Mohammed Saqr
Solomon sunday Oyelere
Skip Abstract Section
Abstract
The momentum around computational thinking (CT) has kindled a rising wave of research initiatives and scholarly contributions seeking to capitalize on the opportunities that CT could bring. A number of literature reviews have showed a vibrant community of practitioners and a growing number of publications. However, the history and evolution of the emerging research topic, the milestone publications that have shaped its directions, and the timeline of the important developments may be better told through a quantitative, scientometric narrative. This article presents a bibliometric analysis of the drivers of the CT topic, as well as its main themes of research, international collaborations, influential authors, and seminal publications, and how authors and publications have influenced one another. The metadata of 1,874 documents were retrieved from the Scopus database using the keyword “computational thinking.” The results show that CT research has been US-centric from the start, and continues to be dominated by US researchers both in volume and impact. International collaboration is relatively low, but clusters of joint research are found between, for example, a number of Nordic countries, lusophone- and hispanophone countries, and central European countries. The results show that CT features the computing’s traditional tripartite disciplinary structure (design, modeling, and theory), a distinct emphasis on programming, and a strong pedagogical and educational backdrop including constructionism, self-efficacy, motivation, and teacher training.
- Alfred V. Aho. 2011. Ubiquity symposium: Computation and Computational Thinking. Ubiquity 2011 (2011), Article 1. Google Scholar
- Massimo Aria and Corrado Cuccurullo. 2017. Bibliometrix: An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis. Journal of Informetrics 11, 4 (2017), 959–975.Google Scholar
- Michal Armoni. 2016. Computer science, computational thinking, programming, coding: The anomalies of transitivity in K–12 computer science education. ACM Inroads 7, 4 (2016), 24–27. Google Scholar
- William Aspray. 2016. Participation in Computing: The National Science Foundation’s Expansionary Programs. Springer, Switzerland. Google Scholar
- Valerie Barr. 2016. Disciplinary thinking, computational doing: Promoting interdisciplinary computing while transforming computer science enrollments. ACM Inroads 7, 2 (2016), 48–57. Google Scholar
- 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. Google Scholar
- Ashok Basawapatna, Kyu Han Koh, Alexander Repenning, David C. Webb, and Krista Sekeres Marshall. 2011. Recognizing computational thinking patterns. In Proceedings of the 42nd ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (SIGCSE ’11). ACM, New York, NY, 245–250. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/1953163.1953241 Google Scholar
- 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.Google Scholar
- Marina Umaschi Bers, Louise Flannery, Elizabeth R. Kazakoff, and Amanda Sullivan. 2014. Computational thinking and tinkering: Exploration of an early childhood robotics curriculum. Computers & Education 72 (2014), 145–157.Google Scholar
- Richard Connor, Quintin Cutts, and Judy Robertson. 2017. Keeping the machinery in computing education. Communications of the ACM 60, 11 (2017), 26–28. Google Scholar
- Paul Curzon, Tim Bell, Jane Waite, and Mark Dorling. 2019. Computational thinking. In The Cambridge Handbook of Computing Education Research, Sally A. Fincher and Anthony V. Robins (Eds.). Cambridge University Press, 513–546.Google Scholar
- Valentina Dagienė and Sue Sentance. 2016. It’s computational thinking! Bebras tasks in the curriculum. In Informatics in Schools: Improvement of Informatics Knowledge and Perception, Andrej Brodnik and Françoise Tort (Eds.). Springer International Publishing, Cham, Switzerland, 28–39. Google Scholar
- Pasquale De Meo, Emilio Ferrara, Giacomo Fiumara, and Alessandro Provetti. 2011. Generalized Louvain method for community detection in large networks. In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Intelligent Systems Design and Applications. 88–93.Google Scholar
- Peter J. Denning. 2009. Beyond computational thinking. Communications of the ACM 52, 6 (2009), 28–30. Google Scholar
- Peter J. Denning. 2017. Computational thinking in science. American Scientist 105, 1 (2017), 13–17.Google Scholar
- Peter J. Denning. 2017. Remaining trouble spots with computational thinking. Communications of the ACM 60, 6 (2017), 33–39. Google Scholar
- Peter J. Denning, D. E. Comer, David Gries, Michael C. Mulder, Allen Tucker, A. Joe Turner, and Paul R. Young. 1989. Computing as a discipline. Communications of the ACM 32, 1 (1989), 9–23. Google Scholar
- Peter J. Denning and Craig H. Martell. 2015. Great Principles of Computing. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA. Google Scholar
- Peter J. Denning and Matti Tedre. 2019. Computational Thinking. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
- Ilenia Fronza, Nabil El Ioini, and Luis Corral. 2015. Students want to create apps: Leveraging computational thinking to teach mobile software development. In Proceedings of the 16th Annual Conference on Information Technology Education (SIGITE’15). ACM, New York, NY, 21–26. Google Scholar
- F. J. García-Peñalvo. 2016. A brief introduction to TACCLE 3—Coding European project. In Proceedings of the 2016 International Symposium on Computers in Education (SIIE’16). 1–4. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1109/SIIE.2016.7751876Google Scholar
- Francisco Jose García-Peñalvo, Daniela Reimann, Maire Tuul, Angela Rees, and Ilkka Jormanainen. 2016. An Overview of the Most Relevant Literature on Coding and Computational Thinking with Emphasis on the Relevant Issues for Teachers. Technical Report. TACCLE3 Consortium, Belgium. DOI:https://doi.org/doi:10.5281/zenodo.165123Google Scholar
- Eugene Garfield. 2004. Historiographic mapping of knowledge domains literature. Journal of Information Science 30, 2 (2004), 119–145.Google Scholar
- Shuchi Grover. 2018. A tale of two CTs (and a revised timeline for computational thinking). Blog@CACM (November 5, 2018). Retrieved January 23, 2021 from https://cacm.acm.org/blogs/blog-cacm/232488-a-tale-of-two-cts-and-a-revised-timeline-for-computational-thinking/fulltext.Google Scholar
- Shuchi Grover and Roy D. Pea. 2013. Computational thinking in K–12: A review of the state of the field. Educational Researcher 42, 1 (2013), 38–43.Google Scholar
- Mark Guzdial. 2008. Education: Paving the way for computational thinking. Communications of the ACM 51, 8 (2008), 25–27. Google Scholar
- Mark Guzdial. 2015. Learner-Centered Design of Computing Education: Research on Computing for Everyone. Morgan & Claypool, San Rafael, CA.Google Scholar
- Astrid Gynnild. 2014. Journalism innovation leads to innovation journalism: The impact of computational exploration on changing mindsets. Journalism 15, 6 (2014), 713–730.Google Scholar
- Susanne Hambrusch, Christoph Hoffmann, John T. Korb, Mark Haugan, and Antony L. Hosking. 2009. A multidisciplinary approach towards computational thinking for science majors. In Proceedings of the 40th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (SIGCSE’09). ACM, New York, NY, 183–187. Google Scholar
- David Hemmendinger. 2010. A plea for modesty. ACM Inroads 1, 2 (2010), 4–7. Google Scholar
- Yasmin B. Kafai. 2016. From computational thinking to computational participation in K–12 education. Communications of the ACM 59, 8 (2016), 26–27. Google Scholar
- Donald E. Knuth. 1974. Computer science and its relation to mathematics. American Mathematical Monthly 81 (1974), 323–343.Google Scholar
- Kyu Han Koh, Ashok Basawapatna, Vicki Bennett, and Alexander Repenning. 2010. Towards the automatic recognition of computational thinking for adaptive visual language learning. In Proceedings of the 2010 IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages and Human-Centric Computing. 59–66. Google Scholar
- K. H. Koh, A. Basawapatna, H. Nickerson, and A. Repenning. 2014. Real time assessment of computational thinking. In Proceedings of the 2014 IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages and Human-Centric Computing (VL/HCC’14). 49–52.Google Scholar
- Anna Lamprou and Alexander Repenning. 2017. Computational thinking \(\) programming. SI Magazine. Retrieved January 23, 2021 from https://magazine.swissinformatics.org/en/computational-thinking-%e2%89%a0-programming/.Google Scholar
- Irene Lee. 2016. Reclaiming the roots of CT. CSTA Voice: The Voice of K–12 Computer Science Education and Its Educators 12, 1 (2016), 3–4.Google Scholar
- Irene Lee, Fred Martin, Jill Denner, Bob Coulter, Walter Allan, Jeri Erickson, Joyce Malyn-Smith, and Linda Werner. 2011. Computational thinking for youth in practice. ACM Inroads 2, 1 (2011), 32–37. Google Scholar
- James Lockwood and Aidan Mooney. 2017. Computational Thinking in Education: Where Does It Fit? A Systematic Literary Review. Technical Report. National University of Ireland Maynooth.Google Scholar
- James J. Lu and George H. L. Fletcher. 2009. Thinking about computational thinking. SIGCSE Bulletin 41, 1 (2009), 260–264. Google Scholar
- Sze Yee Lye and Joyce Hwee Ling Koh. 2014. Review on teaching and learning of computational thinking through programming: What is next for K–12? Computers in Human Behavior 41 (2014), 51–61. Google Scholar
- Linda Mannila, Valentina Dagienė, Barbara Demo, Natasa Grgurina, Claudio Mirolo, Lennart Rolandsson, and Amber Settle. 2014. Computational thinking in K–9 education. In Proceedings of the Working Group Reports of the 2014 on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education Conference (ITiCSE-WGR’14). ACM, New York, NY, 1–29. Google Scholar
- Wookhee Min, Megan H. Frankosky, Bradford W. Mott, Jonathan P. Rowe, Eric Wiebe, Kristy Elizabeth Boyer, and James C. Lester. 2015. DeepStealth: Leveraging deep learning models for stealth assessment in game-based learning environments. In Artificial Intelligence in Education, Cristina Conati, Neil Heffernan, Antonija Mitrovic, and M. Felisa Verdejo (Eds.). Springer International Publishing, Cham, Switzerland, 277–286.Google Scholar
- Jesús Moreno-León and Gregorio Robles. 2015. Dr. Scratch: A web tool to automatically evaluate scratch projects. In Proceedings of the Workshop in Primary and Secondary Computing Education (WiPSCE’15). ACM, New York, NY, 132–133. Google Scholar
- Enrico Nardelli. 2019. Do we really need computational thinking? Communications of the ACM 62, 2 (2019), 32–35. Google Scholar
- National Research Council. 2010. Report of a Workshop on the Scope and Nature of Computational Thinking. National Academies Press, Washington, DC. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17226/12840Google Scholar
- National Research Council. 2011. Report of a Workshop on the Pedagogical Aspects of Computational Thinking. National Academies Press, Washington, DC. DOI:https://doi.org/10.17226/13170Google Scholar
- Sebastian Mateos Nicolajsen. 2020. Perspectives on Computational Thinking. IT University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.Google Scholar
- Seymour Papert. 1980. Mindstorms: Children, Computers, and Powerful Ideas. Basic Books, New York, NY. Google Scholar
- Arnold Neville Pears. 2019. Developing computational thinking, “Fad” or “Fundamental”? Constructivist Foundations 14, 3 (2019), 410–412.Google Scholar
- Alexander Repenning, David Webb, and Andri Ioannidou. 2010. Scalable game design and the development of a checklist for getting computational thinking into public schools. In Proceedings of the 41st ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (SIGCSE’10). ACM, New York, NY, 265–269. Google Scholar
- Mitchel Resnick. 2017. Lifelong Kindergarten: Cultivating Creativity Through Projects, Passion, Peers, and Play. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
- José-Manuel Sáez-López, Marcos Román-González, and Esteban Vázquez-Cano. 2016. Visual programming languages integrated across the curriculum in elementary school: A two year case study using “Scratch” in five schools. Computers & Education 97 (2016), 129–141. Google Scholar
- Mohammed Saqr and Matti Tedre. 2019. Should we teach computational thinking and big data principles to medical students? International Journal of Health Sciences 13, 4 (2019), 1–2. Google Scholar
- Linda Seiter and Brendan Foreman. 2013. Modeling the learning progressions of computational thinking of primary grade students. In Proceedings of the 9th Annual International ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research (ICER’13). ACM, New York, NY, 59–66. Google Scholar
- Pratim Sengupta, John S. Kinnebrew, Satabdi Basu, Gautam Biswas, and Douglas Clark. 2013. Integrating computational thinking with K–12 science education using agent-based computation: A theoretical framework. Education and Information Technologies 18, 2 (2013), 351–380. Google Scholar
- Duane F. Shell and Leen-Kiat Soh. 2013. Profiles of motivated self-regulation in college computer science courses: Differences in major versus required non-major courses. Journal of Science Education and Technology 22, 6 (2013), 899–913. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-013-9437-9Google Scholar
- Valerie J. Shute, Chen Sun, and Jodi Asbell-Clarke. 2017. Demystifying computational thinking. Educational Research Review 22 (2017), 142–158.Google Scholar
- Simon. 2015. Emergence of Computing Education as a Research Discipline. Ph.D. Dissertation. Aalto University, Finland.Google Scholar
- Cynthia J. Solomon. 1976. Teaching the Computer to Add: An Example of Problem-Solving in an Anthropomorphic Computer Culture. Memo 396. MIT AI Laboratory, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
- Matti Tedre and Peter J. Denning. 2016. The long quest for computational thinking. In Proceedings of the 16th Koli Calling International Conference on Computing Education Research (Koli Calling’16). ACM, New York, NY, 120–129. Google Scholar
- Josh Tenenberg. 2018. Computational making. ACM Inroads 9, 1 (2018), 22–23. Google Scholar
- Mike Tissenbaum, Josh Sheldon, and Hal Abelson. 2019. From computational thinking to computational action. Communications of the ACM 62, 3 (2019), 34–36. Google Scholar
- Annette Vee. 2017. Coding Literacy: How Computer Programming Is Changing Writing. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA. Google Scholar
- Joke Voogt, Petra Fisser, Jon Good, Punya Mishra, and Aman Yadav. 2015. Computational thinking in compulsory education: Towards an agenda for research and practice. Education and Information Technologies 20, 4 (2015), 715–728. Google Scholar
- George Vrettas and Mark Sanderson. 2015. Conferences versus journals in computer science. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 66, 12 (2015), 2674–2684. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23349 Google Scholar
- David Weintrop, Elham Beheshti, Michael Horn, Kai Orton, Kemi Jona, Laura Trouille, and Uri Wilensky. 2016. Defining computational thinking for mathematics and science classrooms. Journal of Science Education and Technology 25, 1 (2016), 127–147.Google Scholar
- Linda Werner, Jill Denner, Shannon Campe, and Damon Chizuru Kawamoto. 2012. The fairy performance assessment: Measuring computational thinking in middle school. In Proceedings of the 43rd ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (SIGCSE’12). ACM, New York, NY, 215–220. Google Scholar
- Jeannette M. Wing. 2006. Computational thinking. Communications of the ACM 49, 3 (2006), 33–35. Google Scholar
- Jeannette M. Wing. 2008. Computational thinking and thinking about computing. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A 36, 1881 (2008), 3717–3725.Google Scholar
- 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), Article 5, 16 pages. Google Scholar
Index Terms
- People, Ideas, Milestones: A Scientometric Study of Computational Thinking
Recommendations
Scientometric analysis of Iraqi-Kurdistan universities' scientific productivity
Purpose - This purpose of this study is to examine research performance of Iraqi-Kurdistan universities, using the number of papers appearing in journals and proceedings, and the number of citations received by those papers as covered by Scopus, 1970-...
The scientometric analysis of publications based on the materials of the peer-reviewed journal The Physics of Nanoobjects and Nanotechnologies of the All-Union Institute for Scientific and Technical Information of the Russian Academy of Sciences (VINITI RAS): Graphene
A comparative analysis of the thematic scope of publications in the literature focusing on graphene in the period between 2010 and the first half of 2011 is conducted. The development patterns for physics of graphene are highlighted. Hotspots and ...
Scientometric analysis of publications in the area of nanoenergy based on the materials of the peer-reviewed journal of VINITI RAS Physics of Nanoobjects and Nanotechnology
Based on the analysis of a range of key publications in the area of nanoenergy, which, among other journals, were reflected in the Physics of Nanoobjects and Nanotechnology issue of the peer-reviewed journal that was published by the All-Russia ...
Comments