Dropdown items
My Academies

Personal Library

Account settings

Report of a Workshop on the Scope and Nature of Computational Thinking (2010)

Chapter: Appendix A: Workshop Agenda

Visit NAP.edu/10766 to get more information about this book, to buy it in print, or to download it as a free PDF.

Previous chapter Next chapter
Page of 102
Search this publication

Page 69 Cite Bookmark

Suggested Citation: "Appendix A: Workshop Agenda." National Research Council. 2010. Report of a Workshop on the Scope and Nature of Computational Thinking. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12840.

A
Workshop Agenda

FEBRUARY 19, 2009

8:30-8:45 AM	Welcome and Housekeeping
8:30-8:45 AM	Marcia Linn, University of California, Berkeley, Committee Chair
8:45-10:30 AM	Panel 1—The Scope and Nature of Computational Thinking
	How is computational thinking different from mathematical thinking? How is it different from quantitative reasoning? How is it different from scientific thinking? How is it different from fluency with information technology?
	Presenters:
	Jeannette Wing, National Science Foundation Wm. Wulf, University of Virginia Gerald Sussman, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Peter Lee, Carnegie Mellon University
	Committee respondent: Larry Snyder

Page 70 Cite Bookmark

10:30-12:15 PM	Panel 2—Computational Thinking Everywhere (Part I)
	What kinds of problems require computational thinking? What are some examples? How, if at all, does computational thinking vary by discipline? What would be the nature of computational thinking for physicists, biologists, engineers, lawyers, physicians, historians, sociologists, teachers, accountants, homemakers, bus drivers, and so on? What are the exposures and experiences needed to develop the level of computational thinking needed in various disciplines? What are contemporary issues facing the nation that would benefit from greater development of computational thinking? What is the value of computational thinking for nonscientists? How, if at all, would widespread facility with computational thinking enhance the productivity of U.S. workers? How do we best illustrate the power of computational thinking?
	Presenters:
	Kevin Ashley, University of Pittsburgh Chris Hoffmann, Purdue University Alan Kay, Viewpoints Research Institute, Inc. Richard Lipton, Georgia Tech Robert Sproull, Sun Microsystems, Inc.
	Committee respondent: M. Brian Blake
12:15-1:15 PM	Working Lunch—Other Related Ongoing Efforts
12:15-1:15 PM	Andrew Bernat: CRA Education Committee Peter Denning: Great Principles of Computing (via video-conference)

Page 71 Cite Bookmark

1:15-3:00 PM	Panel 3—Computational Thinking Everywhere (Part II)
	Presenters:
	Andrew McGettrick, University of Strathclyde (invited) Edward Fox, Virginia Tech Ian Foster, Argonne National Laboratory/University of Chicago (via conference call) Paulo Blikstein, Northwestern University Eric Roberts, Stanford University
	Committee respondent: Robert Constable
3:00-3:10 PM	Break
3:10-4:40 PM	Panel 4—Technology and Computational Thinking (Show and Tell)
	What affordances are provided by new technologies for computational thinking? What is the role of information technology in imparting computational thinking skills? What parts of computational thinking can be taught without the use of computers? Without the skills of computer programming?
	Participants:
	Mitchel Resnick, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Ken Kahn, Oxford University David Moursund, University of Oregon
	Committee respondent: Janet Kolodner
4:45-5:15 PM	Break
4:40-4:45 PM	Other Related Ongoing Efforts
4:40-4:45 PM	Tim Bell, New Zealand Computer Science Unplugged (via videoconference)
5:15-5:30 PM	Wrap-up
5:30	Adjourn Day-One Public Sessions

Page 72 Cite Bookmark

5:30-6:15 PM	Reception
6:15-8:15 PM	Working Dinner in Small Groups
6:15-8:15 PM	Homework assignment—What is the core of computational thinking? What are the fundamental principles of computational thinking? What concepts are derivative from the fundamentals? Are there multiple decompositions of computational thinking into fundamental and derivative parts? What are some examples? How, if at all, can computational thinking be decomposed into an intellectual hierarchy?

FEBRUARY 20, 2009

8:30-8:35 AM	Welcome and Housekeeping Marcia Linn, University of Berkeley, Committee Chair
8:35-10:00 AM	Panel 5—Report-back on homework assignments:
8:35-10:00 AM	Committee respondent: Alfred Aho
10:00-10:15 AM	Break
10:15-11:45 AM	Panel 6—Bridging into Education
	Are the fundamental principles of computational thinking the easiest to grasp? If so, why? If not, why not? Are the fundamental principles the logical starting point for the teaching of computational thinking? If so, why? If not, why not?
	Participants:
	Dor Abrahamson, University of California, Berkeley Owen Astrachan, Duke University Lenore Blum, Carnegie Mellon University Andy diSessa, University of California, Berkeley
	Committee respondent: Uri Wilensky

Page 73 Cite Bookmark

11:45-12:45 PM	Working Lunch—Computer Science Advanced Placement Efforts
11:45-12:45 PM	Jan Cuny, National Science Foundation
12:45-2:15 PM	Panel 7—Related Best Practices in Teaching/Pedagogy
	How do we engage all learners in computational thinking? What are the exposures and experiences needed to develop computational thinking? What is the role of the computer in instruction? Where does programming fit into computational thinking?
	Presenters:
	Roy Pea, Stanford University Allan Collins, Northwestern University Ursula Wolz, The College of New Jersey Joshua Danish, Indiana University
	Committee respondent: Yasmin Kafai
2:15-2:30 PM	Break
2:30-4:30 PM	Discussion and Wrap-up
2:30-4:30 PM	Committee members summarize their individual reactions Floor opened to other workshop participants
4:30 PM	Adjourn