Manifestations of computational thinking practices on preservice mathematics teachers’ pen-and-paper problem-solving

Guardado en:
Bibliografiske detaljer
Udgivet i:Pythagoras vol. 46, no. 1 (2025)
Hovedforfatter: Mahlaba, Sfiso C
Udgivet:
AOSIS (Pty) Ltd
Fag:
Online adgang:Citation/Abstract
Full Text
Full Text - PDF
Tags: Tilføj Tag
Ingen Tags, Vær først til at tagge denne postø!

MARC

LEADER 00000nab a2200000uu 4500
001 3282243303
003 UK-CbPIL
022 |a 1012-2346 
022 |a 2223-7895 
024 7 |a 10.4102/pythagoras.v46i1.855  |2 doi 
035 |a 3282243303 
045 2 |b d20250101  |b d20250630 
084 |a 182236  |2 nlm 
100 1 |a Mahlaba, Sfiso C 
245 1 |a Manifestations of computational thinking practices on preservice mathematics teachers’ pen-and-paper problem-solving 
260 |b AOSIS (Pty) Ltd  |c 2025 
513 |a Journal Article 
520 3 |a The development of computational thinking has been declared a necessity for everyone in the current digital era. Most studies dedicated to the development of computational thinking have focused on using plugged activities. However, in developing countries like South Africa, most schools struggle with resource provision which can inhibit the integration of computational thinking in all learners. This article considers an alternative approach to computational thinking in mathematics education using pen-and-paper problem-solving. Through the adoption of exploratory qualitative research with a purposeful sample of five preservice teachers, the manifestation of computational thinking in pen-and-paper problem-solving is explored. Adopting the combination of the metacognitive framework and Schoenfeld’s framework for problem-solving, this study explains from the perspectives of preservice teachers how computational thinking practices manifest in pen-and-paper problem-solving. The thematic analysis conducted in this study revealed that computational thinking practices such as ion, decomposition and algorithmic thinking, and evaluation were observed in preservice teachers’ pen-and-paper problem-solving. Two interesting findings emerged from this study: (1) there was no discernible difference between decomposition and algorithmic thinking in preservice teachers’ pen-and-paper problem-solving, and (2) there was no clear evidence of pattern recognition as an important computational thinking practice in preservice teachers’ pen-and-paper problem-solving.Contribution:The first finding indicates that during pen-and-paper problem-solving, it might be difficult to differentiate between decomposition and algorithmic thinking. The second finding indicates that more studies need to be conducted, directed towards how pattern recognition manifest in pen-and-paper problem-solving. Conclusions and recommendations are made for this study. 
651 4 |a South Africa 
653 |a Digital divide 
653 |a Problem solving 
653 |a Curricula 
653 |a Mathematics education 
653 |a Decomposition 
653 |a Mathematical problems 
653 |a Pattern recognition 
653 |a Computers 
653 |a Mathematics teachers 
653 |a Teachers 
653 |a Algorithms 
653 |a Learning 
653 |a Mathematics Skills 
653 |a Learning Activities 
653 |a Competence 
653 |a Influence of Technology 
653 |a Experimental Groups 
653 |a Cognitive Processes 
653 |a Access to Computers 
653 |a Games 
653 |a Electronic Equipment 
653 |a Meta Analysis 
653 |a Mathematics Curriculum 
653 |a Mathematical Applications 
653 |a Metacognition 
653 |a Preservice Teachers 
653 |a Coding 
653 |a Mathematics Materials 
653 |a Learner Engagement 
653 |a Computer Use 
653 |a Publish or Perish Issue 
653 |a Educational Strategies 
653 |a Programming 
773 0 |t Pythagoras  |g vol. 46, no. 1 (2025) 
786 0 |d ProQuest  |t Engineering Database 
856 4 1 |3 Citation/Abstract  |u https://www.proquest.com/docview/3282243303/abstract/embedded/6A8EOT78XXH2IG52?source=fedsrch 
856 4 0 |3 Full Text  |u https://www.proquest.com/docview/3282243303/fulltext/embedded/6A8EOT78XXH2IG52?source=fedsrch 
856 4 0 |3 Full Text - PDF  |u https://www.proquest.com/docview/3282243303/fulltextPDF/embedded/6A8EOT78XXH2IG52?source=fedsrch