RAC Feedback on ICER Computational Liter

RAC Feedback on ICER Computational Literacies Gayithri: Are the three takes mutually-exclusive? Are we constructing a straw-man argument—that things are not united?      —> The “values, framings, histories”… is this literacy?      —> Make sure we’ve read generously in prior work done.      —> Make sure we’re discussing inadequate conceptions         Deb: Brian Street // Arguing against the skills-based framing of literacies. 

Chris’s reflection: Go further to explain the problems that the literacies framing is solving

Ryan: Richard McKehan’s point that these views underlie all of practice. What’s the real goal of this article? What do you want to achieve in this article?      In talking about three studies focused on Scratch, I was waiting for you to tie these three studies together.      What was missed here?      Yasmin: This is partly written in response to Nelson and Ko’s argument against theory. There’s already theory!     Ryan: Argument between Dick Buchanan & Herb Simon: What are your assumptions? I have none. 

One way to go about this: (based in popular literature) CS discussed as a literacy and as a literature. The metaphors we’re using shape practice. When you don’t know what the metaphors are, you can’t reflect on what they’re buying you. 

REFRAME: These arguments have already been staked out in literacies: Let’s fast-forward. 

Ryan: Nelson & Ko article: we don’t really attack their points.      Let’s just get better designs     Domain-specific education theories. There aren’t many that really are distinct.      Don’t use theory as a barrier to publishing novel designs.      Publish all novel designs

Pedagogies of freedom. Action, a chance to do something about the world. 

Gayithri & Deb: AP CS / Principles shows how practice is shaped by 

Shamya: How do computational thinking and computer science education differ? Which are we talking about?      Be careful to distinguish.

Computational thinking is a means to achieve literacy in the same way 

Yasmin: Let’s learn from the Reading wars. Reform math, and make sure this doesn’t happen in our field.      -> Let’s talk about literacy as a way of relating different purposes.

ACTION ITEMS:      REFRAME: These arguments have already been staked out in literacies: Let’s fast-forward:         Identify how these points appear in literacies.          Explain how the literacies arguments have developed         Point to where things ought to move in CS ED.      Better develop the critical account. Freire out in favor of pedagogies of freedom. 

We have now clearly mapped out the three perspectives. Let’s focus on research paradigms. 

“Before we can even talk about computer science education as a literacy, we need to have a theory about what we mean by that.” 

Should we use the language of lose/gain. 

We want to frame the 

Look at Tenenbaum & Noble

Behavior Cognitive: Expert/Novice Situated: Wait, how does that work?  Critical: Wait, there’s always a power differential here. (Maybe the game is set up for you to fail!)

CONCRETE STEPS

  1. Computational thinking isn’t just one thing. 

  2. Numerous people have pointed this out: diSessa, Vakil, Vee, Guzdial. 

  3. Mapping three framings of CT. Different scales. Different epistemologies. Different assessments. 

  4. Cognitive

  5. Situated

  6. Critical 

  7. Compare what surfaces from each perspective. 

TRUE OUTLINE

  1. CT is a mess. 

  2. We talk past each other. 

  3. BTW. 

  4. Now that CS is coming to K-12, it’s coming into schools of education. 

  5. Three perspectives

  6. For each: epistemology, scale, priorities

  7. Mapping (triangle)

  8. Comparing and questioning between the three

  9. Cognitive questions:

  10. Can you do it? 

  11. We need common goals and clear measures or we can’t make progress. 

  12. Situated:

  13. Situating. How can you not discuss 

  14. Critical:

  15. Positioning, discussion of power

  16. Funds of knowledge. 

  17. What is to be taught? Who should decide? 

  18. The audience, research community we want. 

  19. There are many different computational thinkings. 

  20. We cannot ignore theory. Theory shows us where we are, provides us insights. 

  21. Literacies could help us do this. 

Commitments:     Chris on Friday     Yasmin on Saturday, Sunday     Deb: Monday     Tuesday, Wednesday… Yasmin.