Analysis of the relationship between computational thinking

and mathematical abstraction in primary education

Hasnaa Chaabi Amina Azmani Juan Manuel Dodero
Double affiliation Chemestry Department Informatics Engineering
UCA / UAE Abdelmalek Essaadi University Department
Cadiz / Tangier Spain / Morocco (UAE) University of Cadiz
hasnaa1chaabi@gmail.com Tangier Morroco Cadiz Spain
amina.azmani@gmail.com juanma.dodero@uca.es

Enhancing Multiculturality (TEEM 2019) (León, Spain, October 16-18, 2019),

ABSTRACT
The aim of this paper is to broaden our view on the relationship
between Computational Thinking and the development of the
abstraction skill applied to mathematics. It was aimed to reveal
trends and new potential solutions to be explored in the teaching
of mathematics. We carefully selected sixty-four papers related
with the objective above cited. From which we inspected twenty-
four discovering that abstraction is a key skill for mathematics
and Computational Thinking. We also discovered that we need
to define which type of abstraction are we going to work on
together with choosing between the two ways of teaching CT:
integrating it to the curricula or as an after-school program.
CCS CONCEPTS
• Social and professional topics~Computational
thinking • Social and professional topics~K-12
education • Social and professional topics~Children • Theory
of computation~Abstraction • Applied
computing~Education • Applied computing~Mathematics and
statistics • General and reference~General conference
proceedings
KEYWORDS
Basic Learnings, Computational Thinking, Abstraction, learning
profiles, Thinking Skills, Mathematics Education Research, APOS
Theory.
ACM Reference format:
Hasnaa Chaabi, Amina Azmani and Juan Manuel Dodero. 2019.
Analysis of the relationship between computational thinking and
mathematical abstraction in primary education. In Proceedings of
the Seventh International Conference on Technological Ecosystems for
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal
or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or
distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice
and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights forcomponents of this work
owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is
permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute
to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from
Permissions@acm.org.
TEEM'19, October 16–18, 2019, León, Spain
© 2019 Association for Computing Machinery.
ACM ISBN 978-1-4503-7191-9/19/10...$15.00
https://doi.org/10.1145/3362789.3362881
F. J. García-Peñalvo Ed. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 7 pages.
https://doi.org/10.1145/3362789.3362881
1 Context and motivation
We started with basic learning by working on a first article
[6] about reading skill. Then, we decided to direct our research
towards the mathematics to get closer to the field of computer
science.
Our goal in tackling basic learning was to help primary
students to assimilate best the learning taught. And by making a
state-of-the-art of exploited profiles in primary education (which
is the subject of an article being published), we have found
studies that proclaim the usefulness of assimilating and
convergent profiles for the improvement of the relationship with
mathematics.
In the next section we will describe the state-of-the-art on the
relationship between Computational Thinking and abstract
thinking process in the primary education. We will then present
the hypotheses and research objectives. We identify our research
approach, method and we expose results to date.
Finally, we introduce current and expected contributions of
the research.
2 State-of-the-art
To obtain the papers we are going to focus on, we used the
SPC [10](situación, población, cuestión) format. We did not use
the PICO [24](Population Intervention Comparison Outcome)
format because our purpose is not to analyze the impact of a
health intervention. Table 2 shows the preparation of the String
Search according to the SPC format.
Next, we formed the search equation using the terms already
assembled with OR in the previous table and joining them with
the logic operator AND.
(“Computational Thinking” AND (“primary education” OR
“childhood education” OR student* OR children OR “young
learners”) AND (“abstraction” OR “abstract thinking” OR
“abstraction abilities” OR “thinking process”)
Finally, we executed the search equation in the Web Of Science
database. In table1 we describe the results obtained.
TEEM 2019, October 2019, Léon, Spain H. Chaabi et al.

Table 1. results obtained after running the String Search

Database String Search Localize Selecte

d d
articles articles
“Computational Thinking”
AND(“primary education”
OR “childhood education”
OR student* OR children
Web of
OR “young learners”) 64 24
Science
AND (“abstraction” OR
“abstract thinking” OR
“abstraction abilities” OR
“thinking process”)

Table 2. preparation of the String Search according to the SPC format.

SPC Conditions Standardized terms Synonyms Assemble with OR

Situation Computational Computational Thinking “Computational Thinking”
Thinking
Population Primary school primary education Children “primary education” OR “childhood
children childhood education student* education” OR student* OR children OR
young learners “young learners”
Question Develop abstraction Abstraction abstraction abilities abstraction OR “abstract thinking” OR
abstract thinking “abstraction abilities” OR “thinking
thinking process process”

“Computational thinking involves solving
problems, designing systems, and understanding
human behavior, by drawing on the concepts
fundamental to computer science. Computational
thinking includes a range of mental tools that
reflect the breadth of the field of computer
science.”
This is the official definition started by Jeanette Wing in 2006
[37]. Despite the fact that this notion has been first introduced
by Papert [27] as “Procedural thinking” in his book in 1980 but
he did not define it. Wing’s definition has widely spread since
2006.
Other definitions followed up. But are all, for the majority,
okey to say that it is a process.
Among others, the definition given by Hemmendinger [20]
where he encourages on teaching the learners to think as an
economist, a physicist or an artist this way they will understand
how to solve their problems and not just that, he continues with
the fact of creating and investigating.
Five years later, the definition of Wing focuses more on the
fact that solutions found must formulated so that they can be
computed by an information-processing agent [23].
The royal society in her technical report of 2012 [13] stresses
more on the link that should be built between the reality and
what the learner can do in terms of understanding and reasoning
when it states that : “Computational thinking is the process of
recognizing aspects of computation in the world that surrounds
us, and applying tools and techniques from Computer Science to
understand and reason about both natural and artificial systems
and processes.”
Finally, and in the same sense, as mentioned by Barr and
Stephenson, computational thinking as a thinking process has
much in common with other type of reasoning (engineering,
algorithmic and mathematical) [3].
And this, we would like to explore. Hence, to see how the CT
is evolving in the world of research, we conducted an overview
of CT relating it with the development of abstraction.
On one hand, abstraction is seen by various experts as the
most important computational thinking skill [29], Wing [37]
states that one of the central skills that students should gain in
computational thinking is abstraction and as noted by Yadav [39,
40] it is a key element of CT.
This is why many studies investigated it. According to the
authors [22] abstraction is the fact of reducing complexity to
define main ideas and create a formula to solve problems.
Wing[38] supports this definition certifying that “The
abstraction process- deciding what details we need to highlight
and what details we can ignore- underlies computational
thinking.”. Abstraction [29] is defined by having the ability to
determine which aspects are important and which are not. And
in otherwords, Zúñiga and Al. [41] addresses the existing
relationship between thinking development and abstraction

982
Analysis of the relationship between computational thinking and
mathematical abstraction in primary education
mechanisms. It defines the abstraction mechanisms as being the
separation of interests and the creation of composite elements
from simple elements.
The way to learn abstraction is by promoting imagination via
engaging in personalized projects by the exploitation of tools
such as interactive garments and wearables to fulfill this
objective. Besides, the use of the Arduino technology permets
cross-disciplinary teachings (Art, Design, music …). And it helps
link ideas and imagination to CT [17].
In [31], the authors differentiate between abstraction in
computational thinking and scientific inquiry. For example: CT
considers iterative and incremental development as a formal
software engineering process and in a scientific inquiry it would
be an iterative theory refinement through modeling.
Taking interest in abstraction, Rijke and Al. [29] investigated
the development of students’ decomposition and abstraction
skills with the objective to determine the appropriate age to
teach those skills.
It has been found that girls outperform their peers at this task
from 9.5 years old. And that the capacity for abstract reasoning
begins to develop on the latest years of primary education as
also supported by Marini and Case [25] and [7]. And on another
register, Izu and Al. [22] analyses the structure of the Berbras
challenge (http://www.bebras.org) with the objective to
encourage interest and motivation in computing-related topics.
The results show that the majority of the proposed exercises test
the algorithms & procedures and data representation. Also due
to the usage of interactive tasks there is a slight predominance of
abstraction (only 8%) tasks. Abstraction tasks (considered more
advanced) were mostly addressed to the youngest age groups.
Our investigation showed other forms to explore CT:
Programming and the unplugged way.
In the European Union, more than 800,000 professionals
skilled in computing/informatics by 2020 are expected; In
addition to that coding skills help understand today’s digitalised
society and foster 21st century skills like problem solving,
creativity and logical thinking [2].
This first form is supported by Yadav and Al.[39] stating that
it is valuable for students to learn computational thinking within
the context of computer science curricula and programming
environments. Arguing that the access to computing tools is
required to teach automation. And with the objective of learning
CS basics concepts and CT, Tran[34] did investigate the changes
that are going to occur in third-grade students after 10 weeks of
coding lessons, the results showed that there had been an
improvement from pre- and posttests-based understanding
specific CS concepts and at the same time promoting CT. And in
another experiment [35] authors presents T-Maze, a more direct
and less abstract programming tool for children (5–9) by
building computer programs out of wooden blocks. It has been
used as an efficient approach to teach children about CT. The so-
called Tangible programming. It proposes 2 essential activities
which are playing and creation. Results show that the use of
abstraction was inevitable because of the obligation of respecting
the restrictions imposed by the tool, having to represent real-
TEEM 2019, October 2019, Léon, Spain
world maze to the virtual maze on the screen. This fact was
reported by the learners.
Despite the fact that other tools have been exploited to
facilitate teaching and the most popular used stays Dr. Scratch
[30].
Tools such as App Inventor[42] or NetLogo [43] and other
applications for teaching programming and other robotics kits
[12]. Also, we encountered a non-exhaustive list of initiatives
that work to develop computational thinking[19].
Sung and Al. [33] used Dr. Scratch to explore a new factor:
the degree of embodiment. The authors examine the
development of early mathematics and programming skills
through experiencing computational perspectives.
The papers [32, 41] stress the fact that there is a necessity to
attract the attention of learners so that abstraction is activated
naturally. In other words, this could be done with Dr. Scratch
tool.
Shodiev [32] affirms that CT with a hands-on scratch
graphical approach gives the learners necessary confidence. And
the authors of [41] propose a range of activities based on the
Child programming method which will be assessed by the tool.
This last area is in need of development. A lack of definition
and assessment tools is a factor that slows down the inclusion of
CT into K-12[16, 36].
Finally, the authors advise proposing interesting projects so
that the attention of students would be attracted to the subject
and the students will start thinking computationally naturally
[32]. And recommend, working with ICT, to not give students
too much information so that their sense of abstraction can be
activated [41].
The second form is the unplugged way. The DISSECT
(DIScover SciEnce through Computational Thinking a program
aiming to integrate fundamental CT principles into existing K-12
classroom courses)[11] works to provide these skill-sets to
students and classrooms that lack access to computers. The
paper presents the positive and negative side of every unplugged
learning of CT. The researchers are working on finding
alternative methods to teach CT the appropriate way without
using computers. Staff was mobilized to help develop modules
related to their respective curriculum with the aim of teaching
CT concepts. As are doing Rijke and Al. [29] where they took the
lessons from the Barefoot Computing project
(barefootcas.org.uk). Also Bell´s group, where they use activities
from the website https://csunplugged.org , they state that
Computational Thinking is first of all a way of thinking and
learning solve problems. And this does not, necessarily, require
the use of a computer. The ideal case is to use ideas from
Computer Science to solve real-world problems [4, 19].
Results in Atmatzidou’s paper show that not all activities
need to be computed because although providing written
answers is tiring and boring for students, it is an important
learning tool. In the same direction, the results in Rambally’s
[28] article indicate that it is possible to provide practical,
concrete, learning experiences about a variety of CT concepts
using a problem-driven approach rather than programming.
983
TEEM 2019, October 2019, Léon, Spain
From this we can say that introducing Computational
Thinking and a solid base of coding is the educational agenda of
many countries. The question remains: "what is the main
objective behind it?" And the answer should be: "whatever the
mean used, the most important thing is to lograr the acquisition
of these skills; the application of high level of abstraction and
learning how to solve ptoblems using the computer science´s
principales"[15].
It is important to note that in Section 2[5], the authors
suggest that empirical abstraction is not a powerful mechanism
of abstraction and nominate reflective abstraction for concept
construction.
We are going to use the general term "abstraction" and then
decide later on which one we will be focusing.
On the other hand, Abstraction is at the heart of mathematics
[14]. Doing the overview of the subject, we encountered the
APOS Theory which is helping teachers meet the needs of
students to deal with abstraction and mathematics. The theory
proposes two ways of using it: the first helps explain the
difficulties students have with developing the appropriate
mental constructions to understand some mathematical concepts.
The second helps determine the strategy to be used to help the
student overcome difficulties in learning concepts in
Mathematics [5]. For this matter Mathematics’ educators could
use the free online course provided by Google
(https://computationalthinkingcourse.withgoogle.com/course),
among other resources. Or, design learning environments on
science topics this way it will help promote the development of
computational thinking integrated in scientific school subject in
K-12 [31].
This last idea is conveyed by many authors. Rambally [28]
conducted a study with the aim of evaluating the introduction of
CT in discrete structures using an APOS-CT approach: the
impact is positively significant. This approach allowed to
develop mental models of different elements of CT and to solve
problems in such a way that the solution was to be automated. In
this sense they propose to develop in future works a
mathematics curriculum that integrates CT.
Current educational reforms (Next Generation Science
Standards and Common Core) focus on the need for students to
be exposed to computer science, based on
algorithmic/computational thinking concepts in the K-12
curriculum so that the countries remain competitive in the
education of the 21st Century [16, 18, 21]. Also, Wing [38]
stressed the importance of introducing CT to basic learnings.
And Yadav and Al. believe that the best approach is connecting
CT concepts to what already exists in the curricula [39].
With that said, Research has found that early childhood
educational interventions are related to lower costs and more
lasting effects [9].
984
H. Chaabi et al.
3 Hypotheses
The hypotheses proposed for our thesis are as follows:
H1. Teaching CT at the primary level could help the
development of abstraction and thus improve the
understanding of mathematics.
We think that improving the abstraction skill would help
improve the relationship between the learner and mathematics
since abstraction is at the heart of mathematics [14, 16].
H2. Abstraction can be taught in primary education.
Knowing that there are two opposite currents when it comes
to teaching abstraction at an early age [14, 29, 41], we would like
to study the improvement of abstraction in primary learners
working with CT since assimilator and divergent profiles (Kolb’s
learning profiles) manage very well the abstraction skill.
4 Research objectives
The objectives and goals that we want to explore are the
following:
Objective 1: Analyze the current state of advances made in the
field of Computational Thinking. For this purpose, an overview
will be carried out regarding the application of computational
thinking in mathematics in relation with Kolb's learning profiles
(more specifically the assimilators and convergers).
Objective 2: Explore the APOS Theory to develop mathematical
abilities in primary education. Since APOS Theory has been
successful in describing the mental process that learners need to
learn numerous mathematical concepts [1, 5].
Objective 3: Develop a methodology that allows elementary
children to develop their Learning profiles favoring the learning
of mathematics (above cited) via the use of Computational
Thinking. The methodology should allow these children to
make use of these lessons for the development of their Learning
profiles.
5 Research approach and method
Given the nature of our research, we were looking for a
computing-inspired approach that could effectively bridge the
chasm between research and practice in formal education. With
the aim to participate in the improvement of teaching processes
and learning [3], we decided to go with Design Based Research
(DBR). Also called “design-research” [26] and “development
research” [8, 26], DBR is defined by :
 The involvement in real educational context,
 The Design and Testing of real Interventions is a key
feature designing the quality of the research project,
 The involvement of multiple iterations,
 The complicity of a collaborative partnership between
researchers and practitioners.
Analysis of the relationship between computational thinking and
mathematical abstraction in primary education
We chose this methodology because the present thesis
presents both theoretical investigation and the development of
solutions to respond to propound questions.
6 Results to date and their validity
We started investigating the profiles explored in primary
education. We had two objectives. The first one was to see if this
parameter is taken into account while educating our children in
primary schools. And the second one, since we are interested in
mathematics, is to look for profilesthat could promote the
relationship between mathematics and learners.
So, we prepared a paper, which is in the process of
publication, exposing the different trends of profiles treated by
researchers in the literature in primary education with children
with nolearning disabilities or problem.
Conducting this study allowed us to identify the most used
profiles. The analysis of the selected papers leads us to see a lack
of interest from the researcher to investigate in this field in
primary schools. And that of the few papers encountered, there
is a GAP of more than 10 years in the published papers
The study also allowed us to find interest in Kolb’s Learning
Profiles, especially assimilators and Convergents because they
both have the learning ability namely: “abstract
conceptualization”. This skill favors dealing with mathematics
and science.
7 Dissertation status
I am a PhD student in my 4th year of studies. I am currently
completing a co-tutored PhD between the University of Cadiz
and The Abdelmalek Essaadi University.
Since the subject we chose was too broad, it took us time to
narrow it down. And since last year we are focusing our
research toward children in primary education. Contributing in
helping learners to develop their learning abilities to assimilate
better what they are taught.
Another article, apart from this one, is in a state of “final
phase” to being published.
8 Current and expected contributions
Future work is expected to define the type of abstractions we are
going to focus on. Once it is decided, we will prepare activities to
help develop this type of abstraction with the aim to promote
Computational Thinking. We are working with primary learners,
and in order to work on basic learning, we choose mathematics
as the content area to exercise.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I gratefully acknowledge the support of "el Aula Universitaria del
Estrecho - University of Cadiz" and generosity of "L'Oréal-
UNESCO Maghreb Fellowships For Women in Science", without
which the present study could not have been completed.
TEEM 2019, October 2019, Léon, Spain
REFERENCES
[1] Ilana Arnon, Jim Cottrill, Ed Dubinsky, Asuman Oktaç, Solange R. Fuentes,
Maria Trigueros, and Kirk Weller, 2013. APOS Theory: a framework for research
and curriculum development in mathematics education. Springer Science &
Business Media.
[2] Anja Balanskat, and Katja Engelhardt, 2015. Computing our future. Computer
programming and coding. Priorities, school curricula and initiatives across
Europe.
[3] Valerie Barr, and Chris Stephenson, 2011. Bringing computational thinking to
K-12: what is Involved and what is the role of the computer science education
community? ACM Inroads. 2, 1 (2011), 48–54.
DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/1929887.1929905.
[4] Tim Bell, Jason Alexander, Isaac Freeman, and Mick Grimley, 2009. Computer
science unplugged : school students doing real computing without computers.
New Zealand Journal of Applied Computing and Information Technology. 13, 1
(2009), 20–29.
[5] Ibrahim Cetin, and Ed Dubinsky, 2017. Reflective abstraction in computational
thinking. Journal of Mathematical Behavior. 47, (Sep. 2017), 70–80.
DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2017.06.004.
[6] Hasnaa Chaabi, Abdellah Azmani, and Amina Azmani, 2018. Using Decision
Making AHP Method for the Choice of the Best Pedagogical Method for
Developing Reading Skills for Young and Illiterate Public. Lecture Notes in
Networks and Systems. 37, (2018), 697–709. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-
319-74500-8_64.
[7] Hui C. Chuang, Chiu F. Hu, Cheng C. Wu, and Yu T. Lin, 2015. Computational
thinking curriculum for K-12 education - A Delphi survey. Proceedings - 2015
International Conference on Learning and Teaching in Computing and
Engineering, LaTiCE 2015 (2015), 213–214.
[8] Simone Conceicao, David Gibson, and Lorraine Sherry, 2004. Using
developmental research to design, develop, and evaluate an urban education
portal. Journal of Interactive Learning Research. 15, 3 (2004), 271–286.
[9] Flavio Cunha, and James Heckman, 2007. The technology of skill formation.
American Economic Review. 97, 2 (2007), 31–47.
DOI:https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.97.2.31.
[10] Rafael Del-Pino-Casado, 2017. Como Aprender (Y Enseñar) a Realizar
Búsquedas En Cinahl Y Pubmed. Evidentia. 14, 1 (2017), 1–7.
[11] Folk, R., Gregory Lee, Ashley Michalenko, Amanda Peel, and Enrico Pontelli,
2015. GK-12 DISSECT: Incorporating computational thinking with K-12
science without computer access. Proceedings - Frontiers in Education
Conference, FIE (2015), 1315–1322.
[12] Francisco J. García Peñalvo, Angela M. Rees, Jenny Hughes, Jens Vermeersch,
Ilkka Jormanainen, and Tapani Toivonen, 2016. A survey of resources for
introducing coding into schools. ACM International Conference Proceeding
Series. 02-04-Nove, (2016), 19–26. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/3012430.3012491.
[13] Steve Furber, 2012. Shut down or restart? The way forward for computing in UK
schools.
[14] George Gadanidis, 2017. Artificial intelligence, computational thinking, and
mathematics education. International Journal of Information and Learning
Technology. 34, 2 (2017), 133–139. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1108/IJILT-09-2016-
0048.
[15] Francisco J. García Peñalvo, 2016. A brief introduction to TACCLE 3-coding
European project. 2016 International Symposium on Computers in Education,
SIIE 2016: Learning Analytics Technologies. (2016), 3–6.
DOI:https://doi.org/10.1109/SIIE.2016.7751876.
[16] Francisco J. García Peñalvo and Antònio J. Mendes, 2017. Exploring the
computational thinking effects in pre-university education. Computers in
Human Behavior. 80, (2017), 407–411.
DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.12.005.
[17] Francisco J. García Peñalvo, Daniela Reimann, and Christiane Maday, 2018.
Introducing Coding and Computational Thinking in the Schools: The TACCLE
3 – Coding Project Experience. Computational Thinking in the STEM
Disciplines. 213–226.
[18] Francisco J. García Peñalvo, Faraón Llorens Largo, Xavier Molero Prieto, and
Eduardo Vendrell Vidal, 2017. Sección Especial: Educación en Informática sub 18
(EI<18).
[19] Carina Soledad González-González, 2019. State of the art in the teaching of
computational thinking and programming in childhood education. Education
in the Knowledge Society 20. 20, (2019), 1–15.
DOI:https://doi.org/10.14201/eks2019_20_a17.
[20] David Hemmendinger, 2012. A plea for modesty. ACM Inroads. 1, 2 (2012), 4.
DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/1805724.1805725.
[21] Betty Holcomb, and Teija Sudol, 2014. School-Community Partnerships in
New York State: Snapshot of Trends as Pre-K Expands. School Community
Partnerships Project. Policy Brief II. Center for Children’s Initiatives.
[22] Cruz Izu, Claudio Mirolo, Amber Settle, Linda Mannila, and Gabriele
Stupuriene, 2017. Exploring Bebras Tasks Content and Performance: A
Multinational Study. INFORMATICS IN EDUCATION. 16, 1 (2017), 39–59.
985
TEEM 2019, October 2019, Léon, Spain
DOI:https://doi.org/10.15388/infedu.2017.03.
[23] Jeannette M. Wing 2011. Research Notebook: Computational Thinking--What
and Why.
[24] Kathy A. Jensen 2018. EVIDENCE-BASED NURSING PRACTICE: 7 Steps to the
Perfect PICO Search WHAT IS EVIDENCE-BASED NURSING PRACTICE AND
WHY IS IT IMPORTANT?
[25] Zopito Marini, and Robbie Case, 1994. The Development of Abstract
Reasoning about the Physical and Social World. Child Development. 65, 1
(1994), 147–159. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.1994.tb00741.x.
[26] Eunjung Oh, and Thomas C. Reeves, 2010. The implications of the differences
between design research and instructional systems design for educational
technology researchers and practitioners. Educational Media International. 47,
4 (2010), 263–275. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1080/09523987.2010.535326.
[27] Seymour Papert, 1980. Mindstorms: Children, Computers, and Powerful ideas.
Basic Books, Inc.
[28] Gerard Rambally, 2017. Integrating Computational Thinking in Discrete
Structures. EMERGING RESEARCH, PRACTICE, AND POLICY ON
COMPUTATIONAL THINKING. C. Rich, PJ and Hodges, ed. 99–119.
[29] Wouter J. Rijke, Lars Bollen, Tessa H. S. Eysink, and Jos L. J. Tolboom, 2018.
Computational Thinking in Primary School: An Examination of Abstraction
and Decomposition in Different Age Groups. INFORMATICS IN EDUCATION.
17, 1 (2018), 77–92. DOI:https://doi.org/10.15388/infedu.2018.05.
[30] Scratch, D. Scratch.
[31] Pratim Sengupta, John S. Kinnebrew, Satabdi Basu, Gautam Biswas, and
Douglas Clark, D. 2013. Integrating computational thinking with K-12 science
education using agent-based computation: A theoretical framework. Education
and Information Technologies. 18, 2 (Jun. 2013), 351–380.
DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-012-9240-x.
[32] Hasan Shodiev, 2015. Computational thinking and simulation in teaching
science and mathematics. Springer Proceedings in Mathematics and Statistics
(2015), 405–410.
[33] Woonhee Sung, Junghyun Ahn, and John B. Black, 2017. Introducing
Computational Thinking to Young Learners: Practicing Computational
Perspectives Through Embodiment in Mathematics Education. TECHNOLOGY
KNOWLEDGE AND LEARNING. 22, 3, SI (Oct. 2017), 443–463.
986
H. Chaabi et al.
DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-017-9328-x.
[34] Yune Tran, 2019. Computational Thinking Equity in Elementary Classrooms:
What Third-Grade Students Know and Can Do. JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL
COMPUTING RESEARCH. 57, 1 (Mar. 2019), 3–31.
DOI:https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633117743918.
[35] Danli Wang, Tingting Wang, and Zhen Liu, 2014. A Tangible Programming
Tool for Children to Cultivate Computational Thinking. The Scientific World
Journal. 2014, (2014), 1–10. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/428080.
[36] Linda Werner, Jill Denner, and Shannon Campe, 2012. The Fairy Performance
Assessment: Measuring Computational Thinking in Middle School. Proceedings
of the 43rd ACM technical symposium on computer science education. (2012),
215–220. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/2157136.2157200.
[37] Jeannette M. Wing, 2006. Computational Thinking - The begening.
Communications of the ACM. 24, 3 (2006), 33.
DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/1118178.1118215.
[38] Jeannette M. Wing, 2008. Computational thinking and thinking about
computing. PHILOSOPHICAL TRANSACTIONS OF THE ROYAL SOCIETY A-
MATHEMATICAL PHYSICALAND ENGINEERING SCIENCES. 366, 1881 (Oct.
2008), 3717–3725. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2008.0118.
[39] Aman Yadav, Hai Hong, and Chris Stephenson, 2016. Computational Thinking
for All: Pedagogical Approaches to Embedding 21st Century Problem Solving
in K-12 Classrooms. TechTrends. 60, 6 (Nov. 2016), 565–568.
DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-016-0087-7.
[40] Aman Yadav, Chris Mayfield, Ninger Zhou, Susanne Hambrusch, and John T.
Korb, 2014. Computational Thinking in Elementary and Secondary Teacher
Education. ACM Transactions on Computing Education. 14, 1 (2014), 1–16.
DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/2576872.
[41] René F. Zúñiga Muñoz, Julio A. Hurtado Alegría, and Patricia Paderewsky
Rodríguez, 2016. Discovering the mechanisms of abstraction in the
performance of work teams in children to solve computational problems.
Sistemas y Telemática. 14, 36 (2016), 69–87.
DOI:https://doi.org/10.18046/syt.v14i36.2216.
[42] App inventor.
[43] Netlogo.