Click to learn how you can support the future of STEM

ITEEA Computational Thinking

“Our field has long been confused about educational technologies. National surveys consistently show that Americans think first of computers when asked to define technology. The development of technological literacy standards indicated that computers are but one tool in the use of technologies, rather than its sole definition or purpose. Computer programming was once more closely associated with a career and technical education path than with the technological literacy of open-ended engineering design and problem solving. With the greater capabilities and infusion of computational thinking in today’s work world, perhaps it is time for educational leaders to begin rethinking long-held ideas about computational thinking” (Buckler, Koperski, & Loveland, 2017).

ITEEA is providing this fundamental resource to lead our profession and enable all technology and engineering educators, along with their STEM colleagues from other disciplines, to take the initiative and better understand how computational thinking is operationally defined within the context of teaching through a technology and engineering education and Integrative STEM Education approach. The eventual goal is to operationalize “I-STEM” to provide examples that assist technology and engineering educators (and all others in the STEM field) to understand and implement computational thinking and understandings that are driven through engagement and dynamic instructional practices preK-12 and beyond to benefit ALL students!

This resource provides a launching point upon which teachers can build in their technology and engineering classrooms. The intent is to identify promising computational thinking practices as part of instructional practices and demonstrate to the entire STEM community the value of quality technology and engineering education that classroom teachers provide to students each and every day.


References:

Buckler, C., Koperski, K., & Loveland, T. (2017). Is computer science compatible with technological literacy?  Technology and Engineering Teacher, 77(4), pp 15-20.