Programming (Coding): A Facilitator of Collaboration

Programming (Coding): A Facilitator of Collaboration

University of British Colombia

ETEC511-66A

Summer 2016

Caleb Poole – 87876141

Programming (Coding): A Facilitator of Collaboration

Introduction

Long has it been heard that those who excel with computers are nerds and geeks.

Suffering from low emotional intelligence these individuals struggle to properly interact with

mainstream society. As that narrative continues, those who have a passion for videogames and

technology are often shown nearing 30 years of age, sitting in their parent’s basement, subsisting

on a diet exclusively consisting of soda drinks and potato chips. While this narrative is a long

held stereotype concerning technology enthusiasts, it could not be more wrong. (Cheryan, Plaut,

Handron, & Hudson, 2013) With a simple observation of the world around us, we can start to

dispel this incorrect and damaging narrative. Individuals such as Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, Jack

Dorsey, Elon Musk and Jony Ive are some of the most prolific technology innovators of the past

decade. Some of these individuals have achieved cult-like followings in the mainstream media

and are often viewed as rock stars. What a juxtaposition from the picture of nerds, sitting in their

parent’s basements.

There is another incorrect narrative permeating many schools when it comes to the

teaching of computer programming. This narrative dictates that computer programming (from

hereon referred to as ‘coding’ or ‘programming’) is too advanced for the average classroom.

Many teachers buy into the above myth about technology-basement-dwellers and also steer clear

of programming because they are personally intimidated by it.

Both of these narratives have been harmful to the inclusion of coding in mainstream

curriculum. (Cheryan et al. 2013) Instead, programming has been relegated to the sideline of

option classes and after-school sessions. This is unfortunate as programming has a number of

direct and peripheral benefits to students and the greater learning environment. While many of

these benefits could be predicted in the areas of analytical thinking and sequential design, many
Programming (Coding): A Facilitator of Collaboration

of them are relatively unexpected, yet central to what makes coding unique. These unexpected

benefits fall primarily in the area of problem solving skill development and through coding’s

unique ability to facilitate a collaborative, constructive work environment.

Overview

The primary case study considerations for this paper will be based heavily on two case

studies aimed at the grade 4-6 level. The first took place in a grade 5 science classroom in an

American charter school. The research was performed by Ahmet Baytak and Susan Land (2011)

focusing exclusively on ten, grade 5 students; the majority of which had little prior experience

with computer programming. It is important to note that Baytak and Land’s research heavily

examined the difference between male and female programming competencies. For the sake of

this paper, we will be examining the larger findings and resist delving into the deeper

complexities of gender as they relate to technology and coding. Baytak and Land structured the

lessons into 18 sessions: 10 of which focused on learning, 8 of which focused on presentation

and discourse with peers. The end goal for this case study was to create a program that would be

presented to 2nd grade students.

The second case we will examine is of that observed by the author. In my own grade 5

classroom I have observed two full years of students, and how they react when tasked with

coding in the classroom. In addition to my own classroom I have spent time in grade 4 and 6

classrooms, observing and helping with different coding related lessons. In my own classroom,

coding instruction was presented in three month-long modules. The first of which was a stand

alone module, with the second and third being extensions of science and math units. The end

goal of this case study was to create a game that would be presented to 1st grade students. As an
Programming (Coding): A Facilitator of Collaboration

enriching activity, the majority of 5th grade students created controllers using a Makey-Makey in

order to make their game more appealing to the grade 1 students.

In considering other research, it has been difficult to find research that examines the

larger benefits to coding. Plenty of research focuses on a student’s ability to improve their

programming skills. There is a plethora of research discussing whether or not programming is a

vital concept to teaching, seeing where the world of technology is headed. Yet, there is very little

on the ‘greater good’ that the concepts of coding can bring to the classroom. As a result, I have

been forced to draw from a wide swath of research and bring in smaller components of research

from a wider variety of authors. (Gans, 2010; Heggart, 2014)

Overview of Coding in Schools

According to Gallup Research (as commissioned by Google) only 1 in 4 schools are

currently offering courses involving computer programming. This is a startling statistic,

considering 73% of new science, technology, engineering and mathematics jobs (STEM) focus

on computing. (Computer Science Education Week, n.d.) With these statistics in mind it appears

that schools are currently under educating students in a burgeoning employment field.

However, it is not all bad. In the past 3 years there has been a marked boost in coding

instruction, specifically in elementary schools. This has been through a number of polished, easy

to follow, online resources. The largest of these resources are Code.org (often referred to as Hour

of Code) and Scratch. These tools help young minds grasp the structure of computing languages

are growing rapidly in popularity. In the last two years alone, Code.org has helped train 20,000

computer science teachers in the United Stated. Additionally, AP Computer Science has been the
Programming (Coding): A Facilitator of Collaboration

fastest growing high school course offering from 2010-present. (Making Computer Science

Fundamental, n.d.)

While the current availability of programming instruction is sorely lacking, educators

around the world are seeing its value and pushing themselves to implement it in their classrooms.

As recent as January, 2016 the province of British Colombia announced that it would officially

include computer coding as part of its new curriculum design, reaching from K-12. (Silcoff,

2016) The reasoning for this growing inclusion is in large part due to the increasingly

technological world around us. If students are to perform well in the job force, they must be

equipped with the skills to make a difference. Yet, the benefits of coding education to do end

there. In the next section we will be looking at some very real benefits that are not explicitly tied

to “if/then” commands.

Benefits of Coding in Schools

Comparing the results of Baytak and Land to my own grade 5 classroom, there were a

number of clear commonalities. First, both studies had male subjects with considerably more

prior experience with computers and videogames. Secondly, all participants were able to

significantly develop their understanding of coding, and at conclusion were working at a much

more advanced level. Thirdly, both studies featured students eventually incorporating 8 coding

concepts into their final products. Concepts such as ‘events’, and ‘transitions’ are typically more

advanced and it was encouraging to see student’s using them as this was their first formal foray

into the world of programming. (Baytak & Land, 2011)

The most surprising and illuminating commonality between these two studies was how

the classroom culture shifted dramatically. (Baytak & Land, 2011) In my own classroom of 29
Programming (Coding): A Facilitator of Collaboration

students, 3 regularly strive to help others. They will do anything possible, even at the risk of

personal trouble, to help out others who are not understanding a specific concept. Depending on

the lesson, this can be a great blessing, or a thorn in the side. When it came to coding, the

number of students willing to help a neighbour almost instantly increased from 3 to 23. Students

were raising their hands far less, and instead turning to their desk mate to inquire about how to

properly incorporate a certain element. It is important to note that this helping was fluid and

seamless, they were not interrupting each other or being of nuisance. It was as if the entire class

was working towards a goal, and those a step ahead were not afraid to give their peers a boost,

via their knowledge. It is also important to note that all of the helping was done within strict

guidelines with academic honesty. There was no cheating or ‘getting ahead’ taking place.

Students legitimately were trying their hardest to accomplish various modules, and were on the

lookout to help others lagging behind. When faced with a concept that was new to all, students

rallied together and worked as a learning community.

Initially, I thought this was primarily due to the friendly nature of this specific class.

Large numbers of them grew up together and participate in the same extra-curricular activities.

However, I started to question this when a number of student’s that usually are quite combative,

were working quietly side by side, sharing occasional pointers. It was only when reading Baytak

and Land’s research that it became abundantly clear that this cooperation could not merely be

attributed to a ‘good group’ of students, but was a symptom of the nature of the lesson content.

Students’ were able to quickly realize that no one in the classroom was truly an expert, and

intuitively leaned on each other in order to build individual understanding. (Baytak & Land,

2011) With no expert in sight, the students seemed to pool their understanding to collaboratively

become an expert together.

Programming (Coding): A Facilitator of Collaboration

The other phenomenon witnessed was following the coding unit, how students were

asking less questions of the teacher when it came to general classroom happenings. In doing this,

students were not less informed/capable but were instead answering their own questions by

showing increased determination. Baytak and Land (2011) note the same in remarking “It

became evident that involvement in the game design increased students’ willingness to

communicate when it came to doing actual tasks without waiting for teacher’s encouragement.”

It can be theorized that the forced interaction with seemingly impossible coding tasks helped

students develop a mindset in which they were not afraid to make mistakes, or try on their own.

This translated quite clearly into all facets of the classroom environment. Throughout, and

following the coding unit, students were taking increased risks in their learning and did not seek

a teachers help at the first sign of trouble. They were not looking for an educator to ‘hold their

hand’ and get them through the concepts, but rather ‘put their heads down’ and figured it out

independently (or with some peer support).

Additional benefits of coding are plentiful. It can help develop students into complex

thinkers, competent in thinking through processes and adapting skills to diverse environments.

(Pea and Kurland, 1984; Wing, 2006.) Students who undergo programming lessons have shown

noted improvements in reflectivity and divergent thinking. (Clements & Gullo, 1984) Students

coding have the benefit of receiving immediate feedback; either the program works as intended,

or it does not. Immediate feedback is an invaluable tool through all levels of education and

allows students to more quickly correct their understanding and quicken the learning process

(Epstein, Lazarus, Calvan, Matthews, Hendel, Epstein, & Brosvic, 2002; Garner, Gusberg, &

Kim, 2014).
Programming (Coding): A Facilitator of Collaboration

Collaboration with Coding is Not Entirely New

Collaboration with regards to computer coding is not new. Industry has been doing it for

decades now, and some schools have even gone with a pair-programming technique. In this

technique, schools partner up two students and provide for them one computer to share. The

school then ensures that each student gets equal time controlling the computer. (Denner, Werner,

Campe, & Ortiz, 2014) While this forced collaboration has proven significant results in business

(Cockburn & Williams, 2000) the transition from employees to students has seen it flounder in

schools. (Lewis, 2011)

While basic collaboration with programming is not new, little research exists on class-

wide, unsolicited collaboration.

Possible Overlap of Results

Project Based Learning (PBL) has been an educational hot-topic for the last number of

months. It features students working collaboratively towards a goal; a goal that often not thought

of as a traditional educational pursuit. (Harris et al., 2015) Examples of PBL include building

hover-boards and creating clean water projects. When dealing with programming in schools,

there is often heavy overlap with project based learning. After the preliminary teaching of coding

skills, all that is left is to solve problems and partake in a variety of projects.

It could be noted that the benefits observed are not simply that of Project Based Learning.

While that is true in some regard to the final lessons of each case study, it is not consistent with

the findings above. In the above observations, students were not tasked to work together. They

were simply given a number of learning modules, followed by a number of individual

challenges. It was during both the modules and challenges that they independently used each
Programming (Coding): A Facilitator of Collaboration

other as resources and corporately collaborated towards a goal. The collaboration observed was

clearly distinct, and unique from that observed in PBL.

Challenges Related to Coding in Schools

Even with advanced technology being affordable and readily available, many challenges

still exist pertaining to programming in schools. The first of which is access to capable

technology. While a relative inexpensive $250 Chromebook is able to tackle introductory coding,

many schools possess very few. (R. Marshall, personal communication, June 2016) Secondly,

teachers experienced in intermediate-advanced coding are a rarity. Thankfully, organizations like

Code.org and Khan Academy provide excellent online modules for students to follow. These

modules are essential as they do not rely directly on the teacher’s knowledge. In addition to

providing these module, the organizations also provide seminars to help teachers master different

areas of programming. Thirdly, government curriculum is a gigantic challenge when attempting

to introduce coding. (CBC News, 2015) Schools often struggle to adequately cover all

government curricula as is, finding time to introduce new, forward thinking subjects like coding

can be quite challenging. This has essentially forced teacher to ‘make time’ in order to introduce

coding to their students.

Further Research Possibilities

When considering further research into the collaborative nature of programming

instruction, there are a number of important considerations. Firstly, the individual teacher and

classroom environment in which the learning occurs. While many teachers are encouraging

towards peer-collaboration, some are not. It is important that the classroom is a place that
Programming (Coding): A Facilitator of Collaboration

welcomes learners cooperating, in the most general sense. It would be a shame to skew data by

observing a dated classroom setting where collaboration is not appreciated.

Secondly, it would be important to examine different cultures and geographical areas of

the world. It would be important to determine that these coding benefits are not exclusive to

western educational spheres. Of additional value would be to present coding to communities with

minimal experience with technology. By eliminating cultural differences as a primary factor, it

would be much easier to confirm this collaboration is a result of the nature of the programming

content.

Thirdly, there would need to be considerably more data collected. Two case studies, with

39 total participants does not make it possible to suggest any absolute conclusions. There would

need to be a much wider data set collected. I would suggest starting with an entire school district,

such as Elk Island Public Schools (where the second case study occurred) and then branching out

into an entire province/state.

Lastly, it would be important to use a program other than Scratch or Code.org. Apple

recently announced its Swift Playgrounds app, which is supposed to be an excellent introduction

to coding that exclusively takes place on an iPad. This will provide more variety of programs

while also enabling schools to use previously purchased iPads to teach programming.

Conclusion

The false narrative of computer enthusiasts being locked in their basements is both

confirmed and shattered by the experience of teaching coding in the classroom. Consistent with

the narrative, students are fully engaged. The same power to keep enthusiasts in their basements

for long stretches is able to engage learners in the classroom. Contrary to the narrative, the nature
Programming (Coding): A Facilitator of Collaboration

of coding sees students demonstrating a motivation to help each other in a way that is natural and

unobtrusive to their learning. The observations from these two case studies go to highlight the

benefits of introducing coding to students in the grades 4-6 range. While these case studies are

not extensive in their reach, many teachers share similar results when observing their classroom

happenings.

We need more coding in the classrooms of our schools. The way in which coding can

simultaneously facilitate collaboration while developing creative, divergent thinkers is truly

exciting. Few other subject areas have the rare ability to challenge and develop learners as both

individuals and team members. While there are still obstacles in the way, increased supports and

teacher willingness lead to an advantageous position in which we will experience increased,

healthy collaboration in the classroom, by way of coding. It is my firm conviction that schools

and students will benefit greatly from the widespread introduction of coding in schools.
 Programming (Coding): A Facilitator of Collaboration

Works References

Baytak, A., & Land, S. M. (2011). CASE STUDY: Advancing Elementary-School Girls’ Programming

through Game Design. International Journal of Gender, Science and Technology, 3(1).

Blurbs and Useful Stats. (n.d.). Retrieved July 11, 2016, from https://csedweek.org/resource_kit/blurbs

Brennan, K., and Resnick, M. (2012). New frameworks for studying and assessing the development of

computational thinking. Proceedings of the American Educational Research Association (AERA)

annual conference.

Burke, Q., & Kafai, Y. B. (2010, June). Programming & storytelling: opportunities for learning about

coding & composition. In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Interaction Design

and Children (pp. 348-351). ACM.

CBC News. (2015, August 31). Back to school: Canada lagging in push to teach kids computer coding -

Technology & Science - CBC News. Retrieved July 7, 2016, from

http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/back-to-school-canada-lagging-in-push-to-teach-kids-

computer-coding-1.3185926

Cheryan, S., Plaut, V. C., Handron, C., & Hudson, L. (2013). The stereotypical computer scientist:

Gendered media representations as a barrier to inclusion for women. Sex roles, 69(1-2), 58-71.

Choi, B., Jung, J. & Baek, Y. (2013). In what way can technology enhance student learning? : A

preliminary study of technology supported learning in mathematics. In R. McBride & M.

Searson (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education

International Conference 2013 (pp. 3-9). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.

 Programming (Coding): A Facilitator of Collaboration

Clements, D. H., & Gullo, D. F. (1984). Effects of computer programming on young children's

cognition. Journal of educational psychology, 76(6), 1051.

Cockburn, A., & Williams, L. (2000). The costs and benefits of pair programming. Extreme

programming examined, 223-247.

Denner, J., Werner, L., Campe, S., & Ortiz, E. (2014). Pair programming: Under what conditions is it

advantageous for middle school students? Journal of Research on Technology in

Education, 46(3), 277-296. doi:10.1080/15391523.2014.888272

Epstein, M., Lazarus, A., Calvano, T., Matthews, K., Hendel, R., Epstein, B., & Brosvic, G. (2002).

Immediate feedback assessment technique promotes learning and corrects inaccurate first

responses. Psychological Record,52(2), 187-201.

Gans, P. (2010). The Benefits Of Using Scratch To Introduce Basic Programming Concepts In The

Elementary Classroom. The Journal of Computing Sciences in Colleges, 235.

Garner, M. S., Gusberg, R. J., & Kim, A. W. (2014). The positive effect of immediate feedback on

medical student education during the surgical clerkship. Journal of surgical education, 71(3),

391-397.

Harris, C. J., Penuel, W. R., D'Angelo, C. M., DeBarger, A. H., Gallagher, L. P., Kennedy, C. A.. .

Krajcik, J. S. (2015). Impact of project‐based curriculum materials on student learning in

science: Results of a randomized controlled trial.Journal of Research in Science

Teaching, 52(10), 1362-1385. doi:10.1002/tea.21263

 Programming (Coding): A Facilitator of Collaboration

Heggart, K. (2014, June 16). Coded for success: The benefits of learning to program. Retrieved June 7,

2016, from Edutopia, http://www.edutopia.org/discussion/coded-success-benefits-learning-

program

Kurland, D. M., Pea, R. D., Clement, C., & Mawby, R. (1986). A study of the development of

programming ability and thinking skills in high school students. Journal of Educational

Computing Research, 2(4), 429-458.

Lewis, C. M. (2010, March). How programming environment shapes perception, learning and goals:

logo vs. scratch. In Proceedings of the 41st ACM technical symposium on Computer science

education (pp. 346-350). ACM.

Lewis, C. M. (2011). Is pair programming more effective than other forms of collaboration for young

students?. Computer Science Education, 21(2), 105-134.

Liao, Y. K. C., & Bright, G. W. (1991). Effects of computer programming on cognitive outcomes: A

meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 7(3), 251-268.

Making Computer Science Fundamental to K-12 Education: Eight Policy Ideas. (n.d.). Retrieved July

12, 2016, from https://code.org/files/Making_CS_Fundamental.pdf

Marshall, R. (June 12, 2016). Personal interview. Interview centered around the state of technology in

Alberta schools.

Pea, R. D., & Kurland, D. M. (1984). On the cognitive effects of learning computer programming. New

ideas in psychology, 2(2), 137-168.

 Programming (Coding): A Facilitator of Collaboration

Silcoff, S. (2016, January 17). B.C. to add computer coding to school curriculum. Retrieved July 15,

2016, from http://www.theglobeandmail.com/technology/bc-government-adds-computer-coding-

to-school-curriculum/article28234097/

Wing, J. M. (2006). Computational thinking. Communications of the ACM,49(3), 33-35.