Computational thinking (CT) has been described as the use of abstraction, automation, and analysis in problem-solving [3]. We examine how these ways of thinking take shape for middle and high school youth in a set of NSF-supported programs. We discuss opportunities and challenges in both in-school and after-school contexts. Based on these observations, we present a "use-modify-create" framework, representing three phases of students' cognitive and practical activity in computational thinking. We recommend continued investment in the development of CT-rich learning environments, in educators who can facilitate their use, and in research on the broader value of computational thinking.

This article provides an introduction for the special issue of the Journal of Science Education and Technology focused on computational thinking (CT) from a disciplinary perspective. The special issue connects earlier research on what K-12 students can learn and be able to do using CT with the CT skills and habits of mind needed to productively participate in professional CT integrated STEM fields. In this context, the phrase "disciplinary perspective" simultaneously holds two meanings: it refers to and aims to make connections between established K-12 STEM subjects areas (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) and newer CT-integrated disciplines such as computational sciences. The special issue presents a framework for CT integration, and includes articles that illuminate what CT looks like from a disciplinary perspective, the challenges inherent in integrating CT into K-12 STEM education, and new ways of measuring CT aligned more closely with disciplinary practices. The aim of this special issue is to offer research-based and practitionergrounded insights into recent work in CT integration and provoke new ways of thinking about CT integration from researchers, practitioners, and research-practitioner partnerships.

No abstract

Machine learning systems are infiltrating our lives and are beginning to become important in our education systems. This article, developed from a synthesis and analysis of previous research, examines the implications of recent developments in machine learning for human learners and learning. In this article we first compare deep learning in computers and humans to examine their similarities and differences. Deep learning is identified as a sub-set of machine learning, which is itself a component of artificial intelligence. Deep learning often depends on backwards propagation in weighted neural networks, so is non-deterministic—the system adapts and changes through practical experience or training. This adaptive behaviour predicates the need for explainability and accountability in such systems. Accountability is the reverse of explainability. Explainability flows through the system from inputs to output (decision) whereas accountability flows backwards, from a decision to the person taking responsibility for it. Both explainability and accountability should be incorporated in machine learning system design from the outset to meet social, ethical and legislative requirements. For students to be able to understand the nature of the systems that may be supporting their own learning as well as to act as responsible citizens in contemplating the ethical issues that machine learning raises, they need to understand key aspects of machine learning systems and have opportunities to adapt and create such systems. Therefore, some changes are needed to school curricula. The article concludes with recommendations about machine learning for teachers, students, policymakers, developers and researchers.

No abstract