Search

This introduction welcomes readers to the second volume of an ACM TOCE special issue on justice-centered computing education. Here we reflect on the ways both the first volume and this current volume expand our notions of justice. More specifically, the first volume explored topics such as intersectionality, transformational justice, intercultural computing, ethnocomputing, translanguaging, socially responsible computing, and institutional theory. This volume continues the conversation with its focus on decolonization, racial literacy with white computing educators, youth agency and voice in computing and media production, learning pathways focused on justice issues for a rural Mexican American youth, and Universal Design for Learning in CS education. We end with discussing the important issues, topics, and voices that are missing from these two volumes, and potential future directions for dialogue in our community.

The ideas we offer below for considering justice-centered computing education point to a broad array of problem-spaces, contexts, and communities that scholars, educators, technologists, and activists might engage with. In exploring and deepening the conversation around this project, the seven articles included in the first volume of this special issue employ diverse theoretical perspectives, methodologies, and frameworks, including but not limited to intersectionality, transformational justice, intercultural computing, ethnocomputing, translanguaging, socially responsible computing, and institutional theory. Across them, rather than consensus on a narrow set of issues, we see the possibilities of a pluralistic and wide-ranging conversation about how we might constitute the meanings of “justice-centered” within computing education, the tools that might be used to produce such meanings, and the actions that might address them.

“Back with another video. I got a glitch for y’all. Imaboutta bless, Imaboutta bless.” On the second day of a city-wide early work program for low-income youth in one of America’s largest municipal...

This article explores the intersection of two central issues in computer science education (CSed)—what is meant by “equitable computer science education” and how attendant equity goals play out as school districts attempt to implement comprehensive K12 CSed initiatives. Based on analysis of qualitative data gathered over 15 months of one district's efforts in this area, our findings illustrate how varying conceptualizations of equitable CSed are at play during institutional change processes in a school district, and how negotiation and management of differing equity-related goals takes place within CSed systems change efforts. The implications of this work point to the need of district-wide CSed efforts to engage stakeholders from across levels in the system in the process of planning and implementation. Additionally, we see a potential need for deliberative routines where various conceptions and attendant goals around equity—both related and unrelated to CSed—can be understood and negotiated among district actors.

As districts across the United States move to implement comprehensive computer science education (CSed) initiatives, there is increasing interest in utilizing data-informed strategies such as continuous improvement to address systemic inequities. However, the specifics of how education institutions move from collecting and monitoring data into processes of systems improvement are not straightforward. This study explores the critical intermediary step of diagnostic problem framing which connects the collection of data to the identification of root causes of inequities so that adequate action can be taken to change an instructional system. Without taking the step of diagnostic problem framing, district leaders run the risk of using data to change systems in ways that simply reproduce or worsen existing inequities. Through four cases from three school districts implementing comprehensive (e.g. K12, at scale) CSed initiatives, we explore the dynamics of diagnostic problem framing around each of the four phenomena related to equitable CSed as specified in the CAPE framework: system and teacher capacity around CSed, student access to CS learning, participation rates in those opportunities by subgroups, and the quality of the experience of those participating. Our findings highlight five factors mediating diagnostic problem framing: conceptualization of equity as a multifaceted phenomenon, problem attribution to systems, not students, ability to analyze data for indicators of inequities, knowledge of local instructional systems, and embeddedness in instructional networks. Our results affirm the importance of developing robust data systems in CSed initiatives, but also show how attention to broader institutional factors can improve the capacity of these systems to address inequities.

In this poster, we will present the initial results of a meta-aggregation study that synthesizes qualitative evidence to identify the charac- teristics of effective in-service teacher professional development programs (TPD) around computational thinking (CT) integration in K-12. In addition, we will discuss the importance of these char- acteristics in supporting teachers. We identified four synthesized findings representing the key characteristics of effective TPDs for CT integration in K-12 (e.g., improving teacher capacity in CT in- tegration, creating meaningful learning experiences, establishing research-practice partnership, and providing continuous and sus- tainable support).

Who makes decisions about what K-12 computer science education(CSed) should look like? While equitable participation is a central focus of K-12 CSed, the field has largely thought about equity through the lens of providing access to inclusive and robust CS learning. But issues of who has a "seat at the table" in determining the shape of those experiences, and the larger field that structures them, have been largely under-explored. This panel session argues that equitable CSed must take into account questions of participation in decision-making about CSed, with such issues of power themselves a key dimension of equity in any education effort. We highlight efforts engaging stakeholders from across the education landscape-parents, educators, community members, administrators, and students-exploring how decision-making is structured, how voices that are usually marginalized might be elevated, the tensions involved in these processes, and the relationships between participation and equity.

Equity is arguably an agreed upon value within the Computer Science education (CSed) community, and perhaps even more so within efforts to universalize access to CSed within K12 settings through emerging ‘CS for All’ initiatives. However, stakeholders often mean different things when referring to equity, with important implications for what CS teaching and learning looks like in schools. In this paper, we explore the question of how K12 school district actors’ conceptualizations of equity manifest within their planning and implementation of district-wide CSed initiatives. Based on a research-practice partnership aimed at supporting and researching district-wide CSed initiatives, data presented - interviews with district faculty, district planning documents, meeting transcripts and field observations - were drawn from five participating school districts as they made decisions and enacted activities over 11 months in areas including vision-setting, curriculum, professional development, leadership efforts and use of formative data about implementation. Analyzing these data through equity frameworks found in CSed literature, we highlight three distinct but interconnected ways that district actors conceptualized equity within their CSed initiatives: (1) equity in who Computer Science is for, (2) equity in how Computer Science is taught, and (3) equity in what Computer Science is taught. Data show that these varied conceptualizations resulted in different kinds of decisions about CSed in districts. We discuss the implications of these findings in terms of their relevance to equity-oriented CS education researchers, and what lessons they hold for policy-makers and education leaders engaged in their own efforts to support equitable computer science education.

This panel will provide a space to introduce, discuss, and critique existing instantiations of culturally responsive computing (CRC), as well as envision possible futures—which might include but also go beyond CRC—of CS that are grounded in anti-racist, decolonial, and other community justice goals. This panel is made up of four unique voices from different contexts where CRC is an appropriate framework for CS and STEM education. At the same time that each of their perspectives can be unified under the justice-oriented banner of CRC, they offer divergent narratives about the limitations and affordances of the framework.

Purpose This article makes the case that the education community can learn from professional learning and innovation practices, collectively called “Working in the Open” (or “Working Open”), that have roots in the free/open source software (F/OSS) movement. These practices focus on values of transparency, collaboration and sharing within communities of experimentation. This paper aims to argues that Working Open offers a compelling approach to fostering distributed educational professional networks that focus on co-constructing new projects and best practices. Design/methodology/approach Insights presented here are based on three sources: expert perspectives on open source work practices gleaned through interviews and blog posts, a qualitative case analysis of a collaborative project enacted by a group of informal learning organizations within the Hive NYC Learning Network, a community of over 70 youth-facing organizations in New York City, as well as an overview of that network’s participation structures, and, finally, knowledge-building activities and discussions held within the Hive NYC community about the topic in situ. From these sources, the authors derived general principles to guide open work approaches. Findings The authors identify five practices deemed as central to Working Open: public storytelling and context setting, enabling community contribution, rapid prototyping “in the wild”, public reflection and documentation and, lastly, creating remixable work products. The authors describe these practices, show how they are enacted in situ, outline ways that Hive NYC stewards promote a Working Open organizational ecosystem and conclude with recommendations for utilizing a Working Open approach. Originality/value Drawing from the F/OSS movement, this article builds on standard practices of professional learning communities to provide an approach that focuses on pushing forward innovation and changes in practice as opposed to solely sharing reflections or observing practices.

Purpose This article makes a case for the importance of brokering future learning opportunities to youth as a programmatic goal for informal learning organizations. Such brokering entails engaging in practices that connect youth to events, programs, internships, individuals and institutions related to their interests to support them beyond the window of a specific program or event. Brokering is especially critical for youth who are new to an area of interest: it helps them develop both a baseline understanding of the information landscape and a social network that will respond to their needs as they pursue various goals. The paper aims to describe three critical levers for brokering well in informal settings: creating learning environments that allow trust to form between youth and educators and enable educators to develop an understanding of a young person’s interests, needs and goals; attending to a young person’s tendency (or not) to reach out to educators after a program is over to solicit assistance; and enabling potential brokers to efficiently locate appropriate future learning opportunities for each young person who approaches them. The authors also include a set of program practices for providers who wish to increase their brokering impact, as well as recommendations geared primarily toward organization leaders. The authors hope that this paper brings clarity and enhanced significance to the practice of brokering as a strategy to support youth pathways toward meaningful futures. Design/methodology/approach Insights presented here are the result of a participatory knowledge building and sharing process with a community of after-school providers known as the Mozilla Hive NYC Learning Network. The topic of discussion was how these providers might continue to support young people in their intensive project-based programs after the program was over. The authors of this article, acting as embedded research partners to Hive NYC, contributed insights to these discussions based on ethnographic fieldwork and case studies of high-school-age youth in the Hive NYC context. Findings The authors articulate a set of brokering practices and a conceptual model that communicates how brokering might lead to valued long-term outcomes for youth, including increased social capital. Originality/value The intent is that information and perspectives from this article will inform youth-serving practice and serve as a catalyst for further conversations and activities geared toward promoting youth pathways of learning and identity development.

The rapid expansion of the Computer Science for All (CSforAll) movement in the United States has catalyzed promising policies, tools, and pedagogies for K-12 universal CS education. It has also created significant challenges for schools and districts, namely, decision-making around the programs, curricula, and professional development that will best align to their communities' broader visions and goals around equitable computing education for all.

Do different people hold different reasons for promoting universal computer science education (CS4All)? Do different rationale for CS education imply different learning designs? Is it possible to design educational activities that meaningfully integrate multiple purposes and visions? As CS4All initiatives kick off in localities across the United States, we believe that these questions are key to developing policies, pedagogies and technologies that actually are 'for all'. In this session, participants will engage in a facilitated conversation supported by an informal collaborative tabletop card game. The game, meant to promote reflection, debate, discussion and ideation around CS education, will engage participants as designers tasked with integrating multiple commonly-held values and visions of Computer Science education into a concrete learning activities. The goal of this informal activity and brainstorm is not to become a master designer in 45 minutes. Rather, this design challenge acts as a launching pad to have meaningful discussions around the various visions of Computer Science education and what it looks like to translate these visions into practice. We will also invite participants to give feedback on their experience using the game as a conversation starter, with the hope that it might be used by others engaged in deliberations around how to design CS educational experiences. The game will be supplementing an ongoing research project, "CSed Visions" (http://wp.me/P3GrOX-ek) that investigates the role that visions and values play in Computer Science education.

As momentum grows to expand K12 Computer Science (CS) education, associated public narratives often assume core questions about why CS should be taught to all students have been sufficiently answered. Having clarity around the core purposes that varied stakeholders are envisioning is critical to ensuring the coherence of CS4All initiatives. This study presents a framework examining the range of arguments for and projected impacts of CS education programs. Based on data drawn from a researcher- facilitated participatory knowledge building process involving 26 CS education stakeholders who articulated 161 arguments, we identify seven areas of impact present in arguments for universal CS education: (1) economic and workforce development, (2) equity and social justice, (3) competencies and literacies, (4) citizenship and civic life, (5) scientific, technological and social innovation, (6) school improvement and reform and (7) fun, fulfillment and personal agency. Findings show that individual arguments and visions for CS education often reference multiple impact areas. We intend for this framework to support reflection by CS education stakeholders to consider how their current initiatives index different ideologies about what CS4All projects are meant to achieve.

Technology use is increasingly characterized by both critical mindsets and participatory practices. Yet, our current media literacy frameworks, critical media literacy and participatory media literacy, fail to account for and understand the nature of these practices because they are happening in situ. Arguing that these frameworks might be synthesized to understand emergent online practices, this article introduces the notion of hacker literacies: empowered participatory practices, grounded in critical mindsets, that aim to resist, reconfigure, and/or reformulate the sociotechnical digital spaces and tools that mediate social, cultural, and political participation in the 21st century. The article grounds this concept in a number of recent cases, including the Arab Spring and Occupy Wall Street movements, the creation of the hashtag on Twitter, and public reactions to Facebook's privacy policy changes. These examples illustrate the ways users of new media do not take for granted the design of these new mod...