Playful Computation
Teaching Computing Through Playful Learning
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.7577/seminar.5700Emneord (Nøkkelord):
computational thinking, playful learning, primary education, 21st century skills, student interest and engagement, Information and communication technology (ICT)Sammendrag
This paper investigates students’ experiences and teachers’ attitudes towards playful computation: an innovative pedagogy that emphasizes playful learning to teach students information and computing technology. A pilot study was conducted at a Californian primary school during the summer, involving 84 students and 5 teachers engaging in creative and playful computing activities such as 3D printing, coding drones, redubbing audio, building computers, and music production. Student surveys, teacher interviews, and classroom observations were collected in mixed-methods research to provide multiple perspectives on the challenges and benefits of implementing the pedagogy.
Key findings indicate that playful computation significantly boosted student engagement and enjoyment, even surpassing student expectations. Teachers also expressed surprise at the increase in engagement as well as persistence, attributing this to the intrinsically rewardingnature of playful activities. Playful computation also promoted student self-expression and collaborative learning.
However, teachers expressed concerns about the practicality of implementing this pedagogy in standard educational settings due to existing structural constraints of aligning with academic standards. Classroom management and lack of established norms for play in this learning context also limited their lesson plans and implementations.
Supporting the existing literature on the benefits of playful learning, this research also suggests the need for further investigation into its role in facilitating flow and non-cognitive traits like grit. Investigating how playful computation impacts students’ testable learning outcomes is also recommended as a necessary research direction to facilitate broader implementation in American classrooms.
Referanser
Amineh, R. J., & Asl, H. D. (2015). Review of Constructivism and Social Constructivism. Journal of Social Sciences, Literature and Languages, 1(1), 9–16.
Atayi, M., Hashemi Razini, H., & Hatami, M. (2018). Effect of cognitive-behavioral play therapy in the self-esteem and social anxiety of students. Journal of Research and Health, 8(3), 278–285. https://doi.org/10.29252/jrh.8.3.278
Barnett, L. A., & Storm, B. (1981). Play, pleasure, and pain: The reduction of anxiety through play. Leisure Sciences, 4(2), 161–175. https://doi.org/10.1080/01490408109512958
Basawapatna, A. R., Repenning, A., Koh, K. H., & Nickerson, H. (2013). The zones of proximal flow: Guiding students through a space of computational thinking skills and challenges. Proceedings of the Ninth Annual International ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research, 67–74. https://doi.org/10.1145/2493394.2493404
Bird, D. & Holmwood, C. (2018). Rediscovering the playful learner. In J. Taylor & C. Holmwood, C. (Eds.). Learning as a creative and developmental process in higher education: A therapeutic arts approach and its wider application. Routledge
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3, 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Bubikova-Moan, J., Næss Hjetland, H., & Wollscheid, S. (2019). ECE teachers’ views on play-based learning: A systematic review. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 27(6), 776–800. https://doi.org/10.1080/1350293X.2019.1678717
Cheryan, S., Ziegler, S. A., Montoya, A. K., & Jiang, L. (2017). Why are some STEM fields more gender balanced than others? Psychological Bulletin, 143(1), 1–35. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000052
Code.org, & CSTA, & ECEP Alliance. (2022). 2022 State of Computer Science Education: Understanding Our National Imperative. https://advocacy.code.org/stateofcs
Dindler, C., Smith, R., & Iversen, O. (2020). Computational empowerment: Participatory design in education. CoDesign, 16, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/15710882.2020.1722173
Duckworth, A. L., Peterson, C., Matthews, M. D., & Kelly, D. R. (2007). Grit: Perseverance and passion for long-term goals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92(6), 1087–1101. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.92.6.1087
Fagerlund, J., Leino, K., Kiuru, N., & Niilo-Rämä, M. (2022). Finnish teachers’ and students’ programming motivation and their role in teaching and learning computational thinking. Frontiers in Education, 7. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2022.948783
Ferguson, R., Coughlan, T., Egelandsdal, K., Gaved, M., Herodotou, C., Hillaire, G., Jones, D., Jowers, I., Kukulska-Hulme, A., McAndrew, P., Misiejuk, K., Ness, I. J., Rienties, B., Scanlon, E., Sharples, M., Wasson, B., Weller, M., & Whitelock, D. (2019). Innovating Pedagogy 2019: Open University Innovation Report 7. The Open University. https://ou-iet.cdn.prismic.io/ou-iet/b0fbe67d-3cb3-45d6-946c-4b34330fb9f9_innovating-pedagogy-2019.pdf
Fraillon, J., Ainley, J., Schulz, W., Friedman, T., & Duckworth, D. (2019). Preparing for Life in a Digital World: IEA International Computer and Information Literacy Study 2018 International Report. Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-38781-5
Greipl, S., Klein, E., Lindstedt, A., Kiili, K., Moeller, K., Karnath, H.-O., Bahnmueller, J., Bloechle, J., & Ninaus, M. (2021). When the brain comes into play: Neurofunctional correlates of emotions and reward in game-based learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 125, 106946. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2021.106946
Hassinger-Das, B., Toub, T. S., Zosh, J. M., Michnick, J., Golinkoff, R., & Hirsh-Pasek, K. (2017). More than just fun: A place for games in playful learning / Más que diversión: El Lugar De Los juegos reglados en El Aprendizaje lúdico, Infancia Y Aprendizaje. Journal for the Study of Education and Development, 40, 191–218. https://doi.org/10.1080/02103702.2017.1292684
Heljakka, K., Lamminen, A., & Ihamäki, P. (2021). A Model for Enhancing Emotional Literacy through Playful Learning with a Robot Dog. 2021 International Conference on Electrical, Computer, Communications and Mechatronics Engineering (ICECCME), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICECCME52200.2021.9590996
Heljakka, K., & Ihamäki, P. (2019). Ready, Steady, Move! Coding Toys, Preschoolers, and Mobile Playful Learning. Learning and Collaboration Technologies. Ubiquitous and Virtual Environments for Learning and Collaboration (pp. 68–79). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-21817-1_6
Hinton, M. (2016). Diversity gaps in Computer Science education. Education Week, 36(10), 5–5.
Hyvonen, P. T. (2011). Play in the School Context? The Perspectives of Finnish Teachers. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 36(8). https://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2011v36n8.5
Johnson, B., & Christensen, L. (2020). Educational Research: Quantitative, Qualitative, and Mixed Approaches (7th ed.). Sage.
Kafai, Y. (2006). Playing and Making Games for Learning: Instructionist and Constructionist Perspectives for Game Studies. Games and Culture, 1(1), 36–40. https://doi.org/10.1177/1555412005281767
Kafai, Y., Proctor, C., & Lui, D. (2019). From Theory Bias to Theory Dialogue: Embracing Cognitive, Situated, and Critical Framings of Computational Thinking in K-12 CS Education. ICER '19: Proceedings of the 2019 ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/3291279.3339400
Kangas, M. (2010a). Creative and playful learning: Learning through game co-creation and games in a playful learning environment. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 5(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2009.11.001
Kangas, M. (2010b). The school of the future: Theoretical and pedagogical approaches for creative and playful learning environments. University of Lapland. https://urn.fi/URN:NBN:fi:ula-2011291055
Kangas, M., Siklander, P., Randolph, J., & Ruokamo, H. (2017). Teachers’ engagement and students’ satisfaction with a playful learning environment. Teaching and Teacher Education, 63, 274–284. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2016.12.018
Kaspersen, M. H., Graungaard, D., Bouvin, N. O., Petersen, M. G., & Eriksson, E. (2021). Towards a model of progression in computational empowerment in education. International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction, 29, 100302. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcci.2021.100302
Kemeny, J. G. (1983). The Case for Computer Literacy. Daedalus, 112(2), 211–230. https://www.jstor.org/stable/20024860
Kong, S.-C., Abelson, H., & Kwok, W.-Y. (2022). Introduction to Computational Thinking Education in K–12. In S.-C. Kong & H. Abelson (Eds.), Computational Thinking Education in K–12: Artificial Intelligence Literacy and Physical Computing (p. 0). The MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/13375.003.0002
Li, W. H. C., Chung, J. O. K., Ho, K. Y., & Kwok, B. M. C. (2016). Play interventions to reduce anxiety and negative emotions in hospitalized children. BMC Pediatrics, 16(1), 36. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12887-016-0570-5
Meerbaum-Salant, O., Armoni, M., & Ben-Ari, M. (Moti). (2013). Learning computer science concepts with Scratch. Computer Science Education, 23(3), 239–264. https://doi.org/10.1080/08993408.2013.832022
Miao, F., & Holmes, W. (2020). International Forum on AI and the Futures of Education, developing competencies for the AI Era, 7-8 December 2020: Synthesis report—UNESCO Digital Library. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000377251
Nakamura, J., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2002). The concept of flow. In C. R. Snyder & S. J. Lopez (Eds.) Handbook of positive psychology (pp. 89–105). Oxford University Press.
Nousiainen, T., Kangas, M., Rikala, J., & Vesisenaho, M. (2018). Teacher competencies in game-based pedagogy. Teaching and Teacher Education, 74, 85–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2018.04.012
Paavola, S., & Hakkarainen, K. (2014). Trialogical Approach for Knowledge Creation. In S. C. Tan, H. J. So, & J. Yeo (Eds.), Knowledge Creation in Education (pp. 53–73). Springer Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-287-047-6_4
Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms: Children, computers, and powerful ideas. Basic Books.
Papert, S., & Harel, I. (1991). Situating Constructionism. In S. Papert & I. Harel (Eds.) Constructionism (pp. 1–11). Praeger.
Peppler, K. A., & Kafai, Y. (2005). Creative Coding: Programming for Personal Expression [Conference Paper]. The 8th International Conference on Computer Supported Collaborative Learning, Rhodes.
Prensky, M. (2008). Programming Is the New Literacy. Edutopia. https://www.edutopia.org/literacy-computer-programming
Resnick, M., Maloney, J., Monroy-Hernández, A., Rusk, N., Eastmond, E., Brennan, K., Millner, A., Rosenbaum, E., Silver, J., Silverman, B., & Kafai, Y. (2009). Scratch: Programming for everyone. Communications of the ACM, 52(11), 60–67. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1592761.1592779
Rose, S., Habgood, M. P. J., & Jay, T. (2020). Designing a Programming Game to Improve Children’s Procedural Abstraction Skills in Scratch. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 58(7), 1372–1411. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633120932871
Säljö, R. (2004). Learning and technologies, people and tools in co-ordinated activities. International Journal of Educational Research, 41(6), 489–494. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2005.08.013
Shu, L., & Liu, M. (2019). Student engagement in game-based learning: A literature review from 2008 to 2018. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 28(2), Article 2. https://doi.org/10.3102/1442816
Silander, P., Riikonen, S., Seitamaa-Hakkarainen, P., & Hakkarainen, K. (2022). Learning Computational Thinking in Phenomena-Based Co-creation Projects: Perspectives from Finland. In S.-C. Kong & H. Abelson (Eds.), Computational Thinking Education in K–12: Artificial Intelligence Literacy and Physical Computing (p. 0). The MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/13375.003.0008
Star, J. (2015). When Not to Persevere Nuances Related to Perseverance in Mathematical Problem Solving. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/When-Not-to-Persevere-Nuances-Related-to-in-Problem-Star/7885cccf2fa08a29438d55105ac404940d4d7fd9
Taylor, M. E., & Boyer, W. (2020). Play-Based Learning: Evidence-Based Research to Improve Children’s Learning Experiences in the Kindergarten Classroom. Early Childhood Education Journal, 48(2), 127–133. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-019-00989-7
Vee, A. (2013). Understanding computer programming as a literacy. Literacy in Composition Studies, 1(2), 42–64. https://doi.org/10.21623/1.1.2.4
Wang, C., Shen, J., & Chao, J. (2021). Integrating Computational Thinking in STEM Education: A Literature Review. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-021-10227-5
Whitton, N. (2022). Play and Learning in Adulthood: Reimagining Pedagogy and the Politics of Education. Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-13975-8
Wing, J. (2006). Computational Thinking. Communications of the ACM, 49(3), 33–35.
Nedlastinger
Publisert
Hvordan referere
Utgave
Seksjon
Lisens
Opphavsrett 2024 Surya Pasupuleti, Marjaana Kangas
Dette verket er lisensiert under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Seminar.net is a fully open access journal, which means that all articles are available on the internet to all users immediately upon publication. Use and distribution in any medium is permitted, provided the author and the journal are properly credited. The journal allow reuse and remixing of content in accordance with a Creative Commons license CC-BY
- The journal allows the author(s) to hold the copyright without restrictions.
- The journal allows the author(s) to retain publishing rights without restrictions.
- Seminar.net does not charge authors for publishing with us.