Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Playfully Coding Science: Views from Preservice Science Teacher Education

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Critical, Transdisciplinary and Embodied Approaches in STEM Education

Part of the book series: Advances in STEM Education ((ASTEME))

  • 1506 Accesses

Abstract

There is now a growing body of research focused on integrating computational thinking and modeling in teacher education, ranging from studies that investigate preservice teachers’ perceptions of computational thinking to those that evaluate the efficacy of computational tools that can support such integration. Our work extends this literature by investigating how preservice science teachers can be introduced to computational thinking and modeling by playfully designing computer simulations and games for modeling kinematics and ecological interdependence. Adopting a phenomenological research agenda, we focus on how preservice science teachers experience coding and computational modeling as pedagogical experiences for science education. In doing so, our goal is to contribute to an epistemological, rather than an instrumental, understanding of computational thinking and modeling in the context of preservice science teacher education.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 139.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Aikenhead, G. S. (2003, August). Review of research on humanistic perspectives in science curricula. In 4th Conference of the European Science Education Research Association (ESERA), Research and the Quality of Science Education. Noordwijkerhout, The Netherlands (August 19–23).

    Google Scholar 

  • Azevedo, F. S. (2018). An inquiry into the structure of situational interests. Science Education, 102(1), 108–127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berland, M., & Lee, V. R. (2011). Collaborative strategic board games as a site for distributed computational thinking. International Journal of Game-Based Learning (IJGBL), 1(2), 65–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bower, M., & Falkner, K. (2015, January). Computational thinking, the notional machine, preservice teachers, and research opportunities. In Proceedings of the 17th Australasian Computing Education Conference (ACE 2015) (Vol. 27, p. 30).

    Google Scholar 

  • Daston, L., & Galison, P. (2007). Objectivity. Brooklyn, NY: Zone Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dickes, A., Sengupta, P., Farris, A. V., & Basu, S. (2016). Development of mechanistic reasoning and multi-level explanations in 3rd grade biology using multi-agent based models. Science Education, 100(4), 734–776.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dickes, A. C., & Sengupta, P. (2013). Learning natural selection in 4th grade with multi-agent based computational models. Research in Science Education, 43(3), 921–953.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DiSessa, A. A. (2001). Changing minds: Computers, learning, and literacy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duschl, R. (2008). Science education in three-part harmony: Balancing conceptual, epistemic, and social learning goals. Review of Research in Education, 32(1), 268–291.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Farris, A. V., Dickes, A. C., & Sengupta, P. (2019). Learning to interpret measurement and motion in fourth grade computational modeling. Science & Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-019-00069-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Farris, A. V., & Sengupta, P. (2014). Perspectival computational thinking for learning physics: A case study of collaborative agent-based modeling. In Proceedings of the 12th international conference of the learning sciences (pp. 1102–1107). ICLS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Farris, A. V., & Sengupta, P. (2016). Democratizing children’s computation: Learning computational science as aesthetic experience. Educational Theory, 66(1–2), 279–296.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kalogiannakis, M., & Papadakis, S. (2017, August). Pre-service kindergarten teachers acceptance of “ScratchJr” as a tool for learning and teaching computational thinking and science education. In Proceedings of the 12th Conference of the European Science Education Research Association (ESERA), Research, practice and collaboration in science education (pp. 21–25). Dublin: Dublin City University and the University of Limerick.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keller, E. F. (1984). A feeling for the organism, 10th anniversary edition: The life and work of Barbara McClintock. New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim, B., & Ho, W. (2018). Emergent social practices of Singapore students: The role of laughter and humour in educational gameplay. International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction, 16, 85–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levy, S. T., & Wilensky, U. (2008). Inventing a “mid-level” to make ends meet: Reasoning between the levels of complexity. Cognition and Instruction, 26(1), 1–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leonard, J., Mitchell, M., Barnes-Johnson, J., Unertl, A., Outka-Hill, J., Robinson, R., & Hester-Croff, C. (2018). Preparing teachers to engage rural students in computational thinking through robotics, game design, and culturally responsive teaching. Journal of Teacher Education, 69(4), 386–408.

    Google Scholar 

  • Manz, E., & Suárez, E. (2018). Supporting teachers to negotiate uncertainty for science, students, and teaching. Science Education, 102, 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21343

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McMahon, L. (2017). Phenomenology as first-order perception: Speech, vision, and reflection in Merleau-Ponty. In K. Jacobson & J. Russon (Eds.), Perception and its development in Merleau-Ponty’s philosophy (pp. 308–334). Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merleau-Ponty, M. (1962). Phenomenology of perception. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ochs, E., Gonzales, P., & Jacoby, S. (1996). “When I come down I’m in the domain state”: Grammar and graphic representation in the interpretive activity of physicists. Studies in Interactional Sociolinguistics, 13, 328–369.

    Google Scholar 

  • Papert, S. (1987). Information technology and education: Computer criticism vs. technocentric thinking. Educational Researcher, 16(1), 22–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pickering, A. (1995). The mangle of practice: Time, agency, and science. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Sands, P., Yadav, A., & Good, J. (2018). Computational thinking in K-12: In-service teacher perceptions of computational thinking. In Computational thinking in the STEM disciplines (pp. 151–164). Cham: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Sengupta, P., Brown, B., Rushton, K., & Shanahan, M. C. (2018). Reframing coding as “Mathematization” in the K12 classroom: Views from teacher professional learning. Alberta Science Education Journal, 45(2), 28–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sengupta, P., Dickes, A. C., Farris, A. V., Karan, A., Martin, K., & Wright, M. (2015). Programming in K12 science classrooms. Communications of the ACM, 58(1), 33–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sengupta, P., Krinks, K. D., & Clark, D. B. (2015). Learning to deflect: Conceptual change in physics during digital game play. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 24(4), 638–674.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sengupta, P., Kinnebrew, J., Basu, S., Biswas, G., & Clark, D. (2013). Integrating computational thinking with K12 science education using agent-based modeling: A theoretical framework. Education and Information Technologies, 18, 351–380.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sengupta, P., & Shanahan, M. C. (2017). Boundary play and pivots in public computation: New directions in STEM education. International Journal of Engineering Education, 33(3), 1124–1134.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sengupta, P., Dickes, A., & Farris, A. (2018). Toward a phenomenology of computational thinking in STEM education. In Computational thinking in the STEM disciplines: Foundations and research highlights (pp. 49–72). Cham: Springer International Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weintrop, D., Beheshti, E., Horn, M., Orton, K., Jona, K., Trouille, L., & Wilensky, U. (2016). Defining computational thinking for mathematics and science classrooms. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 25(1), 127–147.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilensky, U. (1999). NetLogo. Evanston: Center for Connected Learning and Computer-Based Modeling, Northwestern University. Retrieved from http://ccl.northwestern.edu/netlogo/

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilensky, U., & Reisman, K. (2006). Thinking like a wolf, a sheep, or a firefly: Learning biology through constructing and testing computational theories—an embodied modeling approach. Cognition and instruction, 24(2), 171–209.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilensky, U., & Resnick, M. (1999). Thinking in levels: A dynamic systems approach to making sense of the world. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 8(1), 3–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilensky, U., Brady, C. E., & Horn, M. S. (2014). Fostering computational literacy in science classrooms. Communications of the ACM, 57(8), 24–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilkerson, M. H., Andrews, C., Shaban, Y., Laina, V., & Gravel, B. E. (2016). What’s the technology for? Teacher attention and pedagogical goals in a modeling-focused professional development workshop. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 27(1), 11–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wing, J. M. (2006). Computational thinking. Communications of the ACM, 49(3), 33–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yadav, A., Stephenson, C., & Hong, H. (2017). Computational thinking for teacher education. Communications of the ACM, 60(4), 55–62.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Werklund School of Education, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada

    Pratim Sengupta, Beaumie Kim & Marie-Claire Shanahan

Authors
  1. Pratim Sengupta
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Beaumie Kim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Marie-Claire Shanahan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Pratim Sengupta .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Werklund School of Education, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada

    Pratim Sengupta , Marie-Claire Shanahan  & Beaumie Kim ,  & 

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Sengupta, P., Kim, B., Shanahan, MC. (2019). Playfully Coding Science: Views from Preservice Science Teacher Education. In: Sengupta, P., Shanahan, MC., Kim, B. (eds) Critical, Transdisciplinary and Embodied Approaches in STEM Education. Advances in STEM Education. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-29489-2_10

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-29489-2_10

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-29488-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-29489-2

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation