The Mathematical Education (한국수학교육학회지시리즈A:수학교육)

Korean Society of Mathematical Education (한국수학교육학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

A study on investigation about the meaning and the research trend of computational thinking(CT) in mathematics education

수학교육에서 계산적 사고(Computational Thinking)의 의미 및 연구 동향 탐색

  • Received : 2019.07.29
  • Accepted : 2019.09.30
  • Published : 2019.11.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Across the world, there is a movement to incorporate computational thinking(CT) into school curricula, and math is at the heart of this movement. This paper reviewed the meanings of CT based on the point of view of Jeanette Wing, and the trend of domestic and international studies that incorporated CT into the field of mathematics education was analyzed to provide implications for mathematics education and future research. Results indicated that the meaning of CT, defined by mainly computer educators, varied in their operationalization of CT. Although CT and mathematical thinking generally have common points that are oriented toward problem solving, there were differences in the way of abstraction that is central to the two thinking processes. The experimental studies on CT in the field of mathematics education focused mainly on the development of students' cognitive capacities and affective domains through programming(coding). Furthermore, the previous studies were mainly conducted on students in school, and the studies conducted in the context of higher education, including pre-service and in-service teachers, were insufficient. Implications for mathematics teacher educators and teacher education as well as the relationship between CT and mathematical thinking are discussed.

세계적으로 계산적 사고를 학교 교육과정에 통합하려는 움직임이 일고 있고, 수학교과는 이러한 움직임의 핵심이 되고 있다. 본 연구에서는 Jeannette Wing의 주장과 선행연구를 바탕으로 계산적 사고와 수학적 사고 간의 관계를 분석하였고 계산적 사고를 수학교과에 통합한 국내외 연구를 종합적으로 검토하였다.

Keywords

References

  1. Ananiadou, K., & Claro, M. (2009). 21st century skills and competences for new millennium learners in OECD countries. OECD Education Working Papers, 41, OECD Publishing.
  2. Association for Computing Machinery (2014). New report presents recommendations and initiatives to address CS education challenges. Retrieved May 30, 2019 from https://cacm.acm.org/news/172705-new-report-presents-recommendations-and-initiatives-to-address-cs-education-challenges/fulltext
  3. Balanskat, A., & Engelhardt, K. (2015). Computing our future: Computer programming and coding priorities, school curricula and initiatives across Europe. Brussels, Belgium: European Schoolnet. Retrieved May 30, 2019 from http://tinyurl.com/zagj3wj
  4. Barr, D., Harrison, J., & Conery, L. (2011). Computational thinking: A digital age skill for everyone. Learning & Leading with Technology, 38(6), 20-23.
  5. Barr, V., & Stephenson, C. (2011). Bringing computational thinking to K-12: what is Involved and what is the role of the computer science education community?. ACM Inroads, 2(1), 48-54. https://doi.org/10.1145/1929887.1929905
  6. Beggrow, E. P., Ha, M., Nehm, R. H., Pearl, D., & Boone, W. J. (2014). Assessing scientific practices using machine-learning methods: How closely do they match clinical interview performance?. Journal of Science education and Technology, 23(1), 160-182. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-013-9461-9
  7. Berkaliev, Z., Devi, S., Fasshauer, G. E., Hickernell, F. J., Kartal, O., Li, X., ... & Zawojewski, J. S. (2014). Initiating a programmatic assessment report. PRIMUS, 24(5), 403-420. https://doi.org/10.1080/10511970.2014.893939
  8. Berland, M., & Wilensky, U. (2015). Comparing virtual and physical robotics environments for supporting complex systems and computational thinking. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 24(5), 628-647. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-015-9552-x
  9. Binkley, M., Erstad, O., Herman, J., Raizen, S., Ripley, M., Miller-Ricci, M., & Rumble, M. (2012). Defining twenty-first century skills. In P. Griffin, B. McGaw, & E. Care (Eds.), Assessment and teaching of 21st century skills (pp. 17-66). Netherlands: Springer.
  10. Bower, M., & Falkner, K. (2015, January). Computational thinking, the notional machine, pre-service teachers, and research opportunities. Proceedings of the 17th Australasian Computing Education Conference (pp. 37-46). Sydney, Australia. Retrieved May 30, 2019 from https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/c2df/f4fdd833c44015fedff1e9ae480740894a7b.pdf
  11. Brennan, K., & Resnick, M. (2012). Using artifact-based interviews to study the development of computational thinking in interactive media design. Paper presented at annual American Educational Research Association meeting. Vancouver, Canada.
  12. Burton, L. (1984). Mathematical thinking: The struggle for meaning. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 15(1), 35-49. https://doi.org/10.2307/748986
  13. Calao, L. A., Moreno-Leon, J., Correa, H. E., & Robles, G. (2015). Developing mathematical thinking with scratch. In Design for teaching and learning in a networked world (pp. 17-27). Springer International Publishing.
  14. Cetin, I., & Dubinsky, E. (2017). Reflective abstraction in computational thinking. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 47, 70-80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2017.06.004
  15. Chang, K. (2017). A feasibility study on integrating computational thinking into school mathematics. School Mathematics, 19(3), 553-570.
  16. Choi-Koh, S. (2003). The effective use of a technology tool for students' mathematical exploration. Mathematics Education, 42(5), 647-672.
  17. Choi-Koh, S. (2005). Push the Excel if you want to do math. Seoul: Kyungmoonsa.
  18. Choi-Koh, S. (2018). Problem solving competence. Korean society of mathematical education yearbook 2017: Mathematical Competences and Capabilities in Korea Math Education(pp. 25-51). Seoul: Kyungmoonsa.
  19. Choi-Koh, S., Ko, H., Gu, N., Kim, N., Kim, R., Kim, H.,..., Han, S. (2015). Journal of Korea society educational studies in mathematics yearbook 2015: Technological tools in mathematics education. Seoul: Kyungmoonsa.
  20. Computer Science Teachers Association. (2017). CSTA K-12 Computer Science Standards, Revised 2017. Computer Science Teachers Association. Retrieved May 30, 2019 from http://www.csteachers.org/standards.
  21. Costa, E. J. F., Campos, L. M. R. S., & Guerrero, D. D. S. (2017, October). Computational thinking in mathematics education: A joint approach to encourage problem-solving ability. In 2017 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE). IEEE, Indianapolis, IN.
  22. DeJarnette, A. F. (2018). Students' conceptions of sine and cosine functions when representing periodic motion in a visual programming environment. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 49(4), 390-423. https://doi.org/10.5951/jresematheduc.49.4.0390
  23. diSessa, A. A. (2000). Changing minds: Computers, learning, and literacy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  24. diSessa, A. A. (2018). Computational literacy and "the big picture" concerning computers in mathematics education. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 20(1), 3-31. https://doi.org/10.1080/10986065.2018.1403544
  25. Falloon, G. (2016). An analysis of young students' thinking when completing basic coding tasks using Scratch Jnr. On the iPad. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 32(6), 576-593. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12155
  26. Gadanidis, G., Cendros, R., Floyd, L., & Namukasa, I. (2017). Computational thinking in mathematics teacher education. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 17(4), 458-477.
  27. Gadanidis, G., Clements, E., & Yiu, C. (2018). Group theory, computational thinking, and young mathematicians. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 20(1), 32-53. https://doi.org/10.1080/10986065.2018.1403542
  28. Garcia-Penalvo, F. J., & Mendes, J. A. (2018). Exploring the computational thinking effects in pre-university education. Computers in Human Behavior, 80, 407-411 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.12.005
  29. Gouws, L., Bradshaw, K., & Wentworth, P. (2013). Computational thinking in educational activities. In J. Carter, I. Utting & A. Clear (Eds.), The proceedings of the 18th Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education (pp. 10-15). Canterbury: ACM.
  30. Grover, S., & Pea, R. (2013). Computational thinking in K-12: A review of the state of the field. Educational Researcher, 42(1), 38-43. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X12463051
  31. Han, S. (2017). Play-based SW education teaching-learning strategy to improve computational thinking. Journal of Korea Association of Information Education, 21(6), 657-664. https://doi.org/10.14352/jkaie.21.6.657
  32. Hwang, Z., & Hwang, S. (2017). An analysis of research trends software education for elementary school: Focusing on domestic articles. Journal of Korea Association of Information Education, 21(5), 509-525. https://doi.org/10.14352/jkaie.21.5.509
  33. Jang, M. (2017). A study on technological pedagogical content knowledge of middle school mathematics teachers. Doctoral Dissertation, Chonnam National University.
  34. Jun, Y., & Yoon, J. (2016). Case exploration of a gifted student's spontaneous and creative project activities using NetLogo in a math-information combined class. The Journal of Science Education for the Gifted, 8, 145-166.
  35. Kafai, Y., & Burke, Q. (2013). Computer programming goes back to school. Phi Delta Kappan, 95(1), 61-65. https://doi.org/10.1177/003172171309500111
  36. Kang, T., Lee, S., & Choi-Koh, S. (2017). Development and implementation of the program for the free learning semester focused on career exploration. Mathematics Education, 56(2), 177-191.
  37. Ke, F. (2014). An implementation of design-based learning through creating educational computer games: A case study on mathematics learning during design and computing. Computers & Education, 73, 26-39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.12.010
  38. Kim, C. (2013). Design and application of math class with robot. Journal of Korea Association of Information Education, 17(1), 43-52.
  39. Kim, D., Bae, S., Kim, W., Lee, D., & Choi, S. (2014). Trends of mathematics education research and mixed methods - Focusing on domestic mathematics education journals for the last 10 years. Communications of Mathematical Education, 23(3), 303-320.
  40. Kim, H. (2015). A turtle microworld and computing thinking. Korea society educational studies in mathematics yearbook 2015: Technological tools in mathematics education (pp. 355-367). Seoul: Kyungmoonsa.
  41. Kim, N., Seo, Y., & Cho, H. (2018). Coding mathematics contents and environment design - Focusing on mathematization and computational thinking. Journal of Learner-Centered Curriculum and Instruction, 18, 647-673.
  42. Kim, S. U., & Kim, S. H. (2019). The effect of a robot-based education program on young children's logic-mathematical knowledge and creative problem-solving. The Journal of Future Early Childhood Education, 26(1), 209-229. https://doi.org/10.22155/JFECE.26.1.209.229
  43. Lee, Y. (2018). Domestic research trends analysis of software education. The Journal of Educational Information and Media, 24(2), 277-301.
  44. Lee, S., & Choi-Koh, S. (2018). The effects of the mathematical program, $DM^3$ based on coding instruction using Python. The Journal of Educational Research in Mathematics, 28(4), 479-499. https://doi.org/10.29275/jerm.2018.11.28.4.479
  45. Lee, D., & Jung, J. (2019). The effects of middle school mathematical statistics area and Python programming STEAM instruction on problem solving ability and curriculum interest. Journal of the Korea Academia-Industrial Cooperation Society, 20(4), 336-344. https://doi.org/10.5762/KAIS.2019.20.4.336
  46. Lee, Y., & Sung, H. (2017). Influence of program using the coding robot "Bee-Bot" on children's mathematical problem solving ability. Children's Media Study, 16(3), 261-281
  47. Lew, H., & Shin, D. (1998). Mathematics education and computer. Seoul: Kyungmoonsa.
  48. Lockwood, E., DeJarnette, A. F., & Thomas, M. (2019). Computing as a mathematical disciplinary practice. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2019.01.004
  49. Lye, S. Y., & Koh, J. H. L. (2014). Review on teaching and learning of computational thinking through programming: What is next for K-12?. Computers in Human Behavior, 41, 51-61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.09.012
  50. Ministry of Education (1992). The 6th reformed middle school curriculum. Seoul: The author.
  51. Ministry of Education (2015a). 2015 reformed mathematics curriculum 2015-74 [Supplementary Book 8]. Retrieved July 21, 2019 from http://www.moe.go.kr
  52. Ministry of Education (2015b). The plans for educating students for the SW-oriented society. Retrieved July 21, 2019 from http://www.moe.go.kr
  53. Ministry of Education (2016). The press materials about coding education in the elementary & secondary School. Retrieved July 21, 2019 from http://www.moe.go.kr
  54. National Research Council. (2010). Report of a workshop on the scope and nature of computational thinking. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
  55. Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms: Children, computers, and powerful ideas. New York, NY: Basic Books.
  56. Park, J., & Kang, M. (2015). Structural relationships among learners' characters, learning flow, and thinking ability in a Scratch programming course for elementary school students. The Journal of Elementary Education, 28(4), 145-170.
  57. Park, J., & Kim, C. (2010). The effects of robot based mathematics learning on learners' attitude and problem solving skills. The Journal of Korea Association of Computer Education, 13(5), 71-80. https://doi.org/10.32431/KACE.2010.13.5.006
  58. Park, M., Kim, D., Kim, J., Kim, H., Lee, B., Cho, Y., & Hong, J. (2018). An analysis on the effects of a tangible coding education program. The Journal of Korea Elementary Education, 29(4), 23-49. https://doi.org/10.20972/kjee.29.4.201812.23
  59. Park, M., Kim, J., & Kim, T. (2014). The effect of the RME-based algorithmic learning on elementary students' problem solving ability for improving computational thinking. Korean Journal of Teacher Education, 30(4), 179-193. https://doi.org/10.14333/KJTE.2014.30.4.179
  60. Pei, C., Weintrop, D., & Wilensky, U. (2018). Cultivating computational thinking practices and mathematical habits of mind in Lattice Land. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 20(1), 75-89. https://doi.org/10.1080/10986065.2018.1403543
  61. Perez, A. (2018). A Framework for computational thinking dispositions in mathematics education. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 49(4), 424-461. https://doi.org/10.5951/jresematheduc.49.4.0424
  62. Rim, H., Choi, I., & Noh, S. (2014). A study on the application of robotic programming to promote logical and critical thinking in mathematics education. Mathematics Education, 53(3), 413-434. https://doi.org/10.7468/mathedu.2014.53.3.413
  63. Sengupta, P., Kinnebrew, J. S., Basu, S., Biswas, G., & Clark, D. (2013). Integrating computational thinking with K-12 science education using agent-based computation: A theoretical framework. Education and Information Technologies, 18(2), 351-380. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-012-9240-x
  64. Shim, K., & Shim, S. (2018). Development of teaching method of mathematics subject with python coding - Focusing on the content of 'prime decomposition' in the middle school mathematics subject of 2015 revised curriculum. Educational Study, 73, 43-64.
  65. Shute, V. J., Sun, C., & Asbell-Clarke, J. (2017). Demystifying computational thinking. Educational Research Review, 22, 142-158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2017.09.003
  66. Sneider, C., Stephenson, C., Schafer, B., & Flick, L. (2014). Computational thinking in high school science classrooms. The Science Teacher, 81(5), 53.
  67. Son, H. (2011). A study on students' conjecturing of geometric properties in dynamic geometry environments using GSP. School Mathematics, 13(1), 107-125.
  68. Song, J. (2017). Effects of learning through Scratch-based game programming on students' interest in and perceived value of mathematics curriculum. Journal of Korea Association of Information Education, 21(2), 199-208. https://doi.org/10.14352/jkaie.21.2.199
  69. Stanic, G. M., & Kilpatrick, J. (1989). Historical perspectives on problem solving in the mathematical curriculum. In R. I. Charles, & E. A. Silver(Eds.) The Teaching and Assessing of Mathematical Problem Solving(pp. 1-22). Hillsdalc, NJ: Erlbaum
  70. Sung, W., Ahn, J., & Black, J. B. (2017). Introducing computational thinking to young learners: Practicing computational perspectives through embodiment in mathematics education. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 22(3), 443-463. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-017-9328-x
  71. Taylor, M., Harlow, A., & Forret, M. (2010). Using a computer programming environment and an interactive whiteboard to investigate some mathematical thinking. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 8, 561-570. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.12.078
  72. Trouche, L. (2004). Managing the complexity of human/machine interaction in a computerized learning environments: Guiding students' command process through instrumental orchestrations. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 9, 281-307. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-004-3468-5
  73. 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. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-015-9581-5
  74. White House (2016). FACT SHEET: President Obama announces computer science for all initiative. Retrieved May. 30, 2019 from https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2016/01/30/fact-sheet-president-obama-announces-computer-science-all-initiative-0
  75. Williams, S. R., & Leatham, K. R. (2017). Journal quality in mathematics education. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 48(4), 369-396. https://doi.org/10.5951/jresematheduc.48.4.0369
  76. Wing, J. M. (2006). Computational thinking. Communications of the ACM, 49(3), 33-35. https://doi.org/10.1145/1118178.1118215
  77. Wing, J. M. (2008). Computational thinking and thinking about computing. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 366, 3717-3725. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2008.0118
  78. Wing, J. M. (2014). Computational thinking benefits society. 40th Anniversary Blog of Social Issues in Computing, 2014. Retrieved May. 30, 2019 from http://socialissues.cs.toronto.edu/index.html%3Fp=279.html
  79. Wing, J. M. (2017). Computational thinking's influence on research and education for all. Italian Journal of Educational Technology, 25(2), 7-14.
  80. Wing, J. M., & Stanzione, D. (2016). Progress in computational thinking, and expanding the HPC community. Communications of the ACM, 59(7), 10-11. https://doi.org/10.1145/2933410
  81. Yadav, A., Mayfield, C., Zhou, N., Hambrusch, S., & Korb, J. T. (2014). Computational thinking in elementary and secondary teacher education. ACM Transactions on Computing Education, 14(1), 1-16.