Maintaining pluralism when embedding computational thinking in required science and engineering classes with young adolescents
Maintaining pluralism when embedding computational thinking in required science and engineering classes with young adolescents
复制标题
DOI：
10.1080/08993408.2021.1940787
复制
发表时间：
2021-06
影响因子：
2.7
通讯作者：
David W. Jackson;Yihong Cheng
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
David W. Jackson;Yihong Cheng
摘要背景和上下文计算思维和实践（CT| P）是科学和工程学习者的关键能力。对于以青少年为参与者的研究，表现出的研究哲学有时与社会多元化不一致。目的基于2016年至2019年初的CT研究文献|P在要求的科学和工程类与青少年年龄10-15 -一个敏感的年龄范围的认知和情感发展-我们写了一篇文献综述，主张使用更多元化和批判性的研究哲学，这将加强研究设计，实施和元推理（柯林斯等人，2012年）。方法我们分析了20个合格的研究，每个研究哲学共同的混合研究，给予额外的关注，研究承认文化的多元性，从事这些多元性相互对话，并确保历史上被边缘化的人群有平等的-不只是平等的-参与（Onwuegalliie & Frels，2013）。结果-我们发现，研究一贯强调实用主义的中间和社区的实践，有时经营的批判现实主义，实用主义的权利，或转型解放的哲学，很少从事辩证的方式。为了避免脱离背景或过于个人主义的方法，无法解决系统性和制度性的社会不平等（在教育，住房，医疗保健，警务，投票等），今后的工作应采取更加多元化和批判性的哲学方法。我们强调了几个例子，希望研究将支持青年在文化上维持和扩展计算的做法（巴黎，2012年）。
ABSTRACT Background and Context Computational thinking and practices (CT|P) are key competencies for learners in science and engineering. For studies with young adolescents as participants, manifested research philosophies are sometimes inconsistent with societal pluralisms. Objective Based on research literature from 2016 to early 2019 for CT|P in required science and engineering classes with youth ages 10-15 – a sensitive age range for cognitive and affective development – we wrote a literature review that argues for the use of more pluralistic and critical research philosophies, which will strengthen research design, implementation, and meta-inferences (Collins et al., 2012). Method We analyzed 20 qualifying studies per research philosophies common to mixed research, giving extra attention to studies that acknowledge cultural pluralisms, engage those pluralisms in conversation with each other, and ensure that historically marginalized populations have equiTable – not just equal – participation (Onwuegbuzie & Frels, 2013). Findings We found that studies consistently emphasized pragmatism-of-the-middle and communities of practice; sometimes operated within critical realist, pragmatism-of-the-right, or transformative-emancipatory philosophies; and rarely engaged in dialectical ways. Implications To avoid decontextualized or overly individualistic approaches that fail to address systemic and institutional social inequities (in education, housing, healthcare, policing, voting, etc.), future work should take more pluralistic and critical philosophical approaches. We highlight several exemplars in hope that research will support youth in maintaining and extending computational practices in culturally sustaining ways (Paris, 2012).