Computational and Mathematics Thinking Workshops for Elementary School Children and Their Parents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This qualitative study explores the nature of engagement of students in Mathematics Thinking (MT) activities in the context of Computational Thinking (CT) integration. It specifically investigates the ways that students interact during CT and MT activities. This study uses a constructionist framework of learning by making and is situated in literature on integration of CT in the mathematics curriculum. In this case study, observations, interviews and reflection data were collected from ten students during CT and MT workshops. The data were analyzed to determine the ways in which CT activities enrich mathematical concepts. All children found that the CT activities (Symmetry, Sphero and Scratch) enriched their understanding of mathematical concepts. Several of the children were excited about what they referred to as a more interesting and interactive way of learning math and code. This study was limited to Grade 3 to Grade 6 students in a private school. For future research, the researchers suggest conducting a study in public schools that will involve specific tools of CT. The researchers also recommend conducting CT workshops over a three-day period so that children do one activity each day rather than all three activities in one session.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".