Author:
Kalovrektis Konstantinos,Dimos Ioannis A.,Kakarountas Athanasios
Abstract
The term Computational Thinking (CT) is commonly acceptable as a 21st century skill in reading, writing, and arithmetic, causing many states to adopt new policies as far as the curriculum, didactic material, teaching and learning methods, as well as assessment methods. In this frame, we have developed a series of Arduino lessons for teachers’ training, including physics computing and computational thinking development. For the training material quality improvement, we have developed a set of assessment criteria (Rubric) that will be used during the teacher’s training course resulting in the formative assessment. The aim of this work is to analyze and justify the rubric’s format and priorities, as well as to inform the teachers’ trainers about the course assessing priorities.
Publisher
European Open Science Publishing
Reference40 articles.
1. Wing JM. Computational thinking’s influence on research and education for all. Ital J Educ Technol. Jul 2017;25(2):7–14. doi:10.17471/2499-4324/922.
2. Wing JM. Computational Thinking. ACM Press; 2006.
3. Wing JM. Research notebook: computational thinking—what and why?. theLink. 2011;8.
4. Voogt J, Fisser P, Good J, Mishra P, Yadav A. Computational thinking in compulsory education: towards an agenda for research and practice. Educ Inf Technol. Dec. 2015;20(4):715–28. doi: 10.1007/s10639-015-9412-6.
5. Psycharis S. Steam in education: a literature review on the role of computational thinking, engineering epistemology and computational science. Sci Cult. Apr 2018;4(2):51–72. doi:10.5281/ZENODO.1214565.