By David Barr, John Harrison, and Leslie Conery
I think the authors of this article want to see computational thinking grow and come into wide use within the classroom because they see it as a tool that can go along with other learning to offer a higher standard of learning and the ability to solve more complex problems. The authors seemed to want to garner support for CT by giving a basic overview of what it is and how it can help in schools. From my understanding of the article, CT is like a tool that makes learning more efficient. I could not find a clear definition of the term and it looks like one of the drawbacks to CT is the lack of a clear definition. I saw this as a major weak point of the article, how are the readers expected to have a great appreciation and support for CT if the three authors cannot even clearly explain what it is? Nonetheless, it seems like the authors are trying to say CT is a multitude of computer-based tools dedicated to solving a wide array of problems.
When I read the article I immediately thought of using calculators in school. Getting the basics 2 + 2, simple multiplication and division has real life applications so calculators should not replace the process of working out a problem. That being said, when students get to high school and start working on trigonometric equations, to do the work on paper would be tedious and frustratingly pointless, knowing there is a tool that will complete several minutes of work with the click of a few buttons. I see the use of CT as similar to the use of graphing calculators in education. I think the roadblocks to CT are similar to the roadblocks standing in the way of every student having a calculator at least capable of helping to solve precalculus equations. For one, the cost of CT or advanced calculators seems high at first. I imagine making every school ready for CT would mean purchasing more computers for the classrooms and additional software and time to train teachers how to integrate CT in their lesson plans. Even so, once that initial cost is paid it looks like the benefit to using CT would be exponential.
I think the calculator is a good example of how computational thinking is already in place. I do agree that the definition of CT is very vague. The authors give bullet points as to what CT consists of and I got the impression that it is breaking complex problems down but if doesn't always have to use technology although sometimes it can. This lends right into your point that the authors need to give a more precise definition of what CT actually is so teachers and schools know what they are implementing and how to implement it.
ReplyDelete