Schlagwort: computing education

  • New free resources for young people to become independent digital makers

    New free resources for young people to become independent digital makers

    Reading Time: 5 minutes

    Our mission at the Raspberry Pi Foundation is to help learners get creative with technology and develop the skills and confidence they need to make things that matter to them using code and physical computing. One of the ways in which we do this is by offering learners a catalogue of more than 250 free digital making projects! Some of them have been translated into 30 languages, and they can be used with or without a Raspberry Pi computer.

    • Two girls code at a laptop.
    • A child codes at a desktop computer.

    Over the last 18 months, we’ve been developing an all-new format for these educational projects, designed to better support young people who want to learn coding, whether at home or in a coding club, on their digital making journey.

    An illustration of the 3-2-1 structure of the new Raspberry Pi Foundation coding project paths.
    Our new free learning content for young people who want to create with technology has a 3-2-1 structure (click the image to enlarge)

    Supporting learners to become independent tech creators

    In the design process of the new project format, we combined:

    • Leading research
    • Experience of what works in Code Clubs, CoderDojos, and our other programmes for young people
    • Feedback from you in the community!

    While designing the new format for our free projects, we found that, as well as support and opportunities to practise while acquiring new skills and knowledge, learners need a learning journey that lets them gradually develop and demonstrate increasing independence.

    • Smiling learners in a computing classroom
    • A young girl solders something at a worktop while a man looks over her shoulder.

    Therefore, each of our new learning paths is designed to scaffold learners’ success in the early stages, and then lets them build upon this learning by providing them with more open-ended tasks and inspirational ideas that learners can adapt or work from. Each learning path is made up of six projects, and the projects become less structured as learners progress along the path. This allows learners to practise their newly acquired skills and use their creativity and interests to make projects that matter to them. In this way, learners develop more and more independence, and when they reach the final project in the path, they are presented with a simple project brief. By this time they have the skills, practice, and confidence to meet this brief any way they choose!

    The four new paths we’re sharing with you today focus on the Scratch language (including a physical computing path!), with a Python and a web development path coming very soon, and even more learning content in development.

    Our new path structure for learning coding and digital making

    When a learner is ready to develop a new set of coding skills, they choose one of our new paths to embark on. Each path is made up of three different types of projects in a 3-2-1 structure:

    • The first three Explore projects introduce learners to a set of skills and knowledge, and provide step-by-step instructions to help learners develop initial confidence. Throughout these projects, learners have lots of opportunity to personalise and tinker with what they’re creating.
    • The next two Design projects are opportunities for learners to practise the skills they learned in the previous Explore projects, and to express themselves creatively. Learners are guided through creating their own version of a type of project (such as a musical instrument, an interactive pet, or a website to support a local event), and they are given code examples to choose, combine, and customise. No new skills are introduced in these projects, so that learners can focus on practising and on designing and creating a project based on their own preferences and interests.
    • In the final one Invent project, learners focus on completing a project to meet a project brief for a particular audience. The project brief is written so that they can meet it using the skills they’ve learned by following the path up to this point. Learners are provided with reference material, but are free to decide which skills to use. They need to plan their project and decide on the order to carry out tasks.

    As a result of working through a path, learners are empowered to make their own ideas and create solutions to situations they or their communities face, with increased independence. And in order to develop more skills, learners can work through more paths, giving them even more choice about what they create in the future.

    • A boy working on a Raspberry Pi robot buggy
    • At a Coolest Projects event, wo girls show off the digital making projects they've coded.

    More features for an augmented learning experience

    We’ve also introduced some new features to add interactivity, choice, and authenticity to each project in a path:

    • Real-world info box-outs provide interesting and relevant facts about the skills and knowledge being taught.
    • Design decision points allow learners to make choices about how their project looks and what it does, based on their preferences and interests.
    • Debugging tips throughout each project give learners guidance for finding and fixing common coding mistakes.
    • Project reflection steps solidify new knowledge and provide opportunities for mastery by letting learners revisit the important learnings from the project. Common misconceptions are highlighted, and learners are guided to the correct answer.
    • At the start of each project, learners can interact with example creations from the community, and at the end of a project, they are encouraged to share what they’ve made. Thus, learners can find inspiration in the creations of their peers and receive constructive feedback on their own projects.
    • An open-ended upgrade step at the end of each project offers inspiration for young people to give them ideas for ways in which they could continue to improve upon their project in the future.

    Access the new free learning content now

    You can discover our new paths on our projects site right now!

    We’ll be adding more content regularly, including completely new Python programming and web development paths coming very soon!

    As always, we’d love to know what you think: here’s a feedback form for you to share comments you have about our new content!

    For feedback specific to an individual project, you can use the feedback link in the footer of that project’s page as usual.

    Website: LINK

  • Delivering a culturally relevant computing curriculum: new guide for teachers

    Delivering a culturally relevant computing curriculum: new guide for teachers

    Reading Time: 7 minutes

    In computing education, designing equitable and authentic learning experiences requires a conscious effort to take into account the characteristics of all learners and their social environments. Doing this allows teachers to address topics that are relevant to a diverse range of learners. To support computing and computer science teachers with this work, we’re now sharing a practical guide document for culturally responsive teaching in schools.

    We need to make computing culturally relevant

    Making computing culturally relevant means that learners with a range of cultural identities will be able to identify with the examples chosen to illustrate computing concepts, to engage effectively with the teaching methods, and to feel empowered to use computing to address problems that are meaningful to them and their communities. This will enable a more diverse group of learners to feel that they belong in computing and encourage them to choose to continue with it as a discipline in qualifications and careers.

    Such an approach can empower all our students and support their skills and understanding of the integral role that computing can play in promoting social justice.

    Yota Dimitriadi, Associate Professor at the University of Reading, member of the project working group

    We introduced our work on this new document to you previously here on the blog. Check out the previous blog post to find out more about the project’s funding and background, and the external working group of teachers and academics we brought together to develop the guide.

    • Two teenage girls do coding activities at their laptops in a classroom.
    • Three teenage boys do coding at a shared computer during a computer science lesson.

    Some shared definitions

    To get the project off to the best start possible once we had assembled the working group, we first spent time drawing on research from the USA and discussing within the working group to come to a shared understanding of key terms:

    • Culture: A person’s knowledge, beliefs, and understanding of the world, which are affected by multiple personal characteristics, as well as social and economic factors.
    • Culturally relevant pedagogy: A framework for teaching that emphasises the importance of incorporating and valuing all learners’ knowledge, ways of learning, and heritage, and that promotes critical consciousness in teachers and learners.
    • Culturally responsive teaching: A range of teaching practices that draw on learners’ personal experiences and cultural identities to make learning more relevant to them, and that support the development of critical consciousness.
    • Social justice: The extent to which all members of society have a fair and equal chance to participate in all aspects of social life, develop to their full potential, contribute to society, and be treated as equals.
    • Equity: The extent to which different groups in society have access to particular activities or resources. To ensure that opportunities for access and participation are equal across different groups.
    • A young girl and boy do a Scratch coding activity together at a desktop computer.
    • Two teenage boys do coding at a shared computer during a computer science lesson.

    To bring in the voices of young people into the project, we asked teachers in the working group to consult with their learners to understand their perspectives on computing and how schools can engage more diverse groups of learners in elective computer science courses. The main reason that learners reported for being put off computing: complex or boring lessons of coding activities with a focus on theory rather than on practical outcomes. Many said that they were inspired by tasks such as producing their own games and suggested that early experiences in primary school and Key Stage 3 had been very important for their engagement in computing.

    Curriculum, teaching approaches, and learning materials

    The guide shows you that a culturally relevant pedagogy applies in three aspects of education, which we liken to a tree to indicate how these aspects connect to each other: the tree’s root system, the basis of culturally relevant pedagogy, is the focus of the curriculum; the tree’s trunk and branches are the teaching approaches taken to deliver the curriculum; the learning materials, represented by the tree’s crown of leaves, are the most widely visible aspect of computing lessons.

    A tree with the roots labeled 'curriculum, the trunk labeled 'teaching approaches', and the crown labeled 'learning materials'.

    Each aspect plays an important role in culturally relevant pedagogy:

    • Within the curriculum, it is important to think about the contexts in which computing concepts are taught, and about you make connections with issues that are meaningful to your learners
    • Equitable teaching approaches, such as open-ended, inquiry-led activities and discussion-based collaborative tasks, are key if you want to provide opportunities for all your learners to express their ideas and their identities through computing
    • Finally, inclusive representations of a range of cultures, and making learning materials accessible, are both of great importance to ensure that all your learners feel that computing is relevant to them

    You can download the guide on culturally relevant pedagogy for computing teachers now to explore the resources provided:

    • You’ll find a lot more information, practical tips, and links to resources to support you to implement culturally relevant pedagogy in all these aspects of your teaching
    • The document links to different available curricula, and we have highlighted materials we’ve created for the Teach Computing Curriculum that promote key aspects of the approach
    • We’ve also included links to academic papers and books if you want to learn more, as well as to videos and courses that you can use for professional development

    What was being part of the working group like?

    One of the teachers who was part of the working group is Joe Arday from Woodbridge High School in Essex, UK. Joe originally worked in the technology sector and has been teaching computing for ten years. We asked him about his experience of being part of the project and how he plans to use the guide in his own classroom practice:

    “It has been an absolute privilege to play a part in working towards producing the guide that my own children will be beneficiaries of when they are studying the computing curriculum throughout their education. I have been able to reflect on how to further improve my teaching practice and pedagogy to ensure that the curriculum taught is culturally diverse and caters for all learners that I teach. (Also, having the opportunity to work with academics from both the UK and US has made me think about becoming an academic in the field of computing at some point in the future!)”

    Computer science teacher Joe Arday.

    Joe also says: “I plan to review the computing curriculum taught in my computing department and sit down with my colleagues to work on how we can implement the guide in our units of work for Key Stages 3 to 5. The guide will also help my department to work towards one of my school’s aims to encourage an anti-racism community and curriculum in my school.“

    Continuing the work

    We hope you find this resource useful for your own practice, and for conversations within your school and network of fellow educators! Please spread the word about the guide to anyone in your circles who you think might benefit.

    We plan to keep working with learners on their perspectives on culturally relevant teaching, and to develop professional development opportunities for teachers, initially in conjunction with a small number of schools. As always with our research projects, we will investigate what works well and share all our findings widely and promptly.

    • A girl doing Scratch coding in a Code Club classroom
    • Two teenagers sit at laptops and do coding activities.

    Many thanks to the teachers and academics in the working group for being wonderful collaborators, to the learners who contributed their time and ideas, and to Hayley Leonard and Diana Kirby from our team for all the time and energy they devoted to this project!

    Working group

    Joseph Arday, FCCT, Woodbridge High School, Essex, UK

    Lynda Chinaka, University of Roehampton, UK

    Mike Deutsch, Kids Code Jeunesse, Canada

    Dr Yota Dimitriadi, University of Reading, UK

    Amir Fakhoury, St Anne’s Catholic School and Sixth Form College, Hampshire, UK

    Dr Samuel George, Ark St Alban’s Academy, West Midlands, UK

    Professor Joanna Goode, University of Oregon, USA

    Alain Ndabala, St George Catholic College, Hampshire, UK

    Vanessa Olsen-Dry, North Cambridge Academy, Cambridgeshire, UK

    Rohini Shah, Queens Park Community School, London, UK

    Neelu Vasishth, Hampton Court House, Surrey, UK

    Website: LINK

  • Educating young people in AI, machine learning, and data science: new seminar series

    Educating young people in AI, machine learning, and data science: new seminar series

    Reading Time: 6 minutes

    A recent Forbes article reported that over the last four years, the use of artificial intelligence (AI) tools in many business sectors has grown by 270%. AI has a history dating back to Alan Turing’s work in the 1940s, and we can define AI as the ability of a digital computer or computer-controlled robot to perform tasks commonly associated with intelligent beings.

    A woman explains a graph on a computer screen to two men.
    Recent advances in computing technology have accelerated the rate at which AI and data science tools are coming to be used.

    Four key areas of AI are machine learning, robotics, computer vision, and natural language processing. Other advances in computing technology mean we can now store and efficiently analyse colossal amounts of data (big data); consequently, data science was formed as an interdisciplinary field combining mathematics, statistics, and computer science. Data science is often presented as intertwined with machine learning, as data scientists commonly use machine learning techniques in their analysis.

    Venn diagram showing the overlaps between computer science, AI, machine learning, statistics, and data science.
    Computer science, AI, statistics, machine learning, and data science are overlapping fields. (Diagram from our forthcoming free online course about machine learning for educators)

    AI impacts everyone, so we need to teach young people about it

    AI and data science have recently received huge amounts of attention in the media, as machine learning systems are now used to make decisions in areas such as healthcare, finance, and employment. These AI technologies cause many ethical issues, for example as explored in the film Coded Bias. This film describes the fallout of researcher Joy Buolamwini’s discovery that facial recognition systems do not identify dark-skinned faces accurately, and her journey to push for the first-ever piece of legislation in the USA to govern against bias in the algorithms that impact our lives. Many other ethical issues concerning AI exist and, as highlighted by UNESCO’s examples of AI’s ethical dilemmas, they impact each and every one of us.

    Three female teenagers and a teacher use a computer together.
    We need to make sure that young people understand AI technologies and how they impact society and individuals.

    So how do such advances in technology impact the education of young people? In the UK, a recent Royal Society report on machine learning recommended that schools should “ensure that key concepts in machine learning are taught to those who will be users, developers, and citizens” — in other words, every child. The AI Roadmap published by the UK AI Council in 2020 declared that “a comprehensive programme aimed at all teachers and with a clear deadline for completion would enable every teacher confidently to get to grips with AI concepts in ways that are relevant to their own teaching.” As of yet, very few countries have incorporated any study of AI and data science in their school curricula or computing programmes of study.

    A teacher and a student work on a coding task at a laptop.
    Our seminar speakers will share findings on how teachers can help their learners get to grips with AI concepts.

    Partnering with The Alan Turing Institute for a new seminar series

    Here at the Raspberry Pi Foundation, AI, machine learning, and data science are important topics both in our learning resources for young people and educators, and in our programme of research. So we are delighted to announce that starting this autumn we are hosting six free, online seminars on the topic of AI, machine learning, and data science education, in partnership with The Alan Turing Institute.

    A woman teacher presents to an audience in a classroom.
    Everyone with an interest in computing education research is welcome at our seminars, from researchers to educators and students!

    The Alan Turing Institute is the UK’s national institute for data science and artificial intelligence and does pioneering work in data science research and education. The Institute conducts many different strands of research in this area and has a special interest group focused on data science education. As such, our partnership around the seminar series enables us to explore our mutual interest in the needs of young people relating to these technologies.

    This promises to be an outstanding series drawing from international experts who will share examples of pedagogic best practice […].

    Dr Matt Forshaw, The Alan Turing Institute

    Dr Matt Forshaw, National Skills Lead at The Alan Turing Institute and Senior Lecturer in Data Science at Newcastle University, says: “We are delighted to partner with the Raspberry Pi Foundation to bring you this seminar series on AI, machine learning, and data science. This promises to be an outstanding series drawing from international experts who will share examples of pedagogic best practice and cover critical topics in education, highlighting ethical, fair, and safe use of these emerging technologies.”

    Our free seminar series about AI, machine learning, and data science

    At our computing education research seminars, we hear from a range of experts in the field and build an international community of researchers, practitioners, and educators interested in this important area. Our new free series of seminars runs from September 2021 to February 2022, with some excellent and inspirational speakers:

    • Tues 7 September: Dr Mhairi Aitken from The Alan Turing Institute will share a talk about AI ethics, setting out key ethical principles and how they apply to AI before discussing the ways in which these relate to children and young people.
    • Tues 5 October: Professor Carsten Schulte, Yannik Fleischer, and Lukas Höper from Paderborn University in Germany will use a series of examples from their ProDaBi programme to explore whether and how AI and machine learning should be taught differently from other topics in the computer science curriculum at school. The speakers will suggest that these topics require a paradigm shift for some teachers, and that this shift has to do with the changed role of algorithms and data, and of the societal context.
    • Tues 3 November: Professor Matti Tedre and Dr Henriikka Vartiainen from the University of Eastern Finland will focus on machine learning in the school curriculum. Their talk will map the emerging trajectories in educational practice, theory, and technology related to teaching machine learning in K-12 education.
    • Tues 7 December: Professor Rose Luckin from University College London will be looking at the breadth of issues impacting the teaching and learning of AI.
    • Tues 11 January: We’re delighted that Dr Dave Touretzky and Dr Fred Martin (Carnegie Mellon University and University of Massachusetts Lowell, respectively) from the AI4K12 Initiative in the USA will present some of the key insights into AI that the researchers hope children will acquire, and how they see K-12 AI education evolving over the next few years.
    • Tues 1 February: Speaker to be confirmed

    How you can join our online seminars

    All seminars start at 17:00 UK time (18:00 Central European Time, 12 noon Eastern Time, 9:00 Pacific Time) and take place in an online format, with a presentation, breakout discussion groups, and a whole-group Q&A.

    Sign up now and we’ll send you the link to join on the day of each seminar — don’t forget to put the dates in your diary!

    In the meantime, you can explore some of our educational resources related to machine learning and data science:

    Website: LINK

  • Introducing the Raspberry Pi Computing Education Research Centre

    Introducing the Raspberry Pi Computing Education Research Centre

    Reading Time: 4 minutes

    I am delighted to announce the creation of the Raspberry Pi Computing Education Research Centre at the University of Cambridge.

    University of Cambridge logo

    With computers and digital technologies increasingly shaping all of our lives, it’s more important than ever that every young person, whatever their background or circumstances, has meaningful opportunities to learn about how computers work and how to create with them. That’s our mission at the Raspberry Pi Foundation.

    Woman computing teacher and young female student at a laptop.
    The Raspberry Pi Computing Education Research Centre will work with educators to translate its research into practice and effect positive change in learners’ lives.

    Why research matters

    Compared to subjects like mathematics, computing is a relatively new field and, while there are enduring principles and concepts, it’s a subject that’s changing all the time as the pace of innovation accelerates. If we’re honest, we just don’t know enough about what works in computing education, and there isn’t nearly enough investment in high-quality research.

    Two teenagers sit at laptops in a computing classroom.
    We need research to find the best ways of teaching young people how computers work and how to create with them.

    That’s why research and evidence has always been a priority for the Raspberry Pi Foundation, from rigorously evaluating our own programmes and running structured experiments to test what works in areas like gender balance in computing, to providing a platform for the world’s best computing education researchers to share their findings through our seminar series. 

    Through our research activities we hope to make a contribution to the field of computing education and, as an operating foundation working with tens of thousands of educators and millions of learners every year, we’re uniquely well-placed to translate that research into practice. You can read more about our research work here.

    The Raspberry Pi Computing Education Research Centre 

    The new Research Centre is a joint initiative between the University of Cambridge and the Raspberry Pi Foundation, and builds on our longstanding partnership with the Department of Computer Science and Technology. That partnership goes all the way back to 2008, to the creation of the Raspberry Pi Foundation and the invention of the Raspberry Pi computer. More recently, we have collaborated on Isaac Computer Science, an online platform that is already being used by more than 2500 teachers and 36,000 students of A level Computer Science in England, and that we will shortly expand to cover GCSE content.

    Woman computing teacher and female students at a computer.
    Computers and digital technologies shape our lives and society — how do we make sure young people have the skills to use them to solve problems?

    Through the Raspberry Pi Computing Education Research Centre, we want to increase understanding of what works in teaching and learning computing, with a particular focus on young people who come from backgrounds that are traditionally underrepresented in the field of computing or who experience educational disadvantage.

    The Research Centre will combine expertise from both institutions, undertaking rigorous original research and working directly with teachers and other educators to translate that research into practice and effect positive change in young peoples’ lives.

    The scope will be computing education — the teaching and learning of computing, computer science, digital making, and wider digital skills — for school-aged young people in primary and secondary education, colleges, and non-formal settings.

    We’re starting with three broad themes: 

    • Computing curricula, pedagogy, and assessment, including teacher professional development and the learning and teaching process
    • The role of non-formal learning in computing and digital making learning, including self-directed learning and extra-curricular programmes
    • Understanding and removing the barriers to computing education, including the factors that stand in the way of young people’s engagement and progression in computing education

    While we’re based in the UK and expect to run a number of research projects here, we are eager to establish collaborations with universities and researchers in other countries, including the USA and India. 

    Get involved

    We’re really excited about this next chapter in our research work, and doubly excited to be working with the brilliant team at the Department of Computer Science and Technology. 

    If you’d like to find out more or get involved in supporting the new Computing Education Research Centre, please subscribe to our research newsletter or email research@raspberrypi.org.

    You can also join our free monthly research seminars.

    Website: LINK

  • The digital divide: interactions between socioeconomic disadvantage and computing education

    The digital divide: interactions between socioeconomic disadvantage and computing education

    Reading Time: 6 minutes

    Digital technology is developing at pace, impacting us all. Most of us use screens and all kinds of computers much more than we did five years ago. The total number of apps downloaded globally each quarter has doubled since 2015, reflecting both increased smartphone penetration and the increasingly prominent role of apps in our lives. However, access to digital technology and the internet is not yet equal: there is still a ‘digital divide’, i.e. some people do not have as much access to digital technologies as others, if any at all.

    This month we welcomed Dr Hayley Leonard and Thom Kunkeler at our research seminar series, to present findings on ‘Why the digital divide does not stop at access: understanding the complex interactions between socioeconomic disadvantage and computing education’. Both Hayley and Thom work as researchers at the Raspberry Pi Foundation, where we have a focus on increasing our understanding of computing education for all. They shared some results of a research project they’d carried out with a group of young people who benefitted from our Learn at Home campaign.

    Digital inequality: beyond the dichotomy of access

    Hayley introduced some of the existing research and thinking around digital inequality, and Thom presented the results of their research project. Setting the scene, Hayley explained that the term ‘digital divide’ can create a dichotomous have/have-not view of the world, as can the concept of a ‘gap’. However, the research presents a more nuanced picture. Rather than describing digital inequality as purely centred on access to technology, some researchers characterise three levels of the digital divide:

    • Level 1: Access
    • Level 2: Skills (digital skills, internet skills) and uses (what you do once you have access)
    • Level 3: Outcomes (what you achieve)

    This characterisation is useful because it enables us to look beyond access and also towards what happens once people have access to technology. This is where our Learn At Home campaign came in.

    The presenters gave a brief overview of the impact of the campaign, in which the Raspberry Pi Foundation has partnered with 80 youth and community organisations and to date, thanks to generous donors, has given 5100 Raspberry Pi desktop computer kits (including monitors, headphones, etc.) to young people in the UK who didn’t have the resources to buy their own computers.

    Computing, identity, and self-efficacy

    As part of the Learn At Home campaign, Hayley and Thom conducted a pilot study of how young people from underserved communities feel about computing and their own digital skills. They interviewed and analysed responses of fifteen young people, who had received hardware through Learn At Home, about computing as a subject, their confidence with computing, stereotypes, and their future aspirations.

    Thom Kunkeler presents an online slide describing the background and research question of the 'Learn at Home campaign' pilot study: underrepresentation, belonging, identity, archetypes, and the question "How do young people from underserved communities feel about computing and their own digital skills?".
    Click on the image to enlarge it.

    The notion of a ‘computer person’ was used in the interview questions, following work conducted by Billy Wong at the University of Reading, which found that young people experienced a difference between being a ‘computer person’ and ‘doing computing’. The study carried out by Hayley and Thom largely supports this finding. Thom described two major themes that emerged from their analysis: a mismatch between computing and interviewees’ own identities, and low self-indicated self-efficacy.

    Showing that stereotypes still persist of what a ‘computer person’ is like, a 13-year-old female interviewee described them as “a bit smart. Very, very logical, because computers are very logical. Things like smart, clever, intelligent because computers are quite hard.” Four of the interviewees were also more likely to associate a ‘computer person’ with being male.

    Thom Kunkeler presents an online slide of findings of the 'Learn at Home campaign' pilot study. The young people interviewed associated the term 'computing person' with the attributes smart, clever, intelligent, nerdy/geeky, problem-solving ability.
    The young people interviewed associated a ‘computing person’ with the following characteristics: smart, clever, intelligent, nerdy/geeky, problem-solving ability. Click on the image to enlarge it.

    The majority of the young people in the study said that they could be this ’computer person’. Even for those who did not see themselves working with computers in the future, being a ’computer person’ was still a possibility: One interviewee said, “I feel like maybe I’m quite good at using a computer. I know my way around. Yes, you never know. I could be, eventually.”

    Five of the young people indicated relatively low self-efficacy in computing, and thought there were more barriers to becoming a computer person, for example needing to be better at mathematics. 

    In terms of future career goals, only two (White male) participants in the study considered computing as a career, with one (White female) interviewee understanding that choosing computing as a qualification might be important for her future career. This aligns with research into computer science (CS) qualification choice at age 14 in England, explored in a previous seminar, which highlighted the interaction between income, gender, and ethnicity: White girls from lower-income families were more likely to choose a CS qualification than White girls more from more affluent families, while very few Asian, Black, and Chinese girls from low-income backgrounds chose a CS qualification.

    Evaluating computing education opportunities using the CAPE framework

    An interesting aspect of this seminar was how Hayley and Thom situated their work in the relatively new CAPE framework, which describes different levels at which to evaluate computer science education opportunities. The CAPE framework highlights that capacity and access to computing (C and A in the framework) are only part of the challenge of making computer science education equitable; students’ participation (P) in and experience (E) of computing are key factors in keeping them engaged longer-term.

    A diagram illustrating the CAPE framework for assessing computing education opportunities according to four aspects. 1, capacity, which relates to availability of resources. 2, access, which relates to whether learners have the opportunity to engage in the subject. 3, participation, which relates to whether learners choose to engage with the subject. 4, experience, which relates to what the outcome of learners' participation is.
    Socioeconomic status (SES) can affect learner engagement with computing education at four levels set out in the CAPE framework.

    As we develop computing education in the curriculum, we can use the CAPE framework to evaluate our provision. For example, where I’m writing from in England, we have the capacity to teach computing through the availability of professional development training for teachers, fully developed curriculum materials such as the Teach Computing Curriculum, and community support for teachers through organisations such as Computing at School and the National Centre for Computing Education. In terms of access we have an established national curriculum in the subject, but access to it has been interrupted for many due to the coronavirus pandemic. In terms of participation we know that gender and economic status can impact whether young people choose computer science as an elective subject post-14, and taking an intersectional view reveals that the issue of participation is more complex than that. Finally, according to our seminar speakers, young people’s experience of computing education can be impacted by their digital or technological capital, by their self-efficacy, and by the relevance of the subject to their career aspirations and goals. This analysis really enhances our understanding of digital inequality, as it moves us away from the have/have-not language of the digital divide and starts to unpack the complexity of the impacting factors. 

    Although this was not covered in this month’s seminar, I also want to draw out that the CAPE framework also supports our understanding of global computing education: we may need to focus on capacity building in order to create a foundation for the other levels. Lots to think about! 

    If you’d like to find out more about this project, you can read the paper that relates to the research and the impact report of the early phases of the Learn At Home initiative. 

    If you missed the seminar, you can find the presentation slides on our seminars page and watch the recording of the researchers’ talk:

    [youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F8mfXaidhfQ?feature=oembed&w=500&h=281]

    Join our next seminar

    The next seminar will be the final one in the current series focused diversity and inclusion, which we’re co-hosting with the Royal Academy of Engineering. It will take place on Tuesday 13 July at 17:00–18:30 BST / 12:00–13:30 EDT / 9:00–10:30 PDT / 18:00–19:30 CEST, and we’ll welcome Prof Ron Eglash, a prominent researcher in the area of ethnocomputing. The title of Ron’s seminar is Computing for generative justice: decolonizing the circular economy.

    To join this free event, click below and sign up with your name and email address:

    We’ll email you the link and instructions. See you there!

    This was our 17th research seminar — you can find all the related blog posts here, and download the first volume of our seminar proceedings with contributions from previous guest speakers.

    Website: LINK

  • How do you use data to solve a real-world problem? | Hello World #16

    How do you use data to solve a real-world problem? | Hello World #16

    Reading Time: 6 minutes

    In our brand-new issue of Hello World magazine, editor Gemma Coleman speaks to Kate Farrell from Data Education in Schools to discuss the importance of teaching data to help students navigate the world.

    Cover of Hello World magazine issue 16.
    The big theme of issue 16 of Hello World is data science and data literacy, and on how to teach those topics to your students.

    When I was searching for contributors for this issue of Hello World, a pattern quickly began to emerge: “Data? You want to speak to Kate.” Kate Farrell is director of curriculum development and professional learning on the Data Education in Schools project, part of the Data-Driven Innovation Skills Gateway in Scotland. With the project developing teaching materials, professional development, and even qualifications for schools that want to teach data education to learners aged 3–18, “It’s not the kind of role that fits easily on a business card,” she laughs.

    Kate Farrell.
    Kate Farrell

    The project started in 2019, with the team looking at the Scottish curriculum and mapping out where data could be embedded and how it could be used to support various subjects. “We know that teachers are under stress and won’t be able to deliver extra stuff, so we’re looking to understand how we get better at doing data literacy within the rest of the curriculum,” Kate explains. “How do we provide and support opportunities to look at data in the rest of the curriculum in cool new ways?”

    “We like taking topics that you wouldn’t instantly think are about data science.”

    The team runs monthly seminars drawing upon this theme, to help teachers see its applicability across all subjects. “We like taking topics that you wouldn’t instantly think are about data science. Yes, the sciences, computer science, and maths are where you would expect it, but there are huge amounts of data and data use in geography, music, social studies, and even PE.”

    One example is the DataFit series of lessons for upper primary and lower secondary students, with a mission to simultaneously increase data literacy and physical activity literacy. This includes an introduction to activity-monitoring devices, such as step counters on phones. The lesson has the twin aims of teaching students how monitoring steps or sleep activity can be a positive thing, and also encouraging them to reflect on how they feel about their phone collecting their personal data.

    “A lot of students don’t realise their phone is keeping track of their step count, just by virtue of it sitting in their pockets,” Kate muses. “It’s been interesting to see just how little some learners know about the data that’s being kept and tracked about them.”

    Data Education in Schools ran a similarly themed workshop for students aged 10–11, with a series of events in an imagined Data Town being examined, to investigate how data can impact our lives. The day started by giving each student a cardboard mobile phone on which they could install apps in the form of stickers if they gave the town certain pieces of information about themselves, such as their favourite colour or football team. “Some kids would just install anything, give up any data, because they wanted the stickers – just like many kids will just download any app,” Kate explains. The apps and associated products then developed as they gathered more data, which was then presented back to the students. The purpose was to get students to reflect on how they felt about the products and how they used their data.

    “[…] a series of ‘aha’ moments for students, as they realised what sharing their data meant.”

    Later in the workshop, the mayor of Data Town announced that the town had sold the data to an advertising company who wanted to know people’s favourite colour, and to a gym who wanted to know their fitness data to help them decide the location of a new branch. “This meant a series of ‘aha’ moments for students, as they realised what sharing their data meant. Some of the kids who had opted not to collect the stickers were suddenly very smug!”

    The project keeps a balance in the story it tells about data, with teaching materials encompassing both the risks of data collection and the huge benefits it can bring. “That is our main aim: how can we help learners use data to make their lives and the lives of their communities better — data for social good.” In the Data Town workshop, students also chose to share data with hospitals and researchers, and later found that this had helped them to develop new medicines. “We didn’t just want to send across the message that sharing data is bad. Yes, you can share your data, but be aware who you’re sharing it with, who you’re trusting with it.”

    “How can we help learners use data to make their lives and the lives of their communities better?”

    The materials that Data Education in Schools has produced use a framework called PPDAC: Problem, Plan, Data, Analysis, and Conclusion. This is an established approach to statistical literacy, and using this data problem-solving cycle in a real-world context is a powerful way to engage learners with data topics. “The aim is to empower students with the tools to be campaigning, to be making real-world changes to their lives and their communities using data.”

    Kate gives a simple example of how a class could look at how much plastic their canteen is using, collecting the data on plastic products and then using that data to make the case to reduce their plastic consumption.

    The project has also worked with Scottish exam board SQA to develop a National Progression Award in Data Science; they believe it is the world’s first data science school qualification. The award is aimed at upper secondary students, colleges, and workplaces as an introductory qualification in data science. It carries the same ethos as their materials for younger learners: to help students understand how data is used in society, both negatively and positively, and develop skills to help them make better decisions.

    “We need learners to be able to look at the news, and their social media stream, and question what they’re looking at, or ask: where is the evidence?”

    “I want people to realise that although data science sounds scary, it’s so important to learners’ lives these days. We’ve seen it with the pandemic. Being able to interpret and analyse data is hugely important. We need learners to be able to look at the news, and their social media stream, and question what they’re looking at, or ask: where is the evidence? This is so important, whether or not they go on to become a data scientist… although we’d love it if they did!”

    Subscribe to Hello World for free

    Issue 16 of Hello World focuses on data science and data literacy; it is full of teaching ideas and inspiration to help you and your students use data to make decisions and to make sense of the world. Also in this issue:

    • Key digital skills for young people with SEND
    • Top tips and case studies on how to run a successful computing club
    • Reflections on decolonising the computing curriculum
    • And more

    Subscribe now to get each new digital issue straight to your inbox! And if you’re based in the UK and do paid or unpaid work in education, you can subscribe for free print issues.

    PS Have you listened to our Hello World podcast yet? Episode 4 has just come out, and it’s great! Listen and subscribe wherever you get your podcasts.

    Website: LINK

  • Physical programming for children with visual disabilities

    Physical programming for children with visual disabilities

    Reading Time: 7 minutes

    When Stack Overflow conducted a survey of 64,000 software engineers, it found that 1% of their respondents were blind — a far higher percentage than among the total population. Yet it is far from easy for young people with visual disabilities to engage in learning programming in school. In this month’s seminar, Dr Cecily Morrison of Microsoft Research Cambridge shared some of her work in this area. Her talk highlighted the difficulties that children learning to program face if they are blind or have low vision, and the affordances of physical programming tools, in particular Code Jumper.

    Cecily Morrison.
    Dr Cecily Morrison

    In her work as a Principal Researcher, Cecily focuses on designing inclusive experiences for people who are blind or have low vision, and she is leading the team that designed Code Jumper (known as Project Torino during its development). She is currently engaged in developing assistive agent technology in Project Tokyo, and she was recently awarded an MBE for her services to inclusive design.

    Block-based programming is inaccessible for children with visual disabilities

    Block-based programming has become the norm for primary school-aged children who are learning to program, and a variety of freely available environments exist, e.g. Scratch and Blockly. These tools have lots of advantages: discoverability of commands; no syntax errors; and live, imaginative visualisations. But how do you use Scratch if you are blind or have low vision and cannot see the screen?

    A girl with her Scratch coding project on a desktop computer.
    Block-based programming environments are commonly used to teach children about programming.

    There are tools that ‘read out’ code in blocks-based environments but — as we experienced in the seminar — their audio output may not readily facilitate understanding. Listening to one line of code at a time can be difficult, for example when trying to understand a loop (let alone a nested loop!). It puts significant demand on listeners’ memory, and children may lack the conceptual cognitive structures to process the audio information. In addition, using screen-based programming environments involves other challenges for blind children: they need to master touch typing, memorise keyboard shortcuts, and understand file systems.

    Project Torino to Code Jumper

    To address these challenges, Cecily’s team at Microsoft Research started to develop a physical programming tool for primary-aged learners, in a project known as Project Torino. The project started in 2015, and the tool was developed iteratively over the next four years. The team’s goal for this research project was always to generate a tool that is useful and available to all young learners who are blind or have low vision. Thus, in 2019 the research and technology was transferred to the American Printing House for the Blind, and the Project Torino tool was renamed Code Jumper.

    A boy creates a computer program using the Torino tool. There are several Torino pods attached to each other and the boy is using his hands to follow the sequence of the program as it runs.
    As learners listen to the physical programming tool’s program output, they can can follow the execution of the program using their hands.

    In the seminar Cecily described the iterative development of the physical programming tool. It consists of a number of physical pods, including a play pod, rest pod, loop pod, and selection pod. The young learner can feel the difference between the pods by touch and link them together in the right sequence to construct a program. They then use a central pod, known as the hub, to play an audio output of the program they have created. Using this tool they can code tunes, songs, and stories using ready-made sound sets or sounds that they record themselves.

    Dials on the pods allow learners to change the parameter values for each program statement, e.g. the number of times to loop. The parameters can also be changed programmatically through the insertion of ‘plugs’ into the dials. For example, a ‘random’ plug can get a random sound to play.

    A use case example is coding the song Row, row, row your boat, which is a common nursery rhyme in the UK and USA. By attaching different pods and using the dials, a learner can use a loop to play “row” three times, and then can add pods for the sounds for “your boat”. Constructing a program like this helps the young programmer learn about sequencing and loops.

    Several threads can be attached to the central hub, as in the image below, so that children can learn to use multi-threaded programming, as they can in block-based programming environments such as Scratch. The seminar recording below includes some examples of Code Jumper in action!

    A diagram of a multi-thread program built with Project Torino, and the equivalent code blocks program.
    Code Jumper supports multi-threaded programming.

    Five design principles

    Cecily described five design principles that her Microsoft Research team used while developing this physical programming tool:

    1. Persistent program behaviour — When you listen to a program one block/line at a time, it’s hard to get a sense of what it does. Therefore, an important requirement in the design process was that the tool should allow the user to experience the program as a whole. With Code Jumper, the young person can use their hands to follow the program as it executes.
    2. Liveness — This refers to the responsiveness of the tool. It was important to have instant feedback when programming: with Code Jumper, as soon as you touch one of the pods, you get a response.
    3. Low floor, high ceiling — This means the tool is accessible to absolute beginners, but it also offers the opportunity to write more complex programs and develop more advanced skills. 
    4. Works across visual abilities — The tool can be used by children with and without vision, and it was designed to be used by learners with multiple disabilities as well as those with low vision. 
    5. Enables progression — The tool can support learners moving from a physical language to a textual language, by enabling them to listen or read their code as they follow its execution.

    The ultimate aim of Code Jumper is to open career opportunities in technology.

    Evaluation of the tool

    As part of Cecily’s research project, her team undertook a nationwide trial to evaluate the effectiveness of Project Torino, with 75 children and 30 teachers. The trial involved a diverse group of students with a wide range of cognitive skills, and the teachers mostly didn’t have much computing experience.

    The team developed a curriculum and sent the teachers full course materials along with Torino kits and laptops. A validated instrument was used to measure engagement and motivation, along with teacher-reported learning outcomes.

    In the findings from the trial, all teachers (100%) said that they would like to continue using Torino. Students were also very engaged by the project. Students’ self-efficacy in coding grew substantially after exposure to Torino, with a change in the median score from 2 to 4 (of 5) and large effect size (r = -0.730).

    100% of teachers agreed or strongly agreed that they would like to use Torino to teach coding in the future. A table shows other results: The mean score for "I think Torino is a good tool for teaching coding for visually impaired children" was 4.9, for "I found some of the computing concepts hard to understand", it was 2.4, for "Teaching with Torino helped me to improve my own computing subject knowledge" it was 4.2 and for "The teacher guide was hard to follow" it was 1.7.
    Cecily presented findings from the Torino trial showing the teachers’ responses to the assessment questionnaire.

    Among the qualitative data the team collected, the teacher-reported outcomes included comments about the young people’s use of programming vocabulary (see our previous seminar on the importance of talk in learning to program), and how they improved their problem solving skills. Some teachers also commented on the fact that the physical computing tool generated an inclusive environment in the classroom, as it allowed sighted and non-sighted children to work together.

    Overall, our seminar audience found this a very interesting and engaging topic and had lots of questions for Cecily in the question-and-answer session. There is obviously much more to do to ensure that computing is accessible to all children, regardless of any disability or impairment. Research projects such as the one Cecily presented generate useful output in terms of tools for use in the classroom or home, and they also challenge us to think about all our learning materials and their accessibility.

    This paper contains more information about the trial. Download Cecily’s annotated slides here, and watch or listen to her presentation:

    [youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pOHA0uDELno?feature=oembed&w=500&h=281]

    Join our next seminar

    Between January and July 2021, we’re partnering with the Royal Academy of Engineering to host speakers from the UK and USA to give a series of research seminars focused on diversity and inclusion. By diversity, we mean any dimension that can be used to differentiate groups and people from one another. This might be, for example, age, gender, socio-economic status, disability, ethnicity, religion, nationality, or sexuality. The aim of inclusion is to embrace all people irrespective of difference.

    In our next research seminar on Tuesday 1 June at 17:00–18:30 BST / 12:00–13:30 EDT / 9:00–10:30 PDT / 18:00–19:30 CEST, we’ll welcome Dr Hayley Leonard and Thom Kunkeler from the Raspberry Pi Foundation team. They will be talking about ‘Why the digital divide does not stop at access: understanding the complex interactions between socioeconomic disadvantage and computing education’.

    To join this free event, click below and sign up with your name and email address:

    We’ll send you the link and instructions. See you there!

    You can now download the first volume of our seminar proceedings, with contributions from our previous guest speakers.

    Website: LINK

  • What makes an impact on gender balance in computing education? Answers from experts

    What makes an impact on gender balance in computing education? Answers from experts

    Reading Time: 6 minutes

    The latest event in the Raspberry Pi Foundation series of research seminars was our first panel discussion, with formal and non-formal learning opportunities in computing education and their impact on gender balance as its theme.

    The panel was chaired by Dr Yota Dimitriadi, Associate Professor of Computing at the University of Reading, who was joined by four expert speakers: Dr Jill Denner, Senior Research Scientist at ETR; Amali de Alwis MBE, Managing Director at Microsoft Startups and Founder of Code First: Girls; Pete Marshman FCCT, NCCE Computing Hub Leader at Park House School; and Carrie Anne Philbin MBE, Director of Educator Support here at the Raspberry Pi Foundation. The event opened with lightning talks from all speakers, followed by an interactive question-and-answer section. Our audience learned from a blend of research insights and lived experiences about practical ways to promote gender balance in both formal and non-formal computing education.

    A girl and boy in India learning at a computer

    Broadening the tech sector employee pool and empowering all students to see computing as a life-changing, fulfilling subject remains an enduring issue in many countries around the world. In England, the proportion of girls choosing formal qualifications in computer science is slowly increasing, and a number of initiatives support the uptake of computing as a career for girls and women. Nevertheless, much remains to be done in order to present computing as an appealing option for girls. In this blog post, I present three key themes which were covered during the panel session. You can find the recording of the event at the bottom of the post.

    Theme 1: Putting computing in context

    Students often describe computing as a very abstract, academic subject. Dr Jill Denner shared that research has shown a promising approach to altering this perception: connecting the content of computing lessons to people’s everyday lives. Learners’ need for contextual lessons was reiterated by Pete Marshman. In his teaching, Pete has observed that the very first lesson in Year 7 (11-year-olds) is crucial, because students form opinions about computing immediately. Pete devised a lesson that uses collaborative play and pixel art to introduce steganography, a cybersecurity technique for hiding data in plain sight within an ordinary file or message.

    Description of a computing lesson that uses collaborative play and pixel art to introduce steganography.
    Pete’s very first lesson for 11-year-old students gives them a real-world context for computing

    Computing education research has much more to uncover about how computing can be presented as a relevant subject in formal education. In this vein, Carrie Anne Philbin gave an overview of the Relevance strand of the ground-breaking Gender Balance in Computing research programme (co-led by the Foundation). The programme’s Relevance strand will explore the impact of linking computing to real-world problem-solving, working with Year 8 pupils in more than 180 secondary schools in England.

    Theme 2: Giving everyone a sense of belonging 

    A second theme that emerged during the panel discussion was to who belongs in computing, more specifically which groups self-identify as belonging in computing. Computing suffers from the perception of brilliance bias amongst students: they often feel that they need genius-like abilities in order to succeed with their computing studies, and that such abilities are most commonly exhibited by men. Amali de Alwis turned this concept upside down when she described the “human-centred design” of Code First: Girls courses. Women attending these courses learn from a volunteer with a group of peers and become part of a community where members support each other towards brilliance. Jill echoed this when she spoke about the need to challenge stereotypes, embed diversity in educational materials, and continue to educate teachers to create computing classrooms where girls feel that they belong.

    Four young women of colour code at computers
    You can find out more about embedding diversity in computing lessons from our past research seminar about equity-focused teaching.

    In the Belonging strand of the Gender Balance in Computing programme, the researchers will look closely at the attitudes of both boys and girls towards computing, and Carrie Annie explained that giving learners the chance to talk to female role models from the tech sector may cause a measurable shift in their attitudes to the subject. Pete highlighted practical steps that every school can take by using internal role models drawn from the student body to inspire other pupils and produce influential peer-to-peer interactions. As Jill remarked so succinctly, educators need “to tell all students they belong in computer science”.

    Theme 3: Presenting learners with role models and advocates

    Finally, we heard about the role that adult and course leader expectations play in shaping young people’s attitudes towards computing. Eccles’ expectancy-value theory suggests that when girls and women make choices about a subject (or career), they are influenced by the perceptions that others hold about that subject. If parents, teachers, and course leaders unconsciously discourage girls from considering computing, then girls will take notice of this. However, adults also have opportunities to underline that they see the value of computing, as for example a parent from Pete’s school did by accompanying a school trip to Google’s offices. In non-formal learning spaces, educators can share insights about their own approaches to problem-solving in computing, such as learning from others’ code on GitHub. Amali believes that sharing this type of common workplace practice shows that in the tech sector you are not expected to be able to solve every problem alone, which helps girls and women feel that they can succeed in a computing career.

    Young women in hijab smiles while holding up a laptop displaying code she has written
    For learners it’s very important to have role models, such as the inspiring young programmer Dalia Awad, who was a guest on our Digital Making at Home live stream recently.

    Final takeaways

    The drop-off in female participation in computing between formal education and the workplace has often been presented as a leaky pipeline. This deficit-based model suggests that solutions need to be aimed at fixing the leaks in the pipeline, such as providing interventions at specific stages when girls make decisions about formal qualifications or careers. An alternative viewpoint and important takeaway from the panel was this: as a community of educators and researchers, we need to focus our efforts on identifying the unconscious bias that exists in computing education, so that we can dismantle the barriers that this bias has created and ensure girls have access to equitable computing education at all stages of their learning.

    One male and two female teenagers at a computer

    During the question-and answer-session, Dr Yota Dimitriadi skillfully drew out and linked some key factors to encourage girls and women to flourish in computing. The audience heard about the need for advocates at all levels in schools to support careful and thoughtful timetabling of computing lessons. Questions about overcoming negative learning experiences and succeeding later in life elicited thoughts from the panel about how non-formal learning can break down learners’ preconceived ideas about computing and show that it’s never too late to learn.

    Watch the recording of the event here:

    [youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yxdEC_R2M2U?feature=oembed&w=500&h=281]

    More research is urgently needed

    A recent report from Engineering UK suggests that one possible impact of the coronavirus pandemic is a widening of the existing gender gap in young people’s engineering or technology career aspirations. That means the need to promote gender-equitable learning spaces in both formal and non-formal computing education is even more pressing now.

    Research to provide evidence-informed solutions will be absolutely crucial to shifting the gender balance in computing. The Raspberry Pi Foundation is a lead organisation in the Gender Balance in Computing research programme, funded by the Department for Education to identify scalable approaches to improving the gender balance in computing. We are currently recruiting primary and secondary schools in England to take part in trials starting in September 2021 and January 2022. Sign up or find information to share with your networks. 

    Next up in our free series

    In our next research seminar on Tuesday 1 June at 17:00–18:30 BST / 12:00–13:30 EDT / 9:00–10:30 PDT / 18:00–19:30 CEST, we’ll welcome Dr Hayley Leonard and Thom Kunkeler from the Raspberry Pi Foundation team. They will be talking about ‘Why the digital divide does not stop at access: understanding the complex interactions between socioeconomic disadvantage and computing education’. To join this free event, click below and sign up with your name and email address:

    We’ll send you the link and instructions. See you there!

    You can now download the first volume of our seminar proceedings, with contributions from our previous guest speakers.

    Website: LINK

  • The all-new Hello World podcast for educators interested in computing and digital making

    The all-new Hello World podcast for educators interested in computing and digital making

    Reading Time: 2 minutes

    There is growing momentum behind the idea of putting computing, computer science, and digital making at the heart of modern education. At the Raspberry Pi Foundation, we want to connect with and support computing educators, both inside and outside of the classroom. Hello World magazine, which we started in 2017, is a platform to help educators all over the world to find inspiration, share experiences, and learn from one another. Hello World is free and has proven to be very popular, with subscribers hailing from 172 countries across the globe!

    Hello World, coming directly to your ears now

    The Hello World community has told us that they’re hungry for more content while they wait for each new magazine issue. So to complement the magazine, we’ve launched a brand-new Hello World podcast to meet this need! That means you can now hear directly from the educators who are writing Hello World articles, dive a little deeper, and have some fun along the way.

    Guests Cat Lamin and Neil Rickus speaking to Hello World podcast hosts Carrie Anne Philbin and James Robinson about well-being and technology

    In season 1 of the Hello World podcast, you will:

    • Explore the importance of creativity and passion in computing with PBS Digital Innovator and CUE Rock Star Amanda Haughs
    • Dive into the role of ethics in computing with Isaac Computer Science content creator Diane Dowling
    • Discover how to look after our well-being while teaching with technology, with practical tips from computing educator Cat Lamin and senior lecturer in computing education at the University of Hertfordshire Neil Rickus
    • Get answers to the question “Are these the droids you’re looking for to teach algorithms?” with computing teacher Huzaifah Zainon and advanced skills computing teacher Nicki Cooper

    Listen and subscribe wherever you get your podcasts

    Start listening to our first episodes now, wherever you usually get your podcasts. And make sure to subscribe to never miss an episode!

    Let us know if you have a question or a topic you would like us to explore on the Hello World podcast. You can get even more involved by featuring as a guest on a future episode, sharing your top tips and best teaching practices with computing educators around the world. Get in touch with us at podcast@helloworld.cc with your suggestions! 

    Website: LINK

  • How can we design inclusive and accessible curricula for computer science?

    How can we design inclusive and accessible curricula for computer science?

    Reading Time: 7 minutes

    After a brief hiatus over the Easter period, we are excited to be back with our series of online research seminars focused on diversity and inclusion, where in partnership with the Royal Academy of Engineering, we host researchers from the UK and USA. By diversity, we mean any dimension that can be used to differentiate groups and people from one another. This might be, for example, age, gender, socio-economic status, disability, ethnicity, religion, nationality, or sexuality. The aim of inclusion is to embrace all people irrespective of difference.

    Maya Israel

    This month we welcomed Dr Maya Israel, who heads the Creative Technology Research Lab at the University of Florida. She spoke to us about designing inclusive learning experiences in computer science (CS) that cater for learners with a wide range of educational needs.

    Underrepresentation of computer science students with additional needs

    Maya introduced her work by explaining that the primary goal of her research is to “increase access to CS education for students with disabilities and others at risk for academic failure”. To illustrate this, she shared some preliminary findings (paper in preparation) from the analysis of data from one US school district.

    A computing classroom filled with learners.
    By designing activities that support students with additional educational needs, we can improve the understanding and proficiency of all of our students.

    Her results showed that only around 22–25% of elementary school students with additional needs (including students with learning disabilities, speech or language impairments, emotional disturbances, or learners on the autistic spectrum) accessed CS classes. Even more worryingly, by high school only 5–7% of students with additional needs accessed CS classes (for students on the autistic spectrum the decline in access was less steep, to around 12%).

    Maya made the important point that many educators and school leaders may ascribe this lack of representation to students’ disabilities being a barrier to success, rather than to the design of curricula and instruction methods being a barrier to these students accessing and succeeding in CS education.

    What barriers to inclusion are there for students with additional needs?

    Maya detailed the systems approach she uses in her work to think about external barriers to inclusion in CS education:

    • At the classroom level — such as teachers’ understanding of learner variability and instructional approaches
    • At the school level — perhaps CS classes clash with additional classes that the learner requires for extra support with other subjects
    • At the systemic level — whether the tools and curricula in use are accessible

    As an example, Maya pointed out that many of the programming platforms used in CS education are not fully accessible to all learners; each platform has unique accessibility issues.

    A venn diagram illustrating that the work to increase access to CS education for students with disabilities and others at risk for academic failure cannot occur if we do not examine barriers to inclusion in a systematic way. The venn diagram consists of four fully overlapping circles. The outermost is represents systemic barriers. The next one represents school-level barriers. The third one represents classroom barriers. The innermost one represents the resulting limited inclusion.

    This is not to say that students with additional needs have no internal barriers to succeeding in CS (these may include difficulties with understanding code, debugging, planning, and dealing with frustration). Maya told us about a study in which the researchers used the Collaborative Computing Observation Instrument (C-COI), which allows analysis of video footage recorded during collaborative programming exercises to identify student challenges and strategies. The study found various strategies for debugging and highlighted a particular need for supporting students in transitioning from a trial-and-error approach to more systematic testing. The C-COI has a lot of potential for understanding student-level barriers to learning, and it will also be able to give insight into the external barriers to inclusion.

    Pathways to inclusion

    Maya’s work has focused not only on identifying the problems with access, it also aims to develop solutions, which she terms pathways to inclusion. A standard approach to inclusion might involve designing curricula for the ‘average’ learner and then differentiating work for learners with additional needs. What is new and exciting about Maya’s approach is that it is based on the premise that there is no such person as an average learner, and rather that all learners have jagged profiles of strengths and weaknesses that contribute to their level of academic success.

    In the seminar, Maya described ways in which CS curricula can be designed to be flexible and take into account the variability of all learners. To do this, she has been using the Universal Design for Learning (UDL) approach, adapting it specifically for CS and testing it in the classroom.

    The three core concepts of Universal Design for Learning according to Maya Israel. 1, barriers exists in the learning environment. 2, variability is the norm, meaning learners have jagged learning profiles. 3, the goal is expert learning.

    Why is Universal Design for Learning useful?

    The UDL approach helps educators anticipate barriers to learning and plan activities to overcome them by focusing on providing different means of engagement, representation, and expression for learners in each lesson. Different types of activities are suggested to address each of these three areas. Maya and her team have adapted the general principles of UDL to a CS-specific context, providing teachers with clear checkpoints to consider when designing computing lessons; you can read more on this in this recent Hello World article.

    Two young children code in Scratch on a laptop.

    A practical UDL example Maya shared with us was using a series of scaffolded Scratch projects based on the ‘Use-Modify-Create’ approach. Students begin by playing and remixing code; then they try to debug the same program when it is not working; then they reconstruct code that has been deconstructed for the same program; and then finally, they try to expand the program to make the Scratch sprite do something of their choosing. All four Scratch project versions are available at the same time, so students can toggle between them as they learn. This helps them work more independently by reducing cognitive load and providing a range of scaffolded support.

    This example illustrates that, by designing activities that support students with additional educational needs, we can improve the understanding and proficiency of all of our students.

    Training teachers to support CS students with additional needs

    Maya identified three groups of teachers who can benefit from training in either UDL or in supporting students with additional needs in CS:

    1. Special Education teachers who have knowledge of instructional strategies for students with additional needs but little experience/subject knowledge of computing
    2. Computing teachers who have subject knowledge but little experience of Special Education strategies
    3. Teachers who are new to computing and have little experience of Special Education

    Maya and her team conducted research with all three of these teacher groups, where they provided professional development for the teachers with the aim to understand what elements of the training were most useful and important for teachers’ confidence and practice in supporting students with additional needs in CS. In this research project, they found that for the teachers, a key aspect of the training was having time to identify and discuss the barriers/challenges their students face, as well as potential strategies to overcome these. This process is a core element of the UDL approach, and may be very different to the standard method of planning lessons that teachers are used to.

    A teacher attending Picademy teacher training laughs as she works through an activity.
    Having time to identify and discuss the barriers/challenges students face, as well as potential strategies to overcome these, is key for teachers to design accessible curricula.

    Another study by Maya’s team showed that an understanding of UDL in the context of CS was a key predictor of teacher confidence in teaching CS to students with additional needs (along with the number years spent teaching CS, and general confidence in teaching CS). Maya therefore believes that focusing on teachers’ understanding of the UDL approach and how they can apply it in CS will be the most important part of their future professional development training.

    Final thoughts

    Maya talked to us about the importance of intersectionality in supporting students who are learning CS, which aligns with a previous seminar given by Jakita O. Thomas. Specifically, Maya identified that UDL should fit into a wider approach of Intersectional Inclusive Computer Science Education, which encompasses UDL, culturally relevant and sustaining pedagogy, and translanguaging pedagogy/multilingual education. We hope to learn more about this topic area in upcoming seminars in our current series.

    Four key takeaways from Maya Israel's research seminar: 1, include students with disabilities in K-12 CS education. They will succeed when given accessible, engaging activities. 2, consider goals, anticipated barriers, and the UDL principles when designing instructions for all learners. 3, disaggregate your data to see who is meeting instructional goals and who is not. 4, share successes of students with disabilities in CS education so we can start shifting the discourse to better inclusion.

    You can download Maya’s presentation slides now, and we’ll share the video recording of her seminar on the same page soon.

    Attend the next online research seminar

    The next seminar in the diversity and inclusion series will take place on Tuesday 4 May at 17:00–18:30 BST / 12:00–13:30 EDT / 9:00–10:30 PDT / 18:00–19:30 CEST. You’ll hear from Dr Cecily Morrison (Microsoft Research) about her research into computing for learners with visual impairments.

    To join this free event, click below and sign up with your name and email address:

    We’ll send you the link and instructions. See you there!

    This was our 15th research seminar — you can find all the related blog posts here.

    Website: LINK

  • Our new SIGCSE Special Project on culturally relevant resources for computing

    Our new SIGCSE Special Project on culturally relevant resources for computing

    Reading Time: 5 minutes

    Over the last 20 years, researchers and educators have increasingly aimed to develop computing curricula that are culturally responsive and relevant. Designing equitable and authentic learning experiences in computing requires conscious effort to take into account the characteristics of learners and their social environments, in order to address topics that are relevant to a diverse range of students. We previously discussed this topic in a research seminar where the invited speakers shared their work on equity-focused teaching of computer science in relation to race and ethnicity.

    Educator and student focussed on a computing task
    Designing equitable and authentic learning experiences in computing requires conscious effort.

    Culturally relevant teaching in the classroom demonstrates a teacher’s deliberate and explicit acknowledgment that they value all students and expect all students will excel. Much of the research on this topic stems from the USA. In the UK, it may be that a lack of cultural responsiveness in the computing curriculum is contributing to the underrepresentation of students from some ethnic backgrounds in formal computing qualifications [1] by negatively affecting the way these young people engage with and learn the subject.

    Guidelines for creating culturally relevant learning resources for computing

    Addressing this issue of underrepresentation is important to us, so we’re making it part of our work on diversity and inclusion in computing education. That’s why we’re delighted to have received an ACM SIGCSE Special Project Award for a project called ‘Developing criteria for K-12 learning resources in computer science that challenge stereotypes and promote diversity’. Our overarching aim for this project, as with all our work at the Raspberry Pi Foundation, is to broaden participation in computing and address the needs of diverse learners. Through this project, we will support computing educators in understanding culturally responsive pedagogy and how to apply it to their own practice. To this end, we’ve set up a working group that will use research into culturally responsive pedagogy to develop a set of guidelines for creating culturally relevant learning resources for computing. Our primary audience for these guidelines are teachers in the UK, but we are confident the project’s results will have value and application all over the world.

    There is increasing awareness across all education, and in computing education in particular, that culturally responsive approaches to curriculum and teaching fosters relevancy, interest, and engagement for student learners. This exciting effort brings together computing classroom teachers and education researchers to identify approaches and resources that England’s educators can leverage to enact culturally responsive approaches to teaching computing.

    Joanna Goode, Sommerville Knight Professor at the University of Oregon, member of our Special Project working group

    What do we mean by culturally relevant resources?

    A learning resource obviously has learning objectives, but it is also always set in a particular context, which may or may not be relevant to young people. It may contain images, video, and other media assets in addition to text. Presenting computing stereotypes, for example in the media assets and language used, or situating resources in an unfamiliar context can cause learners to feel that they do not belong in the subject or that it is not relevant to them and their life. On the other hand, providing resources that allow learners to relate what they are learning to issues or tasks that are personally meaningful to them and/or their culture or community can be empowering and engaging for them. For example, a common scenario used to introduce basic algorithm design to young people is making a cup of tea, but tea preparation and drinking may be culturally specific, and even if tea is drunk in a young person’s home, tea preparation may not be an activity they engage in.

    A matcha tea preparation
    Preparing a cup of tea — a scenario often used for introducing learners to algorithm design — can be culturally specific: compare matcha and builder’s tea.

    Ensuring that a more diverse group of young people feel like they belong in computing

    The expected long-term outcome of this project is to remove significant obstacles to young people’s participation in computing by ensuring that a more diverse group of young people feel represented and like they belong in the subject. The working group we have established consists of seven practising computing teachers from a diverse range of UK schools and a panel of four experts and academics (Lynda Chinaka, Mike Deutsch, Joanna Goode, and Yota Dimitriadi) working with young people and their teachers in the UK, USA, and Canada.

    A teacher aids children in the classroom
    We will support computing educators in understanding culturally responsive pedagogy and how to apply it to their own practice.

    Yota Dimitriadi, Associate Professor at the University of Reading and a member of the expert panel, says: “I am delighted to participate in this project that enables conversations and positive action around inclusive and intersectional computing practices. It is more important than ever to enhance a global perspective in our curriculum planning and further our understanding of culturally responsive pedagogies; such an approach can empower all our students and support their skills and understanding of the integral role that computing can play in promoting social justice.”

    Such an approach can empower all our students and support their skills and understanding of the integral role that computing can play in promoting social justice.

    Yota Dimitriadi, Associate Professor at the University of Reading, member of our Special Project working group

    The group has started to meet and discuss the guidelines, and we aim to share early findings and outputs in the summer months. We’re very excited about this project, and we think it is an important starting point for other work. We look forward to updating you in the summer!

    [1] Students of Black, non-Chinese Asian, and Mixed ethnicities; Kemp, P.E.J., Berry, M.G., & Wong, B. (2018). The Roehampton Annual Computing Education Report: Data from 2017. University of Roehampton, London.

    Website: LINK

  • Expanding our free Isaac Computer Science platform with new GCSE content

    Expanding our free Isaac Computer Science platform with new GCSE content

    Reading Time: 4 minutes

    We are delighted to announce that we’re expanding our free Isaac Computer Science online learning platform in response to overwhelming demand from teachers and students for us to cover GCSE content.

    Woman teacher and female students at a computer

    Thanks to our contract with England’s Department for Education which is funding our work as part of the National Centre for Computing Education (NCCE) consortium, we’ve been able to collaborate with the University of Cambridge’s Department of Computer Science and Technology to build the Isaac Computer Science platform, and to create an events programme, for A level students and teachers. Now we will use this existing funding to also provide content and events for learning and teaching GCSE computer science.

    Building on our success

    With content designed by our expert team of computer science teachers and researchers, the Isaac Computer Science platform is already being used by 2000 teachers and 18,000 students at A level. The platform houses a rich set of interactive study materials and reflective questions, providing full coverage of exam specifications. 

    Within the Teach Computing Curriculum we built as part of our NCCE work, we’ve already created free classroom resources to support teachers with the delivery of GCSE computer science (as well as the rest of the English computing curriculum from Key Stages 1 to 4). Expanding the Isaac Computer Science platform to offer interactive learning content to GCSE students, and running events specifically for GCSE students, will perfectly complement the Teach Computing Curriculum and support learners to continue their computing education beyond GCSE.

    One male and two female teenagers at a computer

    We’ll use our tried and tested process of content design, implementation of student and teacher feedback, and continual improvements based on evidence from platform usage data, to produce an educational offering for GCSE computer science that is of the highest quality.

    What will Isaac Computer Science GCSE cover?

    Isaac Computer Science GCSE will support students and teachers of GCSE computer science across the OCR, AQA, Eduqas and WJEC exam bodies, covering the whole of the national curriculum. The content will be aimed at ages 14 to 16, and it will be suitable for students of all experience levels and backgrounds — from those who have studied little computer science at Key Stage 3 and are simply interested, to those who are already set to pursue a career related to computer science.

    Benefits for students and teachers

    Students will be able to:

    • Use the platform for structured, self-paced study and progress tracking
    • Prepare for their GCSE examinations according to their exam body
    • Get instant feedback from the interactive questions to guide further study
    • Explore areas of interest more deeply

    Teachers will be able to:

    • Use the content and examples on the platform as the basis for classroom work
    • Direct their students to topics to read as homework
    • Set self-marking questions as homework or in the classroom as formative assessment to identify areas where additional support is required and track students’ progress

    Free events for learning, training, and inspiration

    As part of Isaac Computer Science GCSE, we’ll also organise an events programme for GCSE students to get support with specific topics, as well as inspiration about opportunities to continue their computer science education beyond GCSE into A level and higher education or employment.

    Male teacher and male students at a computer

    For teachers, we’ll continue to provide a wide spectrum of free CPD training events and courses through the National Centre for Computing Education.

    Accessible all over the world

    As is the case for the Isaac Computer Science A level content, we’ll create content for this project to suit the English national curriculum and exam bodies. However, anyone anywhere in the world will be able to access and use the platform for free. The content will be published under an Open Government License v3.0.

    When does Isaac Computer Science GCSE launch, and can I get involved now?

    Our launch will be in January of 2022, with the full suite of content available by September of 2022.

    We’ll be putting out calls to the teaching community in England, asking for your help to guide the design and quality assurance of the Isaac Computer Science GCSE materials.

    Follow Isaac Computer Science on social media and sign up on the Isaac Computer Science platform to be the first to hear news!

    Website: LINK

  • Engaging Black girls in STEM learning through game design

    Engaging Black girls in STEM learning through game design

    Reading Time: 6 minutes

    Today is International Women’s Day, giving us the perfect opportunity to highlight a research project focusing on Black girls learning computing.

    Two black girls sitting against an outside wall while working on a laptop

    Between January and July 2021, we’re partnering with the Royal Academy of Engineering to host speakers from the UK and USA to give a series of research seminars focused on diversity and inclusion. By diversity, we mean any dimension that can be used to differentiate groups and people from one another. This might be, for example, age, gender, socio-economic status, disability, ethnicity, religion, nationality, or sexuality. The aim of inclusion is to embrace all people irrespective of difference. In this blog post, I discuss the third research seminar in this series.

    Dr Jakita O. Thomas
    Dr Jakita O. Thomas

    This month we were delighted to hear from Dr Jakita O. Thomas from Auburn University and BlackComputHer, who talked to us about a seven-year qualitative study she conducted with a group of Black girls learning game design. Jakita is an Associate Professor of Computer Science and Software Engineering at Auburn University in Alabama, and Director of the CUlturally and SOcially Relevant (CURSOR) Computing Lab.

    The SCAT programme

    The Supporting Computational Algorithmic Thinking (SCAT) programme started in 2013 and was originally funded for three years. It was a free enrichment programme exploring how Black middle-school girls develop computational algorithmic thinking skills over time in the context of game design. After three years the funding was extended, giving Jakita and her colleagues the opportunity to continue the intervention with the same group of girls from middle school through to high school graduation (7 years in total). 23 students were recruited onto the programme and retention was extremely high.

    Dr Jakita Thomas presents a slide: "Problem context: Black women and girls are rarely construed as producers of computer science knowledge in US schools and society. Design, learning, identity and teaching are inextricably linked and should come together and promoto robust experiences for participation in a global world. Black girls in STEM+C environments are rarely served in such ways. Some scholars suggest that STEM is simply a neoliberal project. When we put that view in conversation with Black girls in and informal learning environment design to promote Black female excellence, a more nuanced and complex perspective emerges."
    Click to enlarge

    The SCAT programme ran throughout each academic year and also involved a summer camp element. The programme included three types of activities: the two-week summer camp, twelve monthly workshops, and field trips, all focused on game design. The instructors on the programme were all Black women, either with or working towards doctorates in computer science, serving as role models to the girls.

    The theoretical basis of the programme drew on a combination of:

    • Cognitive apprenticeship, i.e. learning from others with expertise in a particular field
    • Black Feminist Thought (based on the work of Patricia Hill Collins) as a foundation for valuing Black girls’ knowledge and lived experience as expertise they bring to their learning environment
    • Intersectionality, i.e. considering the intersection of multiple characteristics, e.g. race and gender

    This context highlights that interventions to increase diversity in STEM or computing tend to support mainly white girls or Black and other ethnic minority boys, marginalising Black girls.

    Why game design?

    Game design was selected as a topic because it is popular with all young people as consumers. According to research Jakita drew on, over 94% of girls in the US aged 12 to 17 play video games, with little differences relating to race or socioeconomic status. However, game design is an industry in which African American women are under-represented. Women represent only 10 to 12% of the game design workforce, and less than 5% of the workforce are African American or Latino people of any gender. Therefore Jakita and her colleagues saw it as an ideal domain to work in with the girls.

    Dr Jakita Thomas presents a slide: Game design cycle: brainstorming, storyboarding, physical prototyping, design document, software prototyping, implementation, quality assurance / maintenance"
    Click to enlarge

    Another reason for selecting game design as a topic was that it gave the students (the programme calls them scholars) the opportunity to design and create their own artefacts. This allowed the participants to select topics for games that really mattered to them, which Jakita suggested might be related to their own identity, and issues of equity and social justice. This aligns completely with the thoughts expressed by the speakers at our February seminar.

    What was learned through SCAT?

    Jakita explained that her findings suggest that the ways in which the SCAT programme was intentionally designed to offer Black girls opportunities to radically shape their identities as producers, innovators and disruptors of deficit perspectives. Deficit perspectives are ones that include implicit assumptions that privilege the values, beliefs, and practices of one group over another. Deficit thinking was a theme in our February seminar with Prof Tia Madkins, Dr Nicol R Howard, and Shomari Jones, and it was interesting to hear more about this. 

    Data sources of the project included analysis of online journal data and end of season questionnaires across the first three years of SCAT, which provided insights into the participants’ perceptions and feelings about their SCAT experience, their understanding of computational algorithmic thinking, their perceptions of themselves as game designers, and the application of concepts learned within SCAT to other areas of their lives outside of SCAT.

    In the first three years of the programme, the number of participants who saw game design as a viable hobby went from 0% to 23% to 45%. Other analysis Jakita and her colleagues performed was qualitative and identified as one theme that the participants wanted to ‘find meaning and relevance in altruism’. The researchers found that the participants started to reflect on their own narrative and identity through the programme. One girl on the programme said:

    “At the beginning of SCAT, I didn’t understand why I was there. Then I thought about what I was doing. I was an African American girl learning how to properly learn game design. As I grew over the years in game designing, I gained a strong liking. The SCAT program has gifted me with a new hobby that most women don’t have, and for that I am grateful.”

    – SCAT scholar (participant)

    Jakita explained that the girls on the programme had formed a sisterhood, in that they came to know each other well and formed a strong and supportive community. In addition, what I found remarkable was the long-term impact of this programme: 22 out of the 23 young women that took part in the programme are now enrolled on STEM degree courses.

    Dr Jakita Thomas presents a slide: "Conclusions and points of discussion: STEM learning for whom and to what ends is a complex narrative when centering Black girls because of the intersectional politics of their histories and STEM education opportunities. SCAT serves as a counter-space for STEM learning. Black girls should be positioned as producers of knowledge in STEM. Black girls need to have not only opportunities to acquire and develop STEM skills, capabilities and practices, but they also need time to reflect on those opportunities and experiences and assess whether and how STEM connects to their own interests, goals and aspirations (at least 12 months). It is imperative that learning scientists think from an intersectional perspective when considering how to design STEM learning environments for Black girls."
    Jakita’s final slide, stimulating a great Q&A session (click to enlarge)

    What next?

    Read the paper on which Jakita’s seminar was based, download the presentation slides, and watch the video recording:

    [youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WvjeDB5mAvo?feature=oembed&w=500&h=281]

    This research intervention obviously represents a very small sample, as is often the case with rich, qualitative studies, but there is much we can learn from it, and still much more to be done. In the UK, we do not have any ongoing or previously published research studies that look at intersectionality and computing education, and conducting similar research would be valuable. Jakita and her colleagues worked in the non-formal space, providing opportunities outside the formal curriculum, but throughout the academic year. We need to understand better the affordances of non-formal and formal learning for supporting engagement of learners from underrepresented groups in computing, perhaps particularly in England, where a mandatory computing curriculum from age 5 has been in place since 2014.

    Next up in our free series

    This was our 14th research seminar! You can find all the related blog posts on this page.

    Next we’ve got three online events coming up in quick succession! In our seminar on Tuesday 20 April at 17:00–18:30 BST / 12:00–13:30 EDT / 9:00–10:30 PDT / 18:00–19:30 CEST, we’ll welcome Maya Israel from the University of Florida, who will be talking about Universal Design for Learning and computing. On Monday 26 April, we will be hosting a panel discussion on gender balance in computing. And at the seminar on Tuesday 2 May, we will be hearing from Dr Cecily Morrison (Microsoft Research) about computing and learners with visual disabilities.

    To join any of these free events, click below and sign up with your name and email address:

    We’ll send you the link and instructions. See you there!

    Website: LINK

  • Universal design for learning in computing | Hello World #15

    Universal design for learning in computing | Hello World #15

    Reading Time: 7 minutes

    In our brand-new issue of Hello World magazine, Hayley Leonard from our team gives a primer on how computing educators can apply the Universal Design for Learning framework in their lessons.

    Cover of issue 15 of Hello World magazine

    Universal Design for Learning (UDL) is a framework for considering how tools and resources can be used to reduce barriers and support all learners. Based on findings from neuroscience, it has been developed over the last 30 years by the Center for Applied Special Technology (CAST), a nonprofit education research and development organisation based in the US. UDL is currently used across the globe, with research showing it can be an efficient approach for designing flexible learning environments and accessible content.

    A computing classroom populated by students with diverse genders and ethnicities

    Engaging a wider range of learners is an important issue in computer science, which is often not chosen as an optional subject by girls and those from some minority ethnic groups. Researchers at the Creative Technology Research Lab in the US have been investigating how UDL principles can be applied to computer science, to improve learning and engagement for all students. They have adapted the UDL guidelines to a computer science education context and begun to explore how teachers use the framework in their own practice. The hope is that understanding and adapting how the subject is taught could help to increase the representation of all groups in computing.

    The UDL guidelines help educators anticipate barriers to learning and plan activities to overcome them.

    A scientific approach

    The UDL framework is based on neuroscientific evidence which highlights how different areas or networks in the brain work together to process information during learning. Importantly, there is variation across individuals in how each of these networks functions and how they interact with each other. This means that a traditional approach to teaching, in which a main task is differentiated for certain students with special educational needs, may miss out on the variation in learning between all students across different tasks.

    A stylised representation of the human brain
    The UDL framework is based on neuroscientific evidence

    The UDL guidelines highlight different opportunities to take learner differences into account when planning lessons. The framework is structured according to three main principles, which are directly related to three networks in the brain that play a central role in learning. It encourages educators to plan multiple, flexible methods of engagement in learning (affective networks), representation of the teaching materials (recognition networks), and opportunities for action and expression of what has been learnt (strategic networks).

    The three principles of UDL are each expanded into guidelines and checkpoints that allow educators to identify the different methods of engagement, representation, and expression to be used in a particular lesson. Each principle is also broken down into activities that allow learners to access the learning goals, remain engaged and build on their learning, and begin to internalise the approaches to learning so that they are empowered for the future.

    Examples of UDL guidelines for computer science education from the Creative Technology Research Lab

    Multiple means of engagement Multiple means of representation Multiple means of
    action and expression
    Provide options for recruiting interests
    * Give students choice (software, project, topic)
    * Allow students to make projects relevant to culture and age    		 Provide options for perception
    * Model computing through physical representations as well as through interactive whiteboard/videos etc.
    * Select coding apps and websites that allow adjustment of visual settings (e.g. font size/contrast) and that are compatible with screen readers    		 Provide options for physical action
    * Include CS unplugged activities that show physical relationships of abstract computing concepts
    * Use assistive technology, including a larger or smaller mouse or touchscreen devices
    Provide options for sustaining effort and persistence
    * Utilise pair programming and group work with clearly defined roles
    * Discuss the integral role of perseverance and problem-solving in computer science    		 Provide options for language, mathematical expressions, and symbols
    * Teach and review computing vocabulary (e.g. code, animations, algorithms)
    * Provide reference sheets with images of blocks, or with common syntax when using text    		 Provide options for expression and communication
    * Provide sentence starters or checklists for communicating in order to collaborate, give feedback, and explain work
    * Provide options that include starter code
    Provide options for self-regulation
    * Break up coding activities with opportunities for reflection, such as ‘turn and talk’ or written questions
    * Model different strategies for dealing with frustration appropriately    		 Provide options for comprehension
    * Encourage students to ask questions as comprehension checkpoints
    * Use relevant analogies and make cross-curricular connections explicit    		 Provide options for executive function
    * Embed prompts to stop and plan, test, or debug throughout a lesson or project
    * Demonstrate debugging with think-alouds

    Each principle of the UDL framework is associated with three areas of activity which may be considered when planning lessons or units of work. It will not be the case that each area of activity should be covered in every lesson, and some may prove more important in particular contexts than others. The full table and explanation can be found on the Creative Technology Research Lab website at ctrl.education.ufl.edu/projects/tactic.

    Applying UDL to computer science education

    While an advantage of UDL is that the principles can be applied across different subjects, it is important to think carefully about what activities to address these principles could look like in the case of computer science.

    Maya Israel
    Researcher Maya Israel will speak at our April seminar

    Researchers at the Creative Technology Research Lab, led by Maya Israel, have identified key activities, some of which are presented in the table on the previous page. These guidelines will help educators anticipate potential barriers to learning and plan activities that can overcome them, or adapt activities from those in existing schemes of work, to help engage the widest possible range of students in the lesson.

    UDL in the classroom

    As well as suggesting approaches to applying UDL to computer science education, the research team at the Creative Technology Research Lab has also investigated how teachers are using UDL in practice. Israel and colleagues worked with four novice computer science teachers in US elementary schools to train them in the use of UDL and understand how they applied the framework in their teaching.

    Smiling learners in a computing classroom

    The research found that the teachers were most likely to include in their teaching multiple means of engagement, followed by multiple methods of representation. For example, they all offered choice in their students’ activities and provided materials in different formats (such as oral and visual presentations and demonstrations). They were less likely to provide multiple means of action and expression, and mainly addressed this principle through supporting students in planning work and checking their progress against their goals.

    Although the study included only four teachers, it highlighted the flexibility of the UDL approach in catering for different needs within variable teaching contexts. More research will be needed in future, with larger samples, to understand how successful the approach is in helping a wide range of students to achieve good learning outcomes.

    Find out more about using UDL

    There are numerous resources designed to help teachers learn more about the UDL framework and how to apply it to teaching computing. The CAST website (helloworld.cc/cast) includes an explainer video and the detailed UDL guidelines. The Creative Technology Research Lab website has computing-specific ideas and lesson plans using UDL (helloworld.cc/udl).

    Maya Israel will be presenting her research at our computing education research seminar series, on 20 April 2021. Our seminars are free to attend and open to anyone from anywhere around the world. Find out more about the current seminar series, which focuses on diversity and inclusion in computing education.

    Further reading on UDL

    Subscribe to Hello World for free

    In issue 15 of Hello World, we hear from five teachers who have made the switch to computing from another subject. They tell us about the challenges they have faced, as well as the joys of teaching young people how to create new things with technology. All this and much, much more in the new issue!

    Educators based in the UK can subscribe to receive print copies for free!

    Website: LINK

  • What does equity-focused teaching mean in computer science education?

    What does equity-focused teaching mean in computer science education?

    Reading Time: 6 minutes

    Today, I discuss the second research seminar in our series of six free online research seminars focused on diversity and inclusion in computing education, where we host researchers from the UK and USA together with the Royal Academy of Engineering. By diversity, we mean any dimension that can be used to differentiate groups and people from one another. This might be, for example, age, gender, socio-economic status, disability, ethnicity, religion, nationality, or sexuality. The aim of inclusion is to embrace all people irrespective of difference. 

    In this seminar, we were delighted to hear from Prof Tia Madkins (University of Texas at Austin), Dr Nicol R. Howard (University of Redlands), and Shomari Jones (Bellevue School District) (find their bios here), who talked to us about culturally responsive pedagogy and equity-focused teaching in K-12 Computer Science.

    • Tia Madkins
      Prof Tia Madkins
    • Nicol Howard
      Dr Nicol R. Howard
    • Shomari Jones
      Shomari Jones

    Equity-focused computer science teaching

    Tia began the seminar with an audience-engaging task: she asked all participants to share their own definition of equity in the seminar chat. Amongst their many suggestions were “giving everybody the same opportunity”, “equal opportunity to access high-quality education”, and “everyone has access to the same resources”. I found Shomari’s own definition of equity very powerful: 

    “Equity is the fair treatment, access, opportunity, and advancement of all people, while at the same time striving to identify and eliminate barriers that have prevented the full participation of some groups. Improving equity involves increasing justice and fairness within the procedures and processes of institutions or systems, as well as the distribution of resources. Tackling equity requires an understanding of the root cause of outcome disparity within our society.”

    Shomari Jones

    This definition is drawn directly from the young people Shomari works with, and it goes beyond access and opportunity to the notion of increasing justice and fairness and addressing the causes of outcome disparity. Justice was a theme throughout the seminar, with all speakers referring to the way that their work looks at equity in computer science education through a justice-oriented lens.

    Removing deficit thinking

    Using a justice-oriented approach means that learners should be encouraged to use their computer science knowledge to make a difference in areas that are important to them. It means that just having access to a computer science education is not sufficient for equity.

    Tia Madkins presents a slide: "A justice-oriented approach to computer science teaching empowers students to use CS knowledge for transformation, moves beyond access and achievement frames, and is an asset- or strengths-based approach centering students and families"

    Tia spoke about the need to reject “deficit thinking” (i.e. focusing on what learners lack) and instead focus on learners’ strengths or assets and how they bring these to the school classroom. For researchers and teachers to do this, we need to be aware of our own mindset and perspective, to think about what we value about ethnic and racial identities, and to be willing to reflect and take feedback.

    Activities to support computer science teaching

    Nicol talked about some of the ways of designing computing lessons to be equity-focused. She highlighted the benefits of pair programming and other peer pedagogies, where students teach and learn from each other through feedback and sharing ideas/completed work. She suggested using a variety of different programs and environments, to ensure a range of different pathways to understanding. Teachers and schools can aim to base teaching around tools that are open and accessible and, where possible, available in many languages. If the software environment and tasks are accessible, they open the doors of opportunity to enable students to move on to more advanced materials. To demonstrate to learners that computer science is applicable across domains, the topic can also be introduced in the context of mathematics and other subjects.

    Nicol Howard presents a slide: "Considerations for equity-focused computer science teaching include your beliefs (and your students' beliefs) and how they impact CS classrooms; tiered activities and pair programming; self-expressions versus CS preparation; equity-focused lens"

    Learners can benefit from learning computer science regardless of whether they want to become a computer scientist. Computing offers them skills that they can use for self-expression or to be creative in other areas of their life. They can use their knowledge for a specific purpose and to become more autonomous, particularly if their teacher does not have any deficit thinking. In addition, culturally relevant teaching in the classroom demonstrates a teacher’s deliberate and explicit acknowledgment that they value all students in their classroom and expect students to excel.

    Engaging family and community

    Shomari talked about the importance of working with parents and families of ethnically diverse students in order to hear their voices and learn from their experiences.

    Shomari Jones presents a slide: “Parents without backgrounds and insights into the changing landscape of technology struggle to negotiate what roles they can play, such as how to work together in computing activities or how to find learning opportunities for their children.”

    He described how the absence of a background in technology of parents and carers can drastically impact the experiences of young people.

    “Parents without backgrounds and insights into the changing landscape of technology struggle to negotiate what roles they can play, such as how to work together in computing activities or how to find learning opportunities for their children.”

    Betsy DiSalvo, Cecili Reid, and Parisa Khanipour Roshan. 2014

    Shomari drew on an example from the Pacific Northwest in the US, a region with many successful technology companies. In this location, young people from wealthy white and Asian communities can engage fully in informal learning of computer science and can have aspirations to enter technology-related fields, whereas amongst the Black and Latino communities, there are significant barriers to any form of engagement with technology. This already existent inequity has been enhanced by the coronavirus pandemic: once so much of education moved online, it became widely apparent that many families had never owned, or even used, a computer. Shomari highlighted the importance of working with pre-service teachers to support them in understanding the necessity of family and community engagement.

    Building classroom communities

    Building a classroom community starts by fostering and maintaining relationships with students, families, and their communities. Our speakers emphasised how important it is to understand the lives of learners and their situations. Through this understanding, learning experiences can be designed that connect with the learners’ lived experiences and cultural practices. In addition, by tapping into what matters most to learners, teachers can inspire them to be change agents in their communities. Tia gave the example of learning to code or learning to build an app, which provides learners with practical tools they can use for projects they care about, and with skills to create artefacts that challenge and document injustices they see happening in their communities.

    Find out more

    If you want to learn more about this topic, a great place to start is the recent paper Tia and Nicol have co-authored that lays out more detail on the work described in the seminar: Engaging Equity Pedagogies in Computer Science Learning Environments, by Tia C. Madkins, Nicol R. Howard and Natalie Freed, 2020.

    [youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h63HgcgWsyo?feature=oembed&w=500&h=281]

    You can access the presentation slides via our seminars page.

    Join our next free seminar

    In our next seminar on Tuesday 2 March at 17:00–18:30 BST / 12:00–13:30 EDT / 9:00–10:30 PDT / 18:00–19:30 CEST, we’ll welcome Jakita O. Thomas (Auburn University), who is going to talk to us about Designing STEM Learning Environments to Support Computational Algorithmic Thinking and Black Girls: A Possibility Model for Changing Hegemonic Narratives and Disrupting STEM Neoliberal Projects. To join this free online seminar, simply sign up by following the link at the button.

    Once you’ve signed up, we’ll email you the seminar meeting link and instructions for joining. If you attended Peter’s and Billy’s seminar, the link remains the same.

    Website: LINK

  • Computing education and underrepresentation: the data from England

    Computing education and underrepresentation: the data from England

    Reading Time: 6 minutes

    In this blog post, I’ll discuss the first research seminar in our six-part series about diversity and inclusion. Let’s start by defining our terms. Diversity is any dimension that can be used to differentiate groups and people from one another. This might be, for example, age, gender, socio-economic status, disability, ethnicity, religion, nationality, or sexuality. The aim of inclusion is to embrace all people irrespective of difference.

    It’s vital that we are inclusive in computing education, because we need to ensure that everyone can access and learn the empowering and enabling technical skills they need to support all aspects of their lives.

    One male and two female teenagers at a computer

    Between January and June of this year, we’re partnering with the Royal Academy of Engineering to host speakers from the UK and USA for a series of six research seminars focused on diversity and inclusion in computing education.

    We kicked off the series with a seminar from Dr Peter Kemp and Dr Billy Wong focused on computing education in England’s schools post-14. Peter is a Lecturer in Computing Education at King’s College London, where he leads on initial teacher education in computing. His research areas are digital creativity and digital equity. Billy is an Associate Professor at the Institute of Education, University of Reading. His areas of research are educational identities and inequalities, especially in the context of higher education and STEM education.

    • Peter Kemp
      Dr Peter Kemp
    • Dr Billy Wong

    Computing in England’s schools

    Peter began the seminar with a comprehensive look at the history of curriculum change in Computing in England. This was very useful given our very international audience for these seminars, and I will summarise it below. (If you’d like more detail, you can look over the slides from the seminar. Note that these changes refer to England only, as education in the UK is devolved, and England, Northern Ireland, Scotland, and Wales each has a different education system.)

    In 2014, England switched from mandatory ICT (Information and Communication Technology) to mandatory Computing (encompassing information technology, computer science, and digital literacy). This shift was complemented by a change in the qualifications for students aged 14–16 and 16–18, where the primary qualifications are GCSEs and A levels respectively:

    • At GCSE, there has been a transition from GCSE ICT to GCSE Computer Science over the last five years, with GCSE ICT being discontinued in 2017
    • At A level before 2014, ICT and Computing were on offer as two separate A levels; now there is only one, A level Computer Science

    One of the issues is that in the English education system, there is a narrowing of the curriculum at age 14: students have to choose between Computer Science and other subjects such as Geography, History, Religious Studies, Drama, Music, etc. This means that those students that choose not to take a GCSE Computer Science (CS) may find that their digital education is thereby curtailed from then onwards. Peter’s and Billy’s view is that having a more specialist subject offer for age 14+ (Computer Science as opposed to ICT) means that fewer students take it, and they showed evidence of this from qualifications data. The number of students taking CS at GCSE has risen considerably since its introduction, but it’s not yet at the level of GCSE ICT uptake.

    GCSE computer science and equity

    Only 64% of schools in England offer GCSE Computer Science, meaning that just 81% of students have the opportunity to take the subject (some schools also add selection criteria). A higher percentage (90%) of selective grammar schools offer GCSE CS than do comprehensive schools (80%) or independent schools (39%). Peter suggested that this was making Computer Science a “little more elitist” as a subject.

    Peter analysed data from England’s National Pupil Database (NPD) to thoroughly investigate the uptake of Computer Science post-14 with respect to the diversity of entrants.

    He found that the gender gap for GCSE CS uptake is greater than it was for GCSE ICT. Now girls make up 22% of the cohort for GCSE CS (2020 data), whereas for the ICT qualification (2017 data), 43% of students were female.

    Peter’s analysis showed that there is also a lower representation of black students and of students from socio-economically disadvantaged backgrounds in the cohort for GCSE CS. In contrast, students with Chinese ancestry are proportionally more highly represented in the cohort. 

    Another part of Peter’s analysis related gender data to the Income Deprivation Affecting Children Index (IDACI), which is used as an indicator of the level of poverty in England’s local authority districts. In the graphs below, a higher IDACI decile means more deprivation in an area. Relating gender data of GCSE CS uptake against the IDACI shows that:

    • Girls from more deprived areas are more likely to take up GCSE CS than girls from less deprived areas are
    • The opposite is true for boys
    Two bar charts relating gender data of GCSE uptake against the Income Deprivation Affecting Children Index. The graph plotting GCSE ICT data shows that students from areas with higher deprivation are slightly more likely to choose the GCSE, irrespective of gender. The graph plotting GCSE Computer Science data shows that girls from more deprived areas are more likely to take up GCSE CS than girls from less deprived areas, and the opposite is true for boys.

    Peter covered much more data in the seminar, so do watch the video recording (below) if you want to learn more.

    Peter’s analysis shows a lack of equity (i.e. equality of outcome in the form of proportional representation) in uptake of GCSE CS after age 14. It is also important to recognise, however, that England does mandate — not simply provide or offer — Computing for all pupils at both primary and secondary levels; making a subject mandatory is the only way to ensure that we do give access to all pupils.

    What can we do about the lack of equity?

    Billy presented some of the potential reasons for why some groups of young people are not fully represented in GCSE Computer Science:

    • There are many stereotypes surrounding the image of ‘the computer scientist’, and young people may not be able to identify with the perception they hold of ‘the computer scientist’
    • There is inequality in access to resources, as indicated by the research on science and STEM capital being carried out within the ASPIRES project

    More research is needed to understand the subject choices young people make and their reasons for choosing as they do.

    We also need to look at how the way we teach Computing to students aged 11 to 14 (and younger) affects whether they choose CS as a post-14 subject. Our next seminar revolves around equity-focused teaching practices, such as culturally relevant pedagogy or culturally responsive teaching, and how educators can use them in their CS learning environments. 

    Meanwhile, our own research project at the Raspberry Pi Foundation, Gender Balance in Computing, investigates particular approaches in school and non-formal learning and how they can impact on gender balance in Computer Science. For an overview of recent research around barriers to gender balance in school computing, look back on the research seminar by Katharine Childs from our team.

    Peter and Billy themselves have recently been successful in obtaining funding for a research project to explore female computing performance and subject choice in English schools, a project they will be starting soon!

    If you missed the seminar, watch recording here. You can also find Peter and Billy’s presentation slides on our seminars page.

    [youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2S5Ak_W0znc?feature=oembed&w=500&h=281]

    Next up in our seminar series

    In our next research seminar on Tuesday 2 February at 17:00–18:30 BST / 12:00–13:30 EDT / 9:00–10:30 PDT / 18:00–19:30 CEST, we’ll welcome Prof Tia Madkins (University of Texas at Austin), Dr Nicol R. Howard (University of Redlands), and Shomari Jones (Bellevue School District), who are going to talk to us about culturally responsive pedagogy and equity-focused teaching in K-12 Computer Science. To join this free online seminar, simply sign up with your name and email address.

    Once you’ve signed up, we’ll email you the seminar meeting link and instructions for joining. If you attended Peter’s and Billy’s seminar, the link remains the same.

    Website: LINK

  • Learning at home with the Raspberry Pi Foundation

    Learning at home with the Raspberry Pi Foundation

    Reading Time: 4 minutes

    As the UK — like many countries around the world — kicks off the new year with another national lockdown, meaning that millions of young people are unable to attend school, I want to share an update on how the Raspberry Pi Foundation is helping young people to learn at home.

    Please help us spread the word to teachers, school leaders, governors, parents, and carers. Everything we are offering here is 100% free and the more people know about it, the more young people will benefit.

    A girl and mother doing a homeschooling lesson at a laptop

    Supporting teachers and pupils 

    Schools and teachers all over the world have been doing a heroic job over the past ten months, managing the transition to emergency remote teaching during the first round of lockdowns, supporting the most vulnerable pupils, dealing with uncertainty, changing the way that schools worked to welcome pupils back safely, helping pupils catch up with lost learning, and much, much more.

    Both in my role as Chief Executive of the Raspberry Pi Foundation and as chair of governors at a state school here in Cambridge, I’ve seen first-hand the immense pressure that schools and teachers are under. I’ve also seen them display the most amazing resilience, commitment, and innovation. I want to say a huge thank you to all teachers and school staff for everything you’ve done and continue to do to help young people through this crisis. 

    Here’s some of the resources and tools that we’ve created to help you continue to deliver a world-class computing education: 

    • The Teach Computing Curriculum is a comprehensive set of lesson plans for KS1–4 (learners aged 5–16) as well as homework, progression mapping, and assessment materials.
    • Working with the fabulous Oak National Academy, we’ve produced 100 hours of video for 300 video lessons based on the Teach Computing Curriculum.
    • Isaac Computer Science is our online learning platform for advanced computer science (A level, learners aged 16–18) and includes comprehensive, interactive materials and videos. It also allows you to set your learners self-marking questions. 

    All of these resources are mapped to the English computing curriculum and produced as part of the National Centre for Computing Education. They are available for everyone, anywhere in the world, for free. 

    Making something fun with code

    Parents and carers are the other heroes of remote learning during lockdown. I know from personal experience that juggling work and supporting home learning can be really tough, and we’re all trying to find meaningful, fun alternatives to letting our kids binge YouTube or Netflix (other video platforms and streaming services are available).

    That’s why we’ve been working really hard to provide parents and carers with easy, accessible ways for you to help your young digital makers to get creative with technology:

    A Coolest Projects participant

    Getting computers into the hands of young people who need them 

    One of the harsh lessons we learned last year was that far too many young people don’t have a computer for learning at home. There has always been a digital divide; the pandemic has just put it centre-stage. The good news is that the cost of solving this problem is now trivial compared to the cost of allowing it to persist.

    That’s why the Raspberry Pi Foundation has teamed up with UK Youth and a network of grassroots youth and community organisations to get computers into the hands of disadvantaged young people across the UK.

    A young person receives a Raspberry Pi kit to learn at home

    For under £200 we can provide a vulnerable child with everything they need to learn at home, including a Raspberry Pi desktop computer, a monitor, a webcam, free educational software, and ongoing support from a local youth worker and the Foundation team. So far, we have managed to get 2000 Raspberry Pi computers into the hands of the most vulnerable young people in the UK. A drop in the ocean compared to the size of the problem, but a huge impact for every single young person and family.

    This has only been possible thanks to the generous support of individuals, foundations, and businesses that have donated to support our work. If you’d like to get involved too, you can find out more here.

    Website: LINK

  • Block-based programming: does it help students learn?

    Block-based programming: does it help students learn?

    Reading Time: 5 minutes

    At the Raspberry Pi Foundation, we are continually inspired by young learners in our community: they embrace digital making and computing to build creative projects, supported by our resources, clubs, and volunteers. While creating their projects, they are learning the core programming skills that underlie digital making.

    Over the years, many tools and environments have been developed to make programming more accessible to young people. Scratch is one example of a block-based programming environment for young learners, and it’s been shown to make programming more accessible to them; on our projects site we offer many step-by-step Scratch project resources.

    But does block-based programming actually help learning? Does it increase motivation and support students? Where is the hard evidence? In our latest research seminar, we were delighted to hear from Dr David Weintrop, an Assistant Professor at the University of Maryland who has done research in this area for several years and published widely on the differences between block-based and text-based programming environments.

    David Weintrop

    A variety of block-based programming environments

    The first useful insight David shared was that we should avoid thinking about block-based programming as synonymous with the well-known Scratch environment. There are several other environments, with different affordances, that David referred to in his talk, such as Snap, Pencil Code, Blockly, and more.

    Logos of block-based programming environments

    Some of these, for example Pencil Code, offer a dual-modality (or hybrid) environment, where learners can write the same program in a text-based and a block-based programming environment side by side. Dual-modality environments provide this side-by-side approach based on the assumption that being able to match a text-based program to its block-based equivalent supports the development of understanding of program syntax in a text-based language.

    Screenshot of the Pencil Code dual-modality programming environment

    As a tool for transitioning to text-based programming

    Another aspect of the research around block-based programming focuses on its usefulness as a transition to a text-based language. David described a 15-week study he conducted in high schools in the USA to investigate differences in student learning caused by use of block-based, text-based, and hybrid (a mixture of both using a dual-modality platform) programming tools.

    Details of the study design: classroom-based, 3 conditions, 2 phases, quasi-experimental mixed method study

    The 90 students in the study (14 to 16 years old) were divided into three groups, each with a different intervention but taught by the same teacher. In the first phase of the study (5 weeks), the groups were set the same tasks with the same learning objectives, but they used either block-based programming, text-based programming, or the hybrid environment.

    After 5 weeks, students were given a test to assess learning outcomes, and they were asked questions about their attitudes to programming (specifically their perception of computing and their confidence). In the second phase (10 weeks), all the students were taught Java (a common language taught in the USA for end-of-school assessment), and then the test and attitudinal questions were repeated.

    The results showed that at the 5-week point, the students who had used block-based programming scored higher in their learning outcome assessment, but at the final assessment after 15 weeks, all groups’ scores were roughly equivalent.  

    A graph of assessment scores of the three groups in the study. The final scores are not significantly different.

    In terms of students’ perception of computing and confidence, the responses of the Blocks group were very positive at the 5-week point, while at the 15-week point, the responses were less positive. The responses from the Text group showed a gradual increase in positivity between the 5- and 15-week points. The Hybrid group’s responses weren’t as negative as those of the Text group at the 5-week point, and their positivity didn’t decrease like the Blocks group’s did.

    Taking both methods of assessment into account, the Hybrid group showed the best results in the study. The gains associated with the block-based introduction to programming did not translate to those students being further ahead when learning Java, but starting with block-based programming also did not hamper students’ transition to text-based programming.

    David completed his talk by recommending dual-modality environments (such as Pencil Code) for teaching programming, as used by the Hybrid group in his study. 

    More research is needed

    The seminar audience raised many questions about David’s study, for example whether the actual teaching (pedagogy) may have differed for the three groups, and whether the results are not just due to the specific tools or environments that were used. This is definitely an area for further research. 

    It seems that students may benefit from different tools at different times, which is why a dual-modality environment can be very useful. Of course, competence in programming takes a long time to develop, so there is room on the research agenda for longitudinal studies that monitor students’ progress over many months and even years. Such studies could take into account both the teaching approach and the programming environment in order to determine what factors impact a deep understanding of programming concepts, and students’ desire to carry on with their programming journey. 

    Next up in our series

    If you missed the seminar, you can find David’s presentation slides and a recording of his talk on our seminars page.

    [youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6M7Vvf7ZrbU?feature=oembed&w=500&h=281]

    Our next free online seminar takes place on Tuesday 5 January at 17:00–18:00 BST / 12:00–13:00 EDT / 9:00–10:00 PDT / 18:00–19:00 CEST. We’ll welcome Peter Kemp and Billy Wong, who are going to share insights from their research on computing education for underrepresented groups. To join this free online seminar, simply sign up with your name and email address.

    Once you’ve signed up, we’ll email you the seminar meeting link and instructions for joining. If you attended David’s seminar, the link remains the same.

    The January seminar will be the first one in our series focusing on diversity and inclusion in computing education, which we’re co-hosting with the Royal Academy for Engineering. We hope to see you there!

    Website: LINK

  • Diversity and inclusion in computing education — new research seminars

    Diversity and inclusion in computing education — new research seminars

    Reading Time: 2 minutes

    At the Raspberry Pi Foundation, we host a free online research seminar once a month to explore a wide variety of topics in the area of digital and computing education. This year, we’ve hosted eleven seminars — you can (re)discover slides and recordings on our website.

    A classroom of young learners and a teacher at laptops

    Now we’re getting ready for new seminars in 2021! In the coming months, our seminars are going to focus on diversity and inclusion in computing education. This topic is extremely important, as we want to make sure that computing is accessible to all, that we understand how to actively remove barriers to participation for learners, and that we understand how to teach computing in an inclusive way. 

    We are delighted to announce that these seminars focusing on diversity and inclusion will be co-hosted by the Royal Academy of Engineering. The Royal Academy of Engineering is harnessing the power of engineering to build a sustainable society and an inclusive economy that works for everyone.

    Royal Academy of Engineering logo

    We’re very excited to be partnering with the Academy because of our shared interest in ensuring that computing and engineering are inclusive and accessible to all.

    Our upcoming seminars

    The seminars take place on the first Tuesday of the month at 17:00–18:30 GMT / 12:00–13:30 EST / 9:00–10:30 PST / 18:00–19:30 CET.

    • 5 January 2021: Peter Kemp (King’s College London) and Billy Wong (University of Reading) will be looking at computing education in England, particularly GCSE computer science, and how it is accessed by groups typically underrepresented in computing.
    • 2 February 2021: Professor Tia Madkins (University of Texas at Austin), Nicol R. Howard (University of Redlands), and Shomari Jones (Bellevue School District) will be talking about equity-focused teaching in K–12 computer science. Find out more.
    • 2 March 2021: Dr Jakita O. Thomas (Auburn University, Alabama) will be talking about her research on supporting computational algorithmic thinking in the context of intersectional computing.
    • April 2021: event to be confirmed
    • 4 May 2021: Dr Cecily Morrison (Microsoft Research) will be speaking about her work on physical programming for people with visual impairments.

    Join the seminars

    We’d love to welcome you to these seminars so we can learn and discuss together. To get access, simply sign up with your name and email address.

    Once you’ve signed up, we’ll email you the seminar meeting link and instructions for joining. If you attended our seminars in the past, the link remains the same.

    Website: LINK

  • PRIMM: encouraging talk in programming lessons

    PRIMM: encouraging talk in programming lessons

    Reading Time: 5 minutes

    Whenever you learn a new subject or skill, at some point you need to pick up the particular language that goes with that domain. And the only way to really feel comfortable with this language is to practice using it. It’s exactly the same when learning programming.

    A girl doing Scratch coding in a Code Club classroom

    In our latest research seminar, we focused on how we educators and our students can talk about programming. The seminar presentation was given by our Chief Learning Officer, Dr Sue Sentance. She shared the work she and her collaborators have done to develop a research-based approach to teaching programming called PRIMM, and to work with teachers to investigate the effects of PRIMM on students.

    Sue Sentance

    As well as providing a structure for programming lessons, Sue’s research on PRIMM helps us think about ways in which learners can investigate programs, start to understand how they work, and then gradually develop the language to talk about them themselves.

    Productive talk for education

    Sue began by taking us through the rich history of educational research into language and dialogue. This work has been heavily developed in science and mathematics education, as well as language and literacy.

    In particular the work of Neil Mercer and colleagues has shown that students need guidance to develop and practice using language to reason, and that developing high-quality language improves understanding. The role of the teacher in this language development is vital.

    Sue’s work draws on these insights to consider how language can be used to develop understanding in programming.

    Why is programming challenging for beginners?

    Sue identified shortcomings of some teaching approaches that are common in the computing classroom but may not be suitable for all beginners.

    • ‘Copy code’ activities for learners take a long time, lead to dreaded syntax errors, and don’t necessarily build more understanding.
    • When teachers model the process of writing a program, this can be very helpful, but for beginners there may still be a huge jump from being able to follow the modeling to being able to write a program from scratch themselves.

    PRIMM was designed by Sue and her collaborators as a language-first approach where students begin not by writing code, but by reading it.

    What is PRIMM?

    PRIMM stands for ‘Predict, Run, Investigate, Modify, Make’. In this approach, rather than copying code or writing programs from scratch, beginners instead start by focussing on reading working code.

    In the Predict stage, the teacher provides learners with example code to read, discuss, and make output predictions about. Next, they run the code to see how the output compares to what they predicted. In the Investigate stage, the teacher sets activities for the learners to trace, annotate, explain, and talk about the code line by line, in order to help them understand what it does in detail.

    In the seminar, Sue took us through a mini example of the stages of PRIMM where we predicted the output of Python Turtle code. You can follow along on the recording of the seminar to get the experience of what it feels like to work through this approach.

    The impact of PRIMM on learning

    The PRIMM approach is informed by research, and it is also the subject of research by Sue and her collaborators. They’ve conducted two studies to measure the effectiveness of PRIMM: an initial pilot, and a larger mixed-methods study with 13 teachers and 493 students with a control group.

    The larger study used a pre and post test, and found that the group who experienced a PRIMM approach performed better on the tests than the control group. The researchers also collected a wealth of qualitative feedback from teachers. The feedback suggested that the approach can help students to develop a language to express their understanding of programming, and that there was much more productive peer conversation in the PRIMM lessons (sometimes this meant less talk, but at a more advanced level).

    The PRIMM structure also gave some teachers a greater capacity to talk about the process of teaching programming. It facilitated the discussion of teaching ideas and learning approaches for the teachers, as well as developing language approaches that students used to learn programming concepts.

    The research results suggest that learners taught using PRIMM appear to be developing the language skills to talk coherently about their programming. The effectiveness of PRIMM is also evidenced by the number of teachers who have taken up the approach, building in their own activities and in some cases remixing the PRIMM terminology to develop their own take on a language-first approach to teaching programming.

    Future research will investigate in detail how PRIMM encourages productive talk in the classroom, and will link the approach to other work on semantic waves. (For more on semantic waves in computing education, see this seminar by Jane Waite and this symposium talk by Paul Curzon.)

    Resources for educators who want to try PRIMM

    If you would like to try out PRIMM with your learners, use our free support materials:

    Join our next seminar

    If you missed the seminar, you can find the presentation slides alongside the recording of Sue’s talk on our seminars page.

    [youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2XEEL53RS-I?feature=oembed&w=500&h=281]

    In our next seminar on Tuesday 1 December at 17:00–18:30 GMT / 12:00–13:30 EsT / 9:00–10:30 PT / 18:00–19:30 CEST. Dr David Weintrop from the University of Maryland will be presenting on the role of block-based programming in computer science education. To join, simply sign up with your name and email address.

    Once you’ve signed up, we’ll email you the seminar meeting link and instructions for joining. If you attended this past seminar, the link remains the same.

    Website: LINK

  • Why a great teacher can make all the difference

    Why a great teacher can make all the difference

    Reading Time: 5 minutes

    When we think back to our school days, we can all recall that one teacher who inspired us, believed in us, and made all the difference to how we approached a particular subject. It was someone we maybe took for granted at the time and so we only realised (much) later how amazing they were. 

    I hope this post makes you think of a teacher or mentor who has made a key difference in your life!

    Here computer science student Jonathan Alderson and our team’s Ben Garside talk to me about how Ben supported and inspired Jonathan in his computer science classroom.

    Ben Garside and Jonathan Alderson holding physical and virtual chess games
    The teacher: Ben Garside. The student: Jonathan Alderson.

    Hi Jonathan! How did you get into computing?

    Jonathan: My first memories of using a computer were playing 3D Pinball, Club Penguin, and old Disney games, so nothing productive there…or so I thought! I was always good at IT and Maths at school, and Computing seemed to be a cross between the two, so I thought it would be good.

    Jonathan and Ben, can you remember your time working together? It’s been a while now! 

    Jonathan: I met Mr Garside at the start of sixth form. Our school didn’t have a computer science course, so a few of us would walk between schools twice a week. Mr Garside really made me feel welcome in a place where I didn’t know anyone.

    When learning computer science, it’s difficult to understand the importance of new concepts like recursion, classes, or linked lists when the examples are so small. Mr Garside’s teaching made me see the relevance of them and how they could fit into other projects; it’s easy to go a long time without using concepts because you don’t necessarily need them, even when it would make your life a lot easier.

    Mr Garside really made me feel welcome in a place where I didn’t know anyone. […] Mr Garside’s teaching made me see the relevance of [new computer science concepts] and how they could fit into other projects.

    Jonathan Alderson

    Ben: It was a real pleasure to teach Jonathan. He stands out as being one of the most inquisitive students that I have taught. If something wasn’t clear to him, he’d certainly let me know and ask relevant questions so that he could fully understand. Jonathan was also constantly working on his own programming projects outside of lessons. During his A level, I remember him taking it upon himself to write a program that played chess. Each week he would demonstrate the progress he had made to the class. It was a perfect example of decomposition as he tackled the project in small sections and had a clear plan as to what he wanted to achieve. By the end of his project, not only did he have a program that played chess, but it was capable of playing against real online users including making the mouse clicks on the screen!

    Moving from procedural to object-oriented programming (OOP) can be a sticking point for a lot of learners, and I remember Jonathan finding this difficult at first. I think what helped Jonathan in particular was getting him to understand that this wasn’t as new a concept as he first thought. OOP was just a different paradigm where he could still apply all of the coding structures that he was already confident in using.

    That sounds like a very cool project. What other projects did you make, Jonathan? And how did Ben help you?

    Jonathan: My final-year project, [a video game] called Vector Venture, ended up becoming quite a mammoth task! I didn’t really have a clue about organising large projects, what an IDE was, or you could split files apart. Mr Garside helped me spend enough time on the final report and get things finished. He was very supportive of me releasing the game and got me a chance to speak at the Python North East group, which was a great opportunity.

    Ben: Vector Venture was a very ambitious project that Jonathan undertook, but I think by then he had learned a lot about how to tackle a project of that size from previous projects such as the chess program. The key to his success was that whilst he was learning, he was picking projects to undertake that he had a genuine interest in and enjoyed developing. I would also tell my A level students to pick as a project something that they will enjoy developing. Jonathan clearly enjoyed developing games, but I also had students who picked projects to develop programs that would solve problems. For example, one of my students developed a system that would take online bookings for food orders and manage table allocation for a local restaurant.

    I would tell my A level students to pick as a project something that they will enjoy developing.

    Ben Garside

    I think that point about having fun while learning something challenging like programming is really important to highlight. So what are you doing now, Jonathan?

    Jonathan: I have just completed my undergraduate degree at the University of Leeds (UoL) with a place on the Dean’s List and am staying to complete a Masters in High Performance Graphics. 

    During my time at UoL, I’ve had three summer placements creating medical applications and new systems for the university. This helped me understand the social benefits of computer science; it was great to work on something that is now benefitting so many people. My dissertation was on music visualisation, mapping instrument attributes of a currently playing song to control parameters inside sharers on the GPU to produce reactive visualisations. I’ve just completed an OpenGL project to create procedural underwater scenes, with realistic lighting, reflections, and fish simulations. I’m now really looking forward to completing my Game Engine project for my masters and graduating.

    Teachers are often brilliant at taking something complicated and presenting it in a clearer way. Are those moments of clarity part of what motivates you to teach, Ben? 

    Ben: There are lots of things that excite me about teaching computer science. Before I worked for the Raspberry Pi Foundation, there was a phrase I heard Carrie Anne Philbin say when I attended a Picademy: we are teaching young people to be digital makers, logical thinkers, and problem solvers, not just to be consumers of technology. I felt this really summed up how great it is to teach our subject. Teaching computer science means that we’re educating young people about the world around them and how technology plays its part in their lives. By doing this, we are empowering them to solve problems and to make educated choices about how they use technology.

    Teaching computer science means that we’re educating young people about the world around them and how technology plays its part in their lives.

    Ben Garside

    As for my previous in-school experiences, I loved those lightbulb moments when something suddenly made sense to a student and a loud “Yesssss!” would break the silence of a quietly focused classroom. I loved teaching something that regularly sparked their imaginations; give them a single lesson on programming, and they would start to ask questions like: “Now I’ve made it do that…does this mean I could make it do this next?“. It wasn’t uncommon for students to want to do more outside of the classroom that wasn’t a homework activity. That, for me, was the ultimate win! 

    How about you?

    Who was the teacher who helped shape your future when you were at school? Tell us about them in the comments below.

    Website: LINK

  • Sue Sentance recognised with Suffrage Science award

    Sue Sentance recognised with Suffrage Science award

    Reading Time: 3 minutes

    We’re pleased to share that Dr Sue Sentance, our Chief Learning Officer, is receiving a Suffrage Science award for Mathematics and Computing today.

    Sue Sentance

    The Suffrage Science award scheme celebrates women in science. Sue is being recognised for her achievements in computer science and computing education research, and for her work promoting computing to the next generation.

    Sue is an experienced teacher and teacher educator with an academic background in artificial intelligence, computer science, and education. She has made a substantial contribution to research in computing education in school over the last ten years, publishing widely on the teaching of programming, teacher professional development, physical computing, and curriculum change. In 2017 Sue received the BERA Public Engagement and Impact Award for her services to computing education. Part of Sue’s role at the Raspberry Pi Foundation is leading our Gender Balance in Computing research programme, which investigates ways to increase the number of girls and young women taking up computing at school level.

    Suffrage Science Maths and Computing Brooch and Bangle
    The awards are jewellery inspired by computing, mathematics, and the Suffragette movement

    As Dr Hannah Dee, the previous award recipient who nominated Sue, says: “[…] The work she does is important — researchers need to look at what happens in schools, particularly when we consider gender. Girls are put off computing long before they get to universities, and an understanding of how children learn about computing and the ways in which we can support girls in tech is going to be vital to reverse this trend.”

    Sue says, “I’m delighted and honoured that Hannah nominated me for this award, and to share this honour with other women also dedicated to furthering the fields of mathematics, computing, life sciences, and engineering. It’s been great to see research around computing in school start to gather pace (and also rigour) around the world over the last few years, and to play a part in that. There is still so much to do — many countries have now introduced computing or computer science into their school curricula as a mandatory subject, and we need to understand better how to make the subject fully accessible to all, and to inspire and motivate the next generation.”

    A girl doing Scratch coding in a Code Club classroom

    Aside from her role in the Gender Balance in Computing research programme, Sue has led our work as part of the consortium behind the National Centre for Computing Education and is now our senior adviser on computing subject knowledge, pedagogy, and the Foundation’s computing education research projects. Sue also leads the programme of our ongoing computing education research seminar series, where academics and educators from all over the world come together online to hear about and discuss some of the latest work in the field. 

    We are currently inviting primary and secondary schools in England to take part in the Gender Balance in Computing project.

    Congratulations from all your colleagues at the Foundation, Sue!

    Website: LINK