I've seen is using script which is
an acronym for a program developed by CS
sprawl to help districts come up with
their own implementation plan that is
unique to their interests and needs Etc
I'll include some links to some podcasts
of some people who actually worked on
Scripps or worked at CS for all in
various capacities so if you want to
learn more about that make sure you
check out those podcasts in the show
notes which you can find at
jaredeliry.com or by simply clicking the
link in the app that you're listening to
the song and while you're there you'll
notice that this podcast is powered by
boot up professional development which
is the non-profit that I work for what's
interesting about this case study is
this District ended up spending three
years designing their K-12 CS program in
this particular study this paper
discusses the questions quote what is
the district's vision for computer
science two how should the district's
K-12 CS program be implemented in taught
three what process should be used to
answer these questions and who should
participate end quote from Pages 3 14
and 3 15. all right so the next section
of the paper is a background section I'm
going to skip over that and just jump
right into the methods here's a quote
from page 315 that kind of describes the
district court the study was conducted
at a small wealthy Suburban School
District in California in which a
committee composed of students parents
teachers and school leaders has spent
the last three years designing a K-12 CS
program end quote now the high schools
already have multiple computer science
courses likely because this is a very
affluent district with high social
capital and the authors note that many
of the committee members actually engage
in various leadership capacities in K-12
CS education but again it's interesting
to note that it's parents teachers
students leaders Etc who are all kind of
collaborating or sometimes not
collaborating arguing with each other
about how to implement across K-12 and
for this study they looked at interviews
and transcripts from various
presentations and public discussions
like at the school board of education
meetings all right so the next section
gets at the results the first subsection
is titled what is computer science now
the authors note that the committee
unanimously agreed that computer science
is important but they all had different
rationales for why they felt it was
important so some would say Equity is
important or interests or economic
opportunities or believing CS is an
important literacy or skill that relates
to everyday life and digital citizenship
Etc now I've done multiple episodes that
actually talk about the Visions
framework from CS for all which is
related to the script work workshops
that I previously mentioned so make sure
you check out the show notes at
jaredeliry.com or those podcast episodes
which basically talks about how the
vision framework helps people figure out
their vision for CS what are their
rationales their drive for why they
think it's important or it should be
implemented and that can help people to
engage in conversation to go oh I think
computer science should be this but you
think it should be this other thing that
is interesting let's talk about these
similarities and differences in our
values around the rationales for CS
education one of the really interesting
findings on this particular paper is
that the committee had fundamental
disagreements on well what exactly is
computer science and because of this
disagreement on just like a single
definition of it it really impacted the
effectiveness of their conversations and
then there's also fundamental
disagreement on what the focus should be
of the conversations so some wanted to
focus on inclusion efforts so getting
more students to participate While
others wanted to focus on on diving
deeper into rigor so here's an
interesting quote from a teacher and
this is on page 316 to 317. quote a
teacher taking this perspective argued
that de-emphasizing programming for
example through unplugged activities is
a disservice to students quote if you're
teaching origami in computer science
class and some guy out in a wealthy city
is teaching kids how to actually write
programs I've got very little doubt
which kid is likely to be in better
shape coming out of those two classes in
terms of being able to function well at
the next level I think it's creating a
Chasm between the Haves and the
have-nots end quote and I know that
right there is going to be some fighting
words for some people some people might
say well unplugged are really great ways
to lower the barrier of Entry get people
interested in both taking a CS class and
even teaching a CS class and then other
people look at it go okay but that's not
actually programming you're just kind of
skimming on the surface of understanding
without actually applying it with
increasing complexity over an extended
period of time now it's not to say that
if you do unplugged you can't do
programming you can certainly do both
but it's interesting reading these
arguments because I've been hearing
these Arguments for years now some
people want to talk about inclusion
other people want to talk about rigor so
it's really interesting the way the
authors frame this it's kind of like two
polls on a Continuum where people kind
of gravitating around in their
conversations on implementation here's
an interesting quote from page 317.
quote this epistemological tension is
paralleled in the academic debate over
computational thinking even though the
term was used only 12 times in our
Corpus over the last decade proponents
of computational thinking have argued
for a practice focused vision of
computer science often including
collaboration creativity and the
construction of identities and
communities where computational
practices can emerge computational
thinking has been useful to those
arguing for teaching computer science at
the elementary level for
interdisciplinary computer science and
as a lens on inclusion and inequity
others likely in agreement with the
teacher quoted in the previous paragraph
feel that computer science and the
useful definition of computational
thinking
ought to be more narrow defined focusing
on the application of core computational
ideas through programming too heavy
Reliance on computer science practices
risk obscuring the powerful ideas that
make the field transformative empowering
and worth teaching end quote and if
you're interested in some more nuanced
discussion on the tensions around
computational thinking and what one of
the authors actually proposes with
kaphai as computational literacies I
highly recommend checking out the
podcast that I did almost a year ago now
actually titled A revaluation of
computational thinking in K-12 education
moving toward computational literacies
really interesting paper that I unpack
in that particular Episode by Cafe
improctor now another interesting thing
that the authors note in this particular
study is that on this committee there
were a lot of tensions around people who
had identities as computer scientists
and those who did not and how those
various levels of expertise kind of
butted heads at times but speaking of
some tensions the next subsection is
around the question how should computer
science to be taught so at the
elementary and middle school level they
agreed that computational thinking
should be interwoven throughout the
classes in an interdisciplinary way and
science should be a graduation
requirement with only 15 percent who are
against it and the other remaining
percent of people tried to find another
way or just abstain from voting on that
one which is why that does not add up to
there is support for the graduation
requirement quote there's substantial
disagreement about what sort of course
should be required mirroring the two
different understandings of computer
science there was a group emphasizing
rigor and another group focusing on
exposure the farmer group was interested
in the AP Computer Science principles
course citing the number of people who
have worked hard on that including
people from the University level while
the latter group was interested in
emphasizing the broad applications of
computer science in an inclusive manner
the committee ultimately did not reach
an agreement on the nature of the
required course as they focused their
efforts on first securing the graduation
requirement end quote from page 317.
that's real really interesting a while
back I did a little mini series on
integration and one of the key things
that I was talking about throughout
those episodes was it was important to
really sit down and talk about well what
do you mean by integration same thing
here with the overall definition of
computer science well what do you mean
by what it's going to look like so while
the majority of people agreed yeah it
should be a graduation requirement once
you actually dive into it because well
what does that look like is it going to
be a single course could it be multiple
courses offered like one focusing on
rigor or another focusing on exposure
Etc these are all really important
things to consider when it comes to what
does this actually look like so for
example when the authors mentioned that
they were engaging in an
interdisciplinary way of engaging in
computational thinking whoa what does
interdisciplinary mean to you does it
mean I use the term decomposition in my
class therefore we have now done
computational thinking check I've marked
that off my list for the month and we
can move on or does it mean engaging in
scratch projects to demonstrate
understanding those are two very
different approaches for for engaging in
computational thinking in an
interdisciplinary way in an elementary
class so it's nice that the authors
talked about these tension points rather
than just the agreement far too often
there's this tendency to paint things as
rosy and like yeah everything was great
when it came to this study you should
fund me some more this is not saying the
authors did that not at all in fact they
did the opposite they said here are some
things that people agreed upon here are
some things that they did not agree upon
and I really value that they share those
aspects of these conversations because
it's important to realize this is going
to be a difficult and apparently long
and drawn out process since it took
three years for some District now
jumping back into the findings again
rather than just my commentary but one
of the other interesting conversations
that they had to have was okay well are
we going to replace a graduation
requirement are we going to add on a new
graduation requirement which would then
take away an elective from students and
oh boy I would love to have been sitting
in the audience at that conversation
with a bucket full of popcorn we would
have listened to that that is a really
good good question to consider that
could have profound impact on students
like for people like myself who were in
ensembles like band that made it so I
might have zero or maybe one or maybe
two electives by senior year that I
could take oddly enough I actually just
recently talked to my wife about this
and she said that she only had one other
elective that she could select from in
high school but she was also in band so
if we take that away does that mean
students who are committed to something
that they've potentially been doing
since like I don't know fourth grade
let's say they want to continue it all
the way through high school but then
they don't have electives to choose from
because they have so many graduation
requirements what about what happens
five years from now when we have another
new graduation requirement for another
really interesting and super important
domain so the students who are a part of
this Who quote spoke against the
requirement cited the overwhelming
demands of the existing requirements and
The Limited choice in their schedules
one student summed up a survey of his
peers quote they're less against the
idea of teaching computer science than
they are with the idea of more required
tournaments instead suggesting that the
district might loosen up curriculum and
rethink the idea of what students must
know because right now we're all working
under a system that's collapsing under
its own weight end quote from page 317.
so then the question became quote Should
students be able to choose their courses
or should districts determine what
courses students need to take on the one
hand one board member argued for a
requirement from an equity perspective
quote if we believe that computer
science is a critical skill for being
citizen in the modern world then we
really can't accept a situation in which
our female students and the
underrepresented minority students are
not participating in that at the same
levels as other students that really
should be unacceptable to us and I think
a graduation requirement is a way of
addressing that end quote from page 317
but then on the other hand try to go to
some of the arguments I've made in other
podcast episodes is that a form of
epistemological colonization or
ontological colonization or axiological
colonization so epistemological like
ways of learning or knowing on
ecological ways of being and axiological
like ways of valuing if we add on more
requirements and say students have to do
this thing because I value this thing
and think it's important for them is
that then colonizing their ways of
knowing their ways of being and things
that they value I can see both sides of
an answer to that yes or no but I
definitely lean more towards yes so for
example in high school I had an academic
counselor who was really set on me
getting into Harvard because of how I
placed on some test scores I was placed
into a group of students who this
special academic counselor really wanted
us to all get into some Ivy League
school whenever I'd go meet with him
he'd be like oh well you should drop
banned or better yet leave this school
entirely and go to this other program
that was for students who tested high on
these honors tests that and you'd get a
laptop you'd get all sorts of like
one-on-one attention and get to take
more rigorous courses and this would
look great to get into Harvard and my
response was every time was I'm not
interested in going to Harvard and I
want to be in band this academic
guidance counselor although
well-intentioned did not care what my
interests were and just wanted to serve
his own needs and what he thought was
best for me turns out I've done just
fine even though all my degrees are in
music education I pursued my passions
and that led me to Computer Science
Education and it has allowed me to bring
to this field a perspective and set of
experiences that are unique for many CS
Educators so I'm able to look at things
in a different way had I followed the
academic guidance counselor's advice I
wouldn't have those perspectives and
quite frankly I probably wouldn't be as
happy because I ended up exploring my
own paths my own interests in life and
how I could help other people so that
long-winded tangent to say the more
courses we add the less likely students
are going to be able to pursue their own
interests and the more it's going to
come across as colonizing students is
ways of knowing being and what they
value in my opinion and if you disagree
that's okay happy to chat with you on
the podcast contact me button on my
website okay so that was a discussion on
subsection 2 in the results and some of
my own thoughts embedded throughout that
but now let's look at subsection three
of the results this question focused on
what processes should be used to answer
these questions so the authors kind of
hinted like a bordujian power
perspective and talking about social
cultural capital in terms of sometimes
the experts who had background in
computer science education weren't
actually viewed as experts in a domain
but for example when it comes to
pedagogy and teaching the teachers would
have more social capital or more
cultural capital in that particular
question or context and if you want to
hear a paper that actually talked about
Bordeaux in relation to Computer Science
Education I'll include a link to that in
the show notes as well as the discussion
with Kimberly Scott we kind of talk
about the different forms of capital
that influence us we also talk about
that and some other interviews like with
the interview with Joyce McCall which
used the Shire as a metaphor for
systemic racism highly recommend
listening to that episode here's an
interesting quote from page 318. quote
in some cases the construction of
expertise was explicitly about power and
whose voice counts one male t teacher
explicitly excluded the expertise of the
women quoted in the previous paragraphs
quote it's tough because you know I felt
like other male teacher and I were the
two subject matter experts in the room
other than a couple of parents who were
in the business and I think both other
male teacher and I at different times
during the past couple of years have you
know threw our arms up end quote this
teacher has strong views on what
constitutes computer science and on how
it should be taught and frequently saw
himself in the minority on the committee
these interactions portray computer
science knowledge as situated in
particular identities context of use and
power relationships this is not a
dominant perspective in computer science
end quote honestly you could probably
write an entire paper just on that
little embedded quote within there from
that teacher I read this quote to share
that whenever engaging in conversations
around education everything is gray not
black and white it's gray there are many
perspectives to consider and sometimes
when a group leans in One Direction
those who disagree with that will feel
left out or if the group has a leader
who ultimately listens to everybody's
perspectives and has to make some kind
of a decision with input whatever
decision they make somebody most likely
is going to disagree with that and
that's to be expected so it's important
to consider these different
relationships and contexts and power
dynamics at play and how things are
perceived because even if we make
statements like I think students should
be able to choose what they want to
learn while I strongly agree with that I
can also see situations where I think
it's important for subject matter
experts to determine what students
should learn in X Y or Z most of the
time I disagree with that second
statement and instead prefer the first
one letting students choose but
sometimes I agree with the other
perspective it depends on content now
because of that one of the findings from
this that they talk about on page 318 is
that it is important to consider the
size of the committee when engaging in
these conversations because it can have
a profound impact on the efficiency of
that conversation having been in many
professional conversations before it's
sometimes easier to work in smaller
groups rather than to have everybody
work on something all together other so
for example I helped Wyoming develop
their computer science standards there's
like 50 of us or so who all met long
before covid and chatted about the
different standards we started in a
group of 50 but then broke down into
much smaller groups where we could get
into the details around specific
standards in different grade bands so I
worked in the 3-5 grade band then we
come back together as a full group and
discuss things and then break it down
into a smaller group again and so it
kind of alternated between those that
was an effective way to have everybody
to listen to and understand perspectives
while also being able to kind of work
through things in smaller groups if we
had stayed in a group of 50 the entire
time the standards would still not be
written today but because of the
approach that was used we were able to
get things done so if you are going to
work on some kind of a committee that
determines how you implement in the
classroom maybe consider a smaller group
or kind of alternating between large
group feedback small group goes and
works on something brings it back to the
large group to get some more feedback
and continue that cycle now the authors
in the discussion ask some really the
important questions that I highly
recommend taking a look at but here's a
little paragraph that I'm going to read
from page 319 that kind of summarizes
things quote for stakeholders of schools
designing comprehensive computer science
programs this study offers several
lessons it is important to realize that
there are substantial unresolved
disagreements about what constitutes
computer science and that any
implementation will need to take a
stance on what matters most people's
understandings of computer science will
be situated in their own experience and
the process of developing a broadly
shared operative definition of computer
science should include time to discuss
these different backgrounds in order to
include participants without existing
computer science experience it may be
necessary to invest in Community
Education efforts despite these efforts
some people will be skeptical that
computer science ought to be a priority
if they are not also included in the
process they may solidify into an
oppositional fraction the question of
whether to require a separate computer
science course may be a Crux Point
essential for Equitable participation
but also in competition with other
priority for The Limited number of
courses that can be required the same
factors which have historically excluded
students from participating in computer
science are likely to affect potential
participants in the process of Designing
a computer science program end quote so
I highly recommend reading this paper it
is a single case study of a single
District but it is something that I
highly recommend taking a look at
because there's some interesting
findings at the end of these episodes
I'd like to share some lingering
thoughts and questions I kind of
embedded a lot of those throughout this
particular episode but I guess a
question that I might have for you and
hopefully you can engage in this
conversation with other colleagues in
the field is what implementation
approaches have worked for you or other
districts that you're aware of and how
might we share those successful
approaches with other districts who have
not yet started implementing CS I hope
you enjoyed this episode really
interesting findings and discussions in
this particular paper you also felt it
was interesting please consider sharing
with somebody else or leaving a review
on a podcast app that you're listening
to this on and again check out there's a
bunch of podcast episodes that I
referenced in this one they're all
included in the show notes there's over
a many more interesting papers that were
unpacked and really awesome interviews
with some pretty cool people and when I
say awesome interviews I mean they were
awesome not like giving myself a
compliment or anything because that's
yeah not something I do but anyways
check out the shout outs to
jaredolier.com it's also hundreds if not
thousands of free computer science
education resources including a link to
boot.pd.org which is where I create free
coding curriculum work on Research do
some other cool projects and service
efforts but anyways stay tuned next week
for another episode till then hope
you're all staying safe and are having a
wonderful week
Article
Proctor, C., Bigman, M., & Blikstein, P. (2019). Defining and designing computer science education in a K12 public school district. SIGCSE 2019 - Proceedings of the 50th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, 1, 314–320.
Abstract
“Computer science is poised to become a core discipline in K12 education, however there are unresolved tensions between the definitions and purposes of computer science and public education. This study’s goal is to explore how logistical and conceptual challenges emerge while designing a comprehensive K12 computer science program in a public school district. While the policy infrastructure for K12 computer science education is rapidly developing, few districts have yet implemented computer science as a core discipline in their K12 programs and very little research has explored the challenges involved in putting ideas into practice. This study reports on a committee designing a comprehensive K12 computer science education program at a small public school district in California. Through a grounded-theory qualitative interpretation of committee-member interviews and board meeting transcripts, we surfaced three themes which were the primary points of tension: how computer science is defined, how it ought to be taught, and what process ought to be used to answer these questions. Grounding these tensions in the academic discourse on K12 computer science education, this study offers recommendations to other districts designing comprehensive computer science education and suggests future directions of computer science education research that will be most useful to stakeholders of these processes.”
Author Keywords
K-12 education, computational thinking
My One Sentence Summary
This study serves as a case study of a district’s processes and tensions developing a plan for implementing computer science across K-12.
Some Of My Lingering Questions/Thoughts
What implementation approaches have worked for you or other districts that you’re aware of?
How might we share those approaches with other districts that have not yet implemented CS?
Resources/Links Relevant to This Episode
Podcasts that are relevant to this episode
A Revaluation of Computational Thinking in K–12 Education: Moving Toward Computational Literacies
In this episode I unpack Kafai and Proctor’s (2021) publication titled “A revaluation of computational thinking in K–12 education: Moving toward computational literacies,” which summarizes three key framings of computational thinking and proposes computational literacies in place of computational thinking.
CS for What? Diverse Visions of Computer Science Education in Practice
In this episode I unpack Santo, Vogel, and Ching’s (2019) publication titled “CS for What? Diverse Visions of Computer Science Education in Practice,” which is a white paper that provides a useful framework for considering the underlying values and impact of CS programs or resources.
Contemporary Venues of Curriculum Inquiry
In this episode I unpack an excerpt from Schubert’s (2008) publication titled “Curriculum inquiry,” which describes different venues or types of curriculum that educators and education researchers should consider.
Educational Aims, Objectives, and Other Aspirations
In this episode I unpack Eisner’s (2002) publication titled “Educational aims, objectives, and other aspirations,” which problematizes behavioral education objectives and discuss two alternative approaches.
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.
In this episode I unpack an excerpt from Schubert’s (1986) book titled “Curriculum: Perspective, paradigm, and possibility,” which describes different examples, intents, and criticisms of “images” or “characterizations” of curriculum.
Intersections of Cultural Capital with Kimberly Scott
In this interview with Kimberly Scott, we discuss some of the problems with discourse around grit, students as techno-social change agents, teaching with culturally responsive approaches in communities that are hostile toward culturally responsive pedagogies, unpacking discourse and Discourse, considering both present and future identities when teaching, potential disconnects between theory and practice with intersectional work, comforting the disturbed and disturbing the comforted, and so much more.
In this episode I unpack Kallia and Cutts’ (2021) publication titled “Re-examining inequalities in computer science participation from a Bourdieusian sociological perspective,” which uses Bourdieu’s discussions of capital, habitus, and field to analyze 147 publications on CS interventions.
In this episode I unpack Ni et al.’s (2022) publication titled “Teachers as curriculum co-designers: Supporting professional learning and curriculum implementation in a CSforAll RPP project,” which shares results of an RPP where teachers collaboratively designed an app development curriculum that they implemented in their classrooms.
The Centrality of Curriculum and the Function of Standards: The Curriculum is a Mind-altering Device
In this episode I unpack Eisner’s (2002) publication titled “The centrality of curriculum and the function of standards: The curriculum is a mind-altering device,” which problematizes curricula and standards by discussing how both can deprofessionalize the field of education.
The CS Visions Framework and Equity-centered Computing Education with Rafi Santo and Sara Vogel
In this interview with Rafi Santo and Sara Vogel, we discuss informal learning in CS, the CS Visions Framework, equity through social justice pedagogy, considerations for Integration, and much more.
The Shire as Metaphor for Systemic Racism with Joyce McCall
In this interview with Joyce McCall, we unpack and problematize some of the issues around race and racism in relation to education. In particular, we discuss the importance of allies not only showing up to support marginalized or oppressed groups, but staying when conversations get uncomfortable; the Shire from the Lord of the Rings as a metaphor for hegemony and systemic racism; as well as a variety of theories such as critical race theory, double consciousness, cultural capital; and much more.
Unpacking Systems for CSforALL with Leigh Ann DeLyser
In this interview with Leigh Ann DeLyser, we discuss the purpose of CSforALL, considerations for leading people with different visions for (or interests in) CS education, the evolution and future direction of CS education, positive and negative corporate influence on education, thinking through equity from a systems perspective, and much more.
Find other CS educators and resources by using the #CSK8 hashtag on Twitter
Free CS Resources I Have Created
More Content
