The educator designs an assessment of a computational thinking activity or project, which is clearly linked to learning goals and supports student growth.
The core content of computational thinking is not facts, but instead consists of ways that students think about and approach questions. If we want a clear picture of our students’ learning in computational thinking, we need to keep in mind that their learning is situated:
Therefore, we cannot give an absolute statement about a student’s learning in computational thinking; we can only give an assessment of a student’s situated learning, which describes what a student can do in certain contexts, in collaboration with other people, and using certain tools. Common methods of assessing computational thinking include project portfolios, artifact-based interviews, and design scenarios.
When we understand what students are able to do in different situations, we can identify precisely how best to support their continued learning. For example, while two students might each have struggled with a computational thinking task, the reasons for their struggles could be very different. It might be that one student had a clear idea of what they were trying to do but struggled with the tools, while the other student had always played the role of programmer in prior groups and got stuck trying to understand the task on their own.
It is not necessary to put classroom learning on pause in order to conduct assessments of student learning; students can learn through the process of assessment. This is particularly true when students participate in assessing their own learning, so that the assessment becomes an opportunity to become aware of their thinking processes. When assessments involve completing tasks that are already important to students, with access to all the resources that can help them do their best work, we are likely to get the most complete picture of what they can do.
To earn the micro-credential, you must earn a ‘passing’ evaluation for Parts 1 and 3, and a ‘Yes’ for each component of Part 2. In the assessment of this micro-credential, an educator will submit three students’ examples from an assessment of computational thinking, as well as evidence of how the assessment was used to support future learning. The educator will analyze how the assessment shows students’ situated learning, and how this information was used to support future learning.
(400-word limit total)
Please answer the following questions:
To earn this micro-credential, please submit the following:
1) Assessment of student work
Submit assessments of three students’ work from the same computational thinking activity. These may include portfolios, project journals, artifact-based interviews, design scenarios, or another kind of assessment.
2) Demonstration of growth
Additionally, submit artifacts showing evidence of how you supported each of the three student’s future learning through the assessment. These might include revised drafts of a project, student reflections, examples of student work focused on growth areas, etc.
(500-word limit total)
As you answer the following questions, refer to specific evidence from the artifact(s) submitted.
Reflecting on this process, what would help you better understand the situated learning of one or more students and help you better support their future learning? (See Method Components for information on understanding “situated learning.”)