QP Scratch area

QP Scratch area

  1. What kind of medium and pedagogy might support textual-computational multiliteracy?
  2. What practices might emerge in such a textual-computational multiliteracy space?
  3. How might such practices support critical awareness and resistance to racism, sexism, and other oppressive ideologies?

Resnick et al, 2009

Notes from my phone Computational self-authoring? No pre-post. Instead correlations on identities in practice.  assessments of identities in practice, using histories.  It would never make sense to say it caused this, but perhaps to say it supported the development in a Vygotskian sense. It’s sort of a study in ethnomethodology. 

What claims am I making? 

— Computational modeling can be helpful in thinking about social issues (critical discourse models) — Situating computational thinking can make it accessible to a broader population of students.  — Critical discourse models can support the development of critical awareness. 

What kinds of arguments could I make to support these claims? 

— Computational modeling can be helpful in thinking about social issues (critical discourse models)     — Students with more COMPUTATIONAL SUCCESS had more CRITICAL MOVES.  — Situating computational thinking in lived and urgent experience can make it accessible to a broader population of students.      — Students with more CRITICAL MOVES  had more CS ATTITUDE CHANGE.          — We know that attitude shift is a big deal in CS learning trajectories, particularly for marginalized students.  — Interactive storytelling is a multiliteracy which supports critical awareness.      — Mutual support in both directions 

How might someone refute these arguments? How could I rebut?

— Computational modeling can be helpful in thinking about social issues (critical discourse models)     — Students with more COMPUTATIONAL SUCCESS had more CRITICAL MOVES.          * BUT wouldn’t we expect to see more CRITICAL MOVES from people who have EXPERIENCE WITH DISCRIMINATION?              — Yes,          * But maybe these are just the more thoughtful students. They’d be interested in computing, and they’d be interested in 

— Computational modeling can be helpful in thinking about social issues (critical discourse models)     — Students with more COMPUTATIONAL SUCCESS had more CRITICAL MOVES.          * BUT maybe they are just the more engaged students overall or the smarter students overall?             — This effect was stronger for students with more EXPERIENCE WITH DISCRIMINATION              — This effect was weaker for students with more BACKGROUND IN COMPUTING             — This effect was weaker for students with more BACKGROUND IN COMPUTING

More generally, I don’t have to prove this would not have happened without Unfold Studio. I’m trying to show that Unfold Studio can be part of a critical literacy space, not that it must cause it. Consider that we are up against a background in which there is very little critical education happening in the US. 

What constructs will be necessary to support these arguments? How will I validate them and ground them in theory?

— COMPUTATIONAL MOVES: based on open-coding, these are meaningful uses of computational structures in their stories. These would include branching, using variables, lists, etc.  — CRITICAL MOVES: based on open-coding  — BACKGROUND IN COMPUTING: measured by pre-test questions.  — COMPUTATIONAL SUCCESS: measured by success in the Fairy task.  — CS ATTITUDE CHANGE: measured by pre-post difference in survey of questions.  — EXPERIENCE WITH DISCRIMINATION: measured by pre-test survey questions.