TYPE Systematic Review

PUBLISHED 19 October 2022

DOI 10.3389/fcomp.2022.997222

Review on the teaching of

OPEN ACCESS programming and
computational thinking in the
EDITED BY
Carmen Llorente Cejudo,
University Seville, Spain

REVIEWED BY
Cesar Collazos,
world
University of Cauca, Colombia
Bert Zwaneveld,
Open University of the Héctor Belmar1,2*
Netherlands, Netherlands
1
School of Computer Engineering, National Training Institute (INACAP), Santiago, Chile,
*CORRESPONDENCE 2
Universidad Metropolitana de Ciencias de la Educación, Santiago, Chile
Héctor Belmar
[email protected]

SPECIALTY SECTION
This article was submitted to
Recent studies suggest that computational thinking, composed of the
Digital Education, skills of abstraction, decomposition, algorithmization, debugging, and
a section of the journal problem-solving, is the fundamental skill for scientific, technological, and
Frontiers in Computer Science
economic development for the twenty-first century. However, this diagnosis
RECEIVED 18 July 2022
ACCEPTED 26 September 2022
that is unveiled in rich countries remains nebulous for poor countries. The
PUBLISHED 19 October 2022 problem is that education in computational thinking is fundamental for
CITATION countries to insert themselves in the international arena in an advantageous
Belmar H (2022) Review on the way and thus achieve the welfare goals for the population of each country. The
teaching of programming and
computational thinking in the world. objective of this research was to make a bibliographic review that shows the
Front. Comput. Sci. 4:997222. state of the art in the teaching of computer programming and computational
doi: 10.3389/fcomp.2022.997222
thinking in the 5 continents. In the review, the advances in the countries
COPYRIGHT of Europe, North America, Oceania, and Asia were observed, whereas in
© 2022 Belmar. This is an open-access
article distributed under the terms of Latin America and Africa, the advances are still basic in some countries and
the Creative Commons Attribution non-existent in others. This review is based on Preferred Reporting Items
License (CC BY). The use, distribution
for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). The main search terms
or reproduction in other forums is
permitted, provided the original were “Computational thinking” and “Teaching computer programming.” The
author(s) and the copyright owner(s) search was performed in the ACM, Conference on Computational Thinking
are credited and that the original
publication in this journal is cited, in
Education (Hong-Kong), Google Scholar, WOS, and SCOPUS databases,
accordance with accepted academic from October until December 2020, whose publication year was from 2016
practice. No use, distribution or onward. One of the main results found is that the teaching of computational
reproduction is permitted which does
not comply with these terms. thinking in England was implemented in schools in 2014; in Germany, it has
been implemented since 2016 at a transversal level in universities; in South
Korea, China, and Taiwan, it has been implemented since 2016. However, in
Latin America and Africa governments, the subject is still not considered.

KEYWORDS

computational thinking, computer programming, algorithm, programming, computer

science

Introduction
Contextualization

In the last decade, teaching of computational thinking skills in compulsory education

is being developed in various countries around the world, which is a strategic decision

Frontiers in Computer Science 01 frontiersin.org

Belmar 10.3389/fcomp.2022.997222

for technological development and for the acquisition of it is preferable for it to be an extracurricular activity
twenty-first century skills. In this rapidly advancing world, (Adell-Segura et al., 2019).
education professionals are subjected to new demands during
the exercise of teaching, which has caused training institutions to
permanently analyze their academic work, to make the necessary Teaching of computer programming
adjustments to their teacher training programs to respond to the
new demands (Coppelli, 2018). Despite it is true that this review aims to study the
In this context, questions arise; Will it be necessary teaching-learning of computer programming, it is also true
to include the teaching of computational thinking as a that the concept of “Computational Thinking” has taken some
compulsory subject? Second, from which course should it prominence whenever the subject of computer programming is
be incorporated, how many hours per week would be addressed. Nowadays, the world is incorporating the teaching
necessary? Or would it be better to incorporate it as a of computer programming for elementary and high school
development axis in existing subjects, such as technology students, to develop computational thinking skills, which
education? Even the question arises whether it will be go far beyond learning to program. Thus, the teaching of
necessary to incorporate it in a transversal way, in all computational programming serves as a scaffold for the
subjects? Then comes a second group of questions: Regarding development of computational thinking skills, which are
teachers, are there teachers prepared to teach computational transferable to other areas of knowledge, and it means that they
thinking, are there didactic strategies aimed at it, and also not only remain in computer science scholars, but also radiate
have evaluation instruments been developed to measure into the whole area of science and technology (STEM), also
achievements at each educational level? All these questions and including art (STEAM) and beyond (Rojas and García, 2020).
many others may arise when dealing with the issue of teaching According to Wing (2006), computer science is the study
computational thinking and the teaching of these skills in the of computation and asks himself, what can be computed and
educational system. how to compute it? To have enough elements of judgment
As for computational thinking, it encompasses a range and to appropriate a definition, we will show several research
of thinking skills specific to problem-solving, including that address the studies based on computational sciences, which
abstraction, decomposition, debugging, pattern recognition, orient their meanings based on their applicability. We can
logic, and algorithm design, among other skills. But it is number some applications of computing such as internet of
not only this because problem-solving skills also go beyond things, social networks, big data, artificial intelligence, robotics,
rote learning and procedural skills. Logical thinking involves video games, communications, smart phones, augmented
analyzing situations to decide about an event. Algorithms are reality, virtual reality, etc. The reality is that computer science
step-by-step procedures for solving problems, which are then is ubiquitous, so it is something to know, or at least a part of its
codified in a programming language. It should be noted that applicability (Psycharis et al., 2020).
computational programming is the natural scaffold for the The contributions of computer science in education are
acquisition of computational thinking skills, so its teaching from very broad. Thus, universities around the world are revising
school is essential for future professionals to fully integrate their undergraduate computer science curricula, because of
it as mathematics, science, and language (Grover and Pea, which they are changing their first course in computer science
2018). to cover fundamental concepts, not just programming. In
The implementation of computational thinking in school addition, interest in computational thinking has grown beyond
is already advancing in several countries, as in USA in undergraduate education, with many focusing on incorporating
December 2015 was signed the Federal Law entitled “Every computational thinking into education from kindergarten
Student Succeeds,” which is responsible for public policies through K-12. As for sponsors, they include professional
in this country. This law places computing on an equal organizations, government, academia, and industry. Computer
footing with other academic disciplines, such as Mathematics, scientists know the value of thinking abstractly, thinking at
Geography, History, and Science (Brackmann et al., 2016). multiple levels of abstraction, abstracting ideas to manage
In January 2018, the Spanish Ministry of Education, Culture, complexity, abstracting to scale, iteration, debugging, and
and Sport published the report “Programming, robotics and software testing, among others (Wing, 2011).
computational thinking in the classroom,” the document For García (2018), we cannot abstract from the teaching
describes the current situation of programming, robotics, of programming, but schools must take steps with our young
and computational thinking in the basic curriculum and people to operate in a virtual world, for which they must prepare
different autonomous communities and several unofficial in the language of this century, without which they will become
initiatives, led from companies, universities, or civil society. digital illiterates. Therefore, the school should train the youth
There are some questions to answer about it, such as with the skills of computational thinking. So far, the energy has
integrating it, within the current disciplines or whether been directed at training users of existing computational tools.

Frontiers in Computer Science 02 frontiersin.org

Belmar 10.3389/fcomp.2022.997222

Of course, this is insufficient, since what the present century what didactic strategies are used in the teaching of
demands is to acquire the skills of computational thinking, to computer programming at school?
live a new way of thinking and problem-solving. Therefore, What is the international context in which the process
instead of teaching students to be the users of a changing of teaching computer programming is designed and
technology, they should be trained in the new paradigm of implemented at different educational levels; primary,
computational thinking, to be creators of new technologies secondary, and tertiary?
(García, 2018). Which are the pioneer countries in implementing the
According to Wing’s (2006) definition, computational teaching of computer programming, what are they doing?
thinking has been supplemented as a generalized problem- Which computational tools/programming languages are
solving approach applicable to a broad matrix of STEM and most used to provide the scaffolding toward the acquisition
non-STEM fields. A formal definition is still an open topic of computational thinking skills?
of discussion in the literature, but in general, scholars agree
that computational thinking skills include algorithmic thinking,
navigating multiple levels of abstraction, decomposing problems
into manageable pieces, and representing data. Computational
Method
thinking can be taught with or without the use of computers, but Search terms and databases consulted
it is often operationalized through computer programming, as
this makes the abstraction at the heart of computational thinking In the first instance, the trend of the investigated concepts
easier (Grover and Pea, 2018). (Computational Thinking and Computational Programming)
It should be noted that, with the research shown and was reviewed in Google trends (trends.google.es/trends), which
speaking from experience, it could be safely said that showed a growing interest in investigating computational
computational thinking is the set of skills such as abstraction, thinking from 2014 onward. This review is based on The
decomposition, pattern recognition, algorithmization, PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting
debugging, and problem-solving, which could be extended systematic reviews. International Journal of Surgery, 88, 105906
to the skill of critical thinking. For the author, computational (Page et al., 2021).
thinking is a new paradigm that expands the cognitive skills The search terms were as follows:
of students, in terms of making visible issues that until
now are typical of computer technicians and professionals, - Primary search terms: “Computational thinking” and
but that undoubtedly will be a great contribution to the “Teaching computer programming.”
learning of science, mathematics, and many other areas of - Secondary search terms: Teaching computational
knowledge, where abstraction and the decomposition of programming in elementary school, secondary
problems, parallelism, and thinking at multiple levels provide school, tertiary/higher education, educational
the necessary contributions for students to learn from a different robotics, gamification, and didactics in
approach to the traditional one, especially modeling skills that computational programming.
allow the integration of all skills into a broad knowledge capable
of integrating diverse cognitive skills. A detailed search was conducted in the following databases
since October until December 2020, whose year of publication
was from 2016 onward, due to the accelerated obsolescence of
General objective and research the investigated subjects and associated technologies:
questions
∗ ACM (Association for Computing Machinery)
The general objective was to make a bibliographic review Digital Library.
that shows the state of the art in the teaching of computational ∗ Google Scholar.
programming and computational thinking in the 5 continents ∗ WOS AND SCOPUS.
(see Figure 1). ∗ Conference on Computational Thinking Education (Hong-
It also suggests the possible lines of action that should be Kong).
followed by the countries that are at the stage of evaluating the
implementation of computational thinking.
Research questions:
Selection of articles
What is computational thinking and how is it linked to
computational programming? The flow chart summarizing the searches in the various
Are there didactic strategies in the teaching of databases is below. It shows the articles eliminated and the
computational programming at school? And if so, reasons why (see Figure 2).

Frontiers in Computer Science 03 frontiersin.org

Belmar 10.3389/fcomp.2022.997222

FIGURE 1
Own elaboration based on the literature search procedure according to the PRISMA guidelines.

In the ACM Digital Library, the use of the main terms publications were retained. In addition, 21 articles were found
together with all secondary search terms resulted in 251 articles. in WOS and SCOPUS.
After eliminating by title, 60 publications were retained. In the publications of the Conference on Computational
A Google Scholar search (combining all secondary search Thinking Education (Hong-Kong, 2020), which was held for
terms with computational thinking) yielded 631 articles. the first time in 2017, many papers were found and an own
After filtering by title and eliminating unrelated articles, 96 categorization of computational thinking, which guide the

Frontiers in Computer Science 04 frontiersin.org

Belmar 10.3389/fcomp.2022.997222

FIGURE 2
Number of paper per country.

search toward new horizons, from where in addition to the Results: The main research
published papers were the references of each of them, so we
proceeded to review most recent publications and those of Contextualization
greater interest, and thus, 82 publications were completed.
The inclusion and exclusion criteria were developed as Undoubtedly, the teaching of computer programming
recommended in the systematic review guidelines. lacks a didactic that guides it and that doses the contents
The texts considered have the following characteristics: in smaller units, disaggregating the complexity, to make
learning more fluid for the students. In the computing
∗ Directly answered one or more research questions. field, it is like another side of teaching, which does not
∗ Were related to the teaching of computer programming in include didactic elements from other STEM areas, and
educational institutions. runs on its own track, where those who teach do not have
pedagogical training and teach using the same method as
Studies were excluded if they: they learned, which generates a vicious circle contrary to
didactics as it happens in mathematics, science, and other
∗ Were in a book format or gray literature (opinion articles, areas of learning. The teaching of computer programming is
technical reports, blogs, presentations, etc.). fundamental to acquire the skills of computational thinking,
∗ Did not answer any research question. which opens new opportunities to learning with the skills
∗ Other exclusion criteria used, was to ask the of abstraction, problem disaggregation, algorithmization,
following questions: parallel task processing, debugging, and pattern recognition,
- How well does the evaluation address its original objectives among others.
and purposes? Thus, in this review, we will seek to answer the research
- How well was the data collection conducted? questions, to guide what is being done in the field, or to define
- How clear and coherent is the report? what is intended to be done in the various countries. It should
be noted that not all the publications were written in English,
After these steps, which consisted of reading the abstracts so the translation from Chinese, Russian, Korean, and German,
and conclusions, and eliminating articles if they did not comply among others, was needed. However, the common denominator
with the above criteria, 101 articles were selected for review. found was that the teaching of computational thinking is the key
Regarding the year of publication of the articles reviewed, it skill for the twenty-first century, that it should be taught from an
is highlighted that 19% are from 2018, 40% correspond to the early period of time, that its skills are transferable to other areas
publications from 2019, 22% are the publications from 2020, and of knowledge, and that computer programming is the natural
5% are the publications from 2021. scaffolding to achieve this goal.

Frontiers in Computer Science 05 frontiersin.org

Belmar 10.3389/fcomp.2022.997222

The research questions to which answers were sought were unplugged approach is important for schools that do not
the following: What is computational thinking and how is it have technological resources, internet connections, or even
linked to programming? Are there didactic strategies in the electricity. Regarding this, there is a lack of research showing
teaching of computer programming at school? And if they the effectiveness of unplugged activities in the development of
exist, what didactic strategies are used in teaching computer computational thinking skills, especially in elementary schools
programming at school? What is the international context (Brackmann et al., 2017).
in which the process of teaching computer programming A key issue in the development of computational thinking
is designed and implemented at different educational levels; is the measurement of such skills, and thus, some design and
primary, secondary, and tertiary? What are the pioneer countries validation guidelines for computational thinking content have
in the implementation of teaching computer programming, been developed (González, 2015). Developing computational
what are they doing? What computational tools or programming thinking of young children with educational robotics allows
languages are the most used to provide the scaffolding toward an interaction effect between gender and scaffolding strategy
the acquisition of the skills of computational thinking? (Angeli and Valanides, 2020). In the same sense, there are
By obtaining the results, several ways of facing the problem successful experiences of teaching programming and robotics in
of the lack of didactic strategies in the teaching of computer elementary and middle school education (Gómez et al., 2019).
programming were found. Some of them resort to the use Developing students’ computational thinking with a
of games, others to educational robotics, metaphors, etc., but poly-disciplinary approach becomes fundamental for the
none of them proposes a properly developed didactic, which is student group, due to the diversity and multiple approaches
applicable to all contexts and levels of teaching, rather they are from different professions (Klunnikova et al., 2020). In
trials and errors. It stands out to the general rule, the 10 didactic summary, programming expertise promotes greater STEM
principles of Brown and Wilson (2018), which create a kind of motivation among all the students and with a focus on first-year
algorithm for teaching programming, which is perhaps the path girls and boys (Master et al., 2017).
that should be followed. In this sense, it is left to the reader to Other publications show a series of research that deepen
acquire the necessary elements of judgment, such as validating the development of computational thinking and programming,
one or another attempt to shape didactics of computational of which stand out the methodological proposal based on
programming, just as didactics of mathematics and science have. metaphors to teach programming to children (Pérez et al.,
2018), the development of programming skills in engineering
education through problem-based game projects with Scratch
Computational thinking—Research and (Topalli and Cagiltay, 2018), the introduction to computer
concepts science as a part of the general education curriculum
Computational thinking is unquestionably the skill that for the whole university (Khenner, 2019), toward the use
young people of the twenty-first century must acquire, and of computational models in learning physical computing
computational programming seems the logical way to achieve (hardware) (Seow et al., 2020), the comparison of learning
it, since making a computer program confronts the student behaviors of third-year elementary students and integrate robots
with problem-solving, abstraction, task sequencing or task and computational thinking board game in Singapore and
algorithmization, parallelism, and code debugging. In 2018, Taiwan (Liang and Hsu, 2020), and the alignment of the
Ching et al. published the research, in which he begins framework in STEM classrooms infused with computational
by positing that computer programming should be taught thinking (Bain et al., 2020).
for children of all ages. Here, in the research conducted, In the same vein as the previous paragraph, a study about
computational thinking is considered as a broad problem- changing the way a generation thinks by teaching computational
solving framework involving problem-solving skills, processes, thinking through programming is also shown that it is a giant
and approaches, and “programming” as a key practice to support challenge, no doubt (Buitrago et al., 2017). Other authors
and cultivate the cognitive tasks involved in computational focus on education in computational thinking, the problems,
thinking (Ching et al., 2018). and challenges it holds (Angeli and Giannakos, 2020). In
The following research works computational thinking a following study, there is an analysis of response theory
from a different perspective, and here, it seeks to teach to the element of sequencing algorithms and programming
the same computational thinking skills, but without the concepts (da Cruz Alves et al., 2020). And finally, research
need for a computer laboratory. In 2017, Brackmann’s about computational thinking skills and their impact on the
et al. research set out to develop computational thinking achievements of the Trends in International Mathematics and
skills through unplugged activities in elementary school, for Science Study (TIMSS) test, a study that looks in depth at the
which they conducted a quasi-experiment with 5th and scope of such measurement, which will set the tone in the
6th graders from two public elementary schools in Madrid, educational development of countries (Alyahya and Alotaibi,
which has 73 students aged between 10 and 12 years. The 2019).

Frontiers in Computer Science 06 frontiersin.org

Belmar 10.3389/fcomp.2022.997222

The results will be shown in the following two Point: the fantastic and fabulous world of fractional fun.”
categories In the game, the student travels sequentially to different
- Lines of research in applied programming education. theme areas (Haunted House, Wild West, Space Adventure,
Amusement Park), playing a variety of mini games within
∗ Gamification. each theme area aimed at learning decimals. Student progress
∗ Educational robotics. is tracked by tracking the park and students are visually
cued to the next game they will play (McLaren et al.,
- Pedagogical and didactic elements. 2017).
In the same vein, researchers Zhou and Hsu from National
∗ Pedagogical and didactic practices. Taiwan University published in 2020, a study that aimed
∗ Didactic methods in Computer Programming. to integrate the computational thinking board game with
robots, so that students put computational thinking skill
◦ Learning programming like learning a into practice when completing the board game tasks by
second language. controlling the action of robots. The participants were sixth-
◦ Metaphors and building blocks for grade students in Singapore. In total, two students divided
teaching programming. into a team collaborated with each other, competed with the
◦ Ten principles for teaching programming, by Brown other team composed of two other students. The research used
& Wilson. Robots City board games to enable the students to cultivate
the concept of computational thinking through game-based
Now regarding the countries that publish, these learning and use cell phone applications to control robot
investigations are mainly found in the continents, Europe, behavior with programmed logic for analysis (Zhou and Hsu,
Asia, and North America. With less participation are some Latin 2020).
American countries, such as Colombia, Brazil, and Argentina. Finally, there are other research such as, Fotaris et al.
The following graph shows the number of articles reviewed (2016), with conducting an empirical study of the application
by country: of gamification techniques in a computer programming class,
where it uses a leaderboard as motivation for players.
Lines of research in programming education applied Daungcharone et al. (2019) present learning the C programming
The following are some of the research lines associated with language based on the mobile games to improve students’
this work, such as gamification and educational robotics, which learning. Also, Pellas and Vosinakis (2018) show the effect
provide guidance on the teaching of computer programming in of simulation games in learning computer programming
these areas. on the learning performance of high school students by
Gamification: Teaching using games. Teaching by games assessing computational problem-solving strategies. There
in the field of computational thinking covers a range of is a wide range of applications of computer games to
possibilities, ranging from the design, construction, and use motivate and enhance learning, not only in the areas
of games to the production and marketing of video games. of computer science, but also in different areas (Wing,
Thus, there are experiences of the use of digital games in 2011).
storytelling, learning mathematics, history, etc. Children learn Educational robotics. An educational robotics paper
better history if they play Age of Empires, personal reading presented at the “International Conference on Computational
books are more attractive if they are developed in animated Thinking Education 2020” in Hong Kong, which explored the
environments, and mathematics is fun if there is an interaction learning behaviors of sixth-grade students using educational
with numbers and they are contextualized in a real environment, robots in English oral interaction learning units, in which a
etc. In this regard, de Paula et al. published in 2018 an smart phone application was provided to control the action of
article entitled “Playing Beowulf,” featuring a game produced the robots and ask students to orally interact with their peers to
by two 14-year-olds, “Playing Beowulf,” which is a collaboration put learning sentences into practice. Then, the foreign language
with teenagers from the British library (de Paula et al., interactive behaviors were recorded and observed during the
2018). collaborative learning task period. The participants were 18
In the United States, researchers published an article English foreign language learners, aged between 11 and 12 years
in 2017, which presents an empirical study that provides (Kong et al., 2020).
evidence that a mathematical educational game can help It should be noted that multimedia environment can
with superior learning opportunities, as well as being more reduce students’ anxiety and provide a less stressful classroom
engaging. The “Decimal Point” game is a single-player game environment. In addition, multimedia tools enable English
and is based on an amusement park metaphor and is teachers to help the students improve their English performance
aimed at high school students. The game is called “Decimal and reduce language anxiety (Huang and Hwang, 2013 in

Frontiers in Computer Science 07 frontiersin.org

Belmar 10.3389/fcomp.2022.997222

Kong et al., 2020). When students begin to feel confident in a problem-solving, and algorithmic thinking, skills that are not
foreign language classroom, they will naturally start speaking. only necessary for the scientific and technological development
Ultimately, all foreign language teachers need to motivate of humanity, but also for the preparation for work and the
learners, encourage them to speak, and allow them to make challenges posed by the automation of work and the loss
mistakes freely (Atas, 2015; in Kong et al., 2020). Experimental of jobs as a result of robotization and artificial intelligence.
results show that, in the learning process, with the help of With the above in mind, the challenge for governments is
educational robots, students speak English as a very common to prepare future generations for this complex world ahead;
action to give commands to the robot. To complete the goal of however, countries that have implemented educational reforms
the class, it is possible to interact with students in spoken English have found themselves with a shortage of teachers trained in the
(Kong et al., 2020). areas of computer science (Bocconi et al., 2016).
In another research at the Norwegian University of Science
and Technology, a paper was conducted that deals with Pedagogical and didactic practices
children’s collaboration and participation, and their attitudes Japanese researchers conducted research on pedagogical
in game programming and educational robotics. The goal of transformation based on computational design and thinking.
the work was to investigate how collaboration and engagement Now, that technology has become ubiquitous, and it is
moderate children’s attitudes about programming activities. For more appropriate to discuss transformative pedagogy
this purpose, a study was designed with 44 children aged where technology is no longer considered a tool, but part
between 8 and 17 years, who participated in a full-day computer of who we are. We do not believe that there is a strong
programming activity. Their participation and collaboration basis for claiming that the integration of technology was
during the activity was measured by recording their gaze and the game changer, for our students working on extensive
attitudes regarding their learning, enjoyment, teamwork, and and complex robot programming tasks; rather, it was the
intention using post-activity survey instruments. Behavior was design of teaching and learning in practice that made
found to moderate the relationship among intention to learn, the real difference. A key implication for heutagogical
attitude toward teamwork, enjoyment, and observed learning (self-determined learning) practice that follows is that
(Sharma et al., 2019). technology must build on a solid understanding of key
Also, authors Lee and Low (2020) conducted the concepts in teaching and learning, not the other way
implementation of a computational thinking curriculum around (Vallance and Towndrow, 2016).
with robotic programming activities. In addition, Cheng et al. In turn, Chinese researchers from Hainan University
(2018) investigated on the essential applications of educational investigated on a model of blended learning and the
robot through a requirements analysis from the perspective of cultivation of innovative talent, whose mechanism
experts, researchers, and instructors. Regarding SRA (Sense, is based on computational thinking. Computational
Reasoning, Action) programming, authors Fanchamps et al. thinking includes computational thinking and integration
(2020) investigated the influence of SRA programming on with the social and natural environment, including
algorithmic thinking using robotics. They also investigated the evolutionary thinking in general computing environments,
effects of using cell phone software to control educational robots alternatively promoting and co-evolving problems. In
with third-grade elementary school students (Yi and Ting, 2020, the future, non-computer science professionals can
in Kong et al., 2020). In addition, Paucar-Curasma et al. (2022) use computer science means for innovation in various
conducted a study with a group of students aged 6–13 years disciplines. They can also develop support for various
in Peru, which was developed during 4 weeks, and applied disciplines of research and innovation of new media
computational thinking assessments applying the concepts of digital technology. Computational thinking can
of sequences, cycles, parallelism, conditionals, operators, effectively help non-computer science professionals
and data manipulation, which allowed an appropriation of to bridge the gap between learning and training with
computational thinking skills by the participants in an optimal common computing tools for future professionals
way (Paucar-Curasma et al., 2022). Finally, researchers Souza (Zhang et al., 2019).
et al. (2019) analyzed the effect of computational thinking in Didactic methods in computer programming general.
mathematics through educational robotics. In 2018, the book “Content and Skills of Computer
Science” was published in Germany by the university
press of the University of Potsdam, which makes a tour
Pedagogical and didactic elements on what should be learned in computer science by the
From the articles and reports selected and reviewed, all students of higher education of all careers, which receives
agree that computational thinking is the essential skill for the contributions of different academic teams of the
education and industry in the twenty-first century, as it provides German university world, to contribute collaboratively
complex cognitive skills such as abstraction, decomposition, to lay the foundations of the skills that professionals

Frontiers in Computer Science 08 frontiersin.org

Belmar 10.3389/fcomp.2022.997222

of the twenty-first century should possess. On this, complications stem largely from the small number of control
some of the papers included in the publication are structures that programming languages employ, even though
highlighted (Bergner et al., 2018). they are adaptive and are semantically broad (Portnoff, 2018).
In the publication, it was found that the central topics were Metaphors and blocks for teaching programming. Pérez
algorithms, computer programming, and data representation, et al. (2018) proposed using metaphors such as recipe/program,
but also elementary technical concepts of computers and the pantry/memory, and boxes/variables. They also illustrate the
internet. Courses also appeared that touched on traditional possibility of applying these metaphors to any resource available
topics, on social implications, privacy, and the role of computer to the teacher. In total, four step-by-step scripts are provided
science in society. Regarding programming environments, on how to use metaphors in class, with the opinions of
programming systems were used professionally in most of 62 children (enrolled in fourth, fifth, and sixth grades of
the courses. Among the recommendations, it is indicated Spanish Primary Education, ages 9–11) and their teacher. This
that it would be better to design courses focused on proposal has been validated with 62 Spanish children, who
the specialties in which they are taught, since this would found the metaphors useful in more than 65% of the cases.
enhance the students’ learning and applicability in subsequent The students were able to understand the metaphors (<30%
subjects to be taken, thus better achieving the objectives of the students found the metaphors difficult) and <10% of
of metacognition. the students did not want to use the metaphors. The teacher
Computational thinking develops naturally in higher was also asked to evaluate and validate the methodology
education, as shown by the research seen, which for reasons of (Pérez et al., 2020). In this same line in 2021, a research
space, it is not possible to show them in this section. The research by Jiménez Toledo et al. (2021) published a study entitled
deals with diverse topics, such as augmented reality for STEM “Discovery Model Based on Analogies for Teaching Computer
learning; a computational thinking curriculum framework Programming” through which he applied a discovery model
for lower sixth with implications for teachers’ knowledge; that allowed the extraction of patterns, textual and linguistic
computer science as a core competency for teachers in other analysis, in addition to the use of analogies for teaching the
disciplines; trainee teachers’ views on computational thinking— fundamental ideas of computer programming, which allowed
STEM vs. non-STEM teachers; technology-enhanced learning to achieve better learning in students (Jiménez Toledo et al.,
in higher education; motivations, engagement, and academic 2021).
performance; a study between Finland, mainland China, In another case, 20 years ago, AgentSheets combined
Singapore, Taiwan, and South Korea, comparing teachers’ four possibilities to create an early form of block scheduling.
perceptions and preparedness to teach programming skills (Wu After initially focusing on syntactic possibilities, AgentSheets
et al., 2020). in computer science education, new approaches have been
Learning programming using learning a second language experimented with to go beyond syntax to address semantic
methods. The introductory course in computer programming and pragmatic obstacles. Thus, three approaches are described:
is first and foremost a language course, since teaching (1) contextualized explanations to support understanding,
a language is already a component of the introductory (2) conversational programming to proactively assist and
programming course. The issue has been the pedagogical predict the future, and (3) live palettes to make programming
approach to teaching the linguistic aspects of the course, more unpredictable. The block scheduling community
a teaching structure long abandoned for natural languages has been concerned about the syntactic possibilities of
modeled after a linguistics approach (based on rules of the scheduling environment. It is time to shift research
grammar instruction), rather than incorporating principles agendas toward systematically exploring the semantic and
of second language acquisition. In the twenty-first century, pragmatic possibilities of block programming (Repenning,
there are virtually no natural language classrooms using 2017).
the prescriptive linguistics approach, yet it remains the Ten principles for teaching programming, by Brown and
universal teaching model for learning a programming Wilson (2018). Neil Brown is a researcher at King’s College
language (Portnoff, 2018). London University in England, and Greg Wilson belongs to the
The absence of grammatical rules for learning programming computer training organization DataCamp in Toronto, Canada,
causes students has a conceptual pedagogical gap to bridge on which after arduous bibliometric research and the experience
their own, even though instructors expect to solve problems accumulated in the development of their academic functions,
using logic mediated by a programming language, in that most offer ten principles for learning to program.
struggle to express basic fluency. Even those talented enough to Principle 1: Remember that there is no such thing as the
get their programs to run and function correctly still compose programming knowledge gene.
inadequately structured programs well into their first year. The Computer programming skills are not innate, but
specific difficulties in learning a programming language coincide rather a learned skill that can be acquired and improved
with the difficulties of learning a second natural language. The with practice.

Frontiers in Computer Science 09 frontiersin.org

Belmar 10.3389/fcomp.2022.997222

Principle 2: Use the help of your peers. Genexus, among others, have been and will continue to be
One-on-one tutoring is perhaps the ideal form of teaching, a great contribution in software development, but computer
a teacher’s full attention can be focused on one student, and programming is something fundamental in the formation of
they can fully customize their teaching for that person and tailor computational thinking skills, such as addition, subtraction, and
individual feedback and corrections based on a two-way dialog multiplication, as it is for elementary school students. I agree
with them. that the focus should go beyond programming, since computer
Principle 3: Use live coding. programming is a tool to move toward computational thinking,
Instructors should create programs in front of their students. and incidentally allows future generations to have the ability to
This is most effective for several reasons: (1) It allows instructors be creators of technology and not just users of it.
to better answer “what if?” questions. Live coding allows Undoubtedly, the implementation of the teaching of
instructors to follow the interests of their and (2) it facilitates computational thinking in the various countries of the world
unintended knowledge transfer. demands a lot of resources, creativity, knowledge, and will
Principle 4: Encourage students make predictions. of governments to generate policies that open the way for
When instructors use live coding, they usually run the the training of today’s students to become professionals that
program several times during its development to show what it will make them competitive and capable enough to perform
does. The key to making demonstrations more effective is to their jobs in the twenty-first century. In the area of the
have students predict the outcome of the demonstration before implementation of the teaching of computational thinking, this
running it. is where the playing field is most uneven worldwide. There are
Principle 5: Use pair programming. countries in which all schools are equipped with computers,
Pair programming is a software development practice in such as Australia, England, Germany, Japan, and New Zealand,
which two programmers share a computer. One individual among others, and other countries in which there is a significant
(called the driver) writes, whereas the other (called the percentage of schools that do not have such infrastructure, as
navigator) offers comments and suggestions. The two switch in Latin American countries, and other countries that have a
roles 2–3 times per hour. percentage of schools that do not even have electricity, as in the
Principle 6: Use solved examples with labeled objectives. case of India and Africa.
A good way to guide students in building programs is to use
solved examples: step-by-step guides that show how to solve an
existing problem. Main considerations
Principle 7: Stay in one language.
A principle that applies in all areas of education is that This review discusses the concept of computational
transfer only comes with mastery of a programming language. thinking, a term that finds support in the skills of abstraction,
Principle 8: Use authentic tasks. decomposition, sequencing, algorithmization, debugging, and
Learners find authentic tasks more engaging than problem-solving skills. In the literature, computational thinking
abstract examples. is mentioned as the skill of the twenty-first century, and
Principle 9: Remember that freshmen are not experts. computational programming as the natural scaffolding to move
Freshmen are taking their first steps in learning toward the incorporation of computational thinking as an active
programming, so initially confront them with small problems, problem-solving skill. In addition, it is noted that these types
broken down into chunks. of skills have already been incorporated in international tests
Principle 10: Do not just code. such as Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study
Faced with the challenges of learning syntax, semantics, (TIMSS), which allows measuring the trend of countries in
algorithms, and design, examples that seem small to instructors mathematics and science skills. In this sense, a research that talks
can easily overwhelm beginners. about computational thinking skills and its impact on TIMSS
achievement looks in depth at the scopes of such measurement,
which will set the tone in the educational development of
Discussion and implementation of countries (Alyahya and Alotaibi, 2019).
programming education For Grgurina (2021) in her work entitled “Getting the
Picture: Modeling and Simulation in Secondary Computer
For this author, as a computer professional and educator, Science Education,” computational thinking includes the skill
most of the conclusions are shared; however, with respect of modeling, a skill that is at a higher level of complexity
to the authors who state that programming could disappear, than problem-solving. Thus, computational thinking includes
I consider that it is like saying that the use of the wheel formulating problems, so that it is feasible to solve them
could disappear because of the invention of airplanes. It with a computer, organizing and analyzing data logically,
is clear that advances in artificial intelligence and code representing data through models, and automating solutions
generators such as CSS3 Generator, Colorzilla Gradients, through algorithmization, which includes abstractions and

Frontiers in Computer Science 10 frontiersin.org

Belmar 10.3389/fcomp.2022.997222

parallelism. Thus, looking toward student training, these skills (a) Data practice; which is composed of data collection,
support and improve attitudes such as: confidence in dealing data creation, data manipulation, data analysis, and
with complexity, persistence in working with difficult problems, data visualization,
tolerance of ambiguity, the ability to deal with open problems, (b) Modeling and simulation, which is composed of the
and the ability to work with others to achieve a common goal and subcategories; conceptual understanding, testing solutions,
communicate it. Thus, for example, in two-schema modeling, model evaluation, model design, and model building,
students have to construct two schemas and combine them: a (c) Computational problem-solving, which is composed
schema consisting of the situation to be modeled and the schema of solution preparation, programming, tool selection,
of the means (mathematical, computer, scientific, everyday life, solution evaluation, solution development, abstraction,
etc.) that can be used in the construction of an understandable and debugging,
model representing the situation to be modeled. (d) Systems thinking, which is composed of systematic
Grgurina describes computational thinking in terms of investigation, understanding the relationships between
its main concepts, such as: data collection, data analysis, components, multilevel thinking, communication, and
data representation, problem decomposition, abstraction, system management.
algorithms and procedures, automation, simulation, and
parallelization (CSTA Computational Thinking Task Force, In the author’s opinion, this seems to be a significant
2011; in Grgurina, 2021). The definition of computational contribution that goes in the right direction, since it allows
thinking is complemented by the Carnegie Mellon Center addressing in an orderly manner each of the categories necessary
for Computational Thinking (CMCCT), which states to learn in computer science, when it is necessary to acquire the
that it consists of three fundamental aspects: abstraction, skills of computational thinking.
modeling, and algorithmic thinking (Carnegie Mellon Moreno-León et al. (2018) worked on a review on
Center for Computational Thinking, 2010; in Grgurina, computational thinking as a universal skill, in which they
2021). conclude several things to highlight:
In the review made by Shute et al. (2017), entitled
“demystifying computational thinking,” he addresses the - That the focus should not be placed exclusively on
concept as the set of skills of decomposition, abstraction, programming, but on the skills that are developed through
algorithm design, debugging, iteration, and generalization, learning to code, specifically computational thinking skills,
understood as necessary skills for problem-solving. Regarding - The most effective way to train these computational
computational thinking and programming, they are thinking skills is through programming,
analyzed at the same level; however, it does not consider - It is possible that in the future new and more efficient
that computational programming through teaching allows mechanisms for developing these skills in students
acquiring computational thinking skills, since it is necessary will flourish.
to abstract and decompose a problem before coding a - There are even authors who argue that programming
program, and also, depending on the complexity, it will be could disappear in a few years due to the advances in
necessary to abstract at several levels, and once programmed, artificial intelligence.
debugging and checking that what is done does what it should - Consequently, we argue that the metaphor for presenting
solve will be necessary, thus incorporating computational this movement to the educational community should shift
thinking step by step. Regarding the bibliography consulted, toward computational thinking as a universal skill that
most of it is observed between 2011 and 2015, so what is can foster the learning of subjects and skills across the
said there has been changing, leaving some conclusions, elementary and middle school curriculum.
rather obsolete.
It is highlighted in Shute Shute et al. (2017), a research When the most advanced countries in this area are
developed, in which a scale was created to measure investigated, European countries appear in the first line, or
computational thinking (Román-González et al., 2017; in rather the European Union, a conglomerate of countries that
Shute et al., 2017), which includes a 28-item scale and advance at an even pace in various areas and especially in
takes about 45 min to complete. It focuses on programming technology and implementation of educational systems that
concepts, such as directions and sequences, loops, conditionals, allow them to be at the forefront in future generations. Thus,
and simple functions. In addition, there is the taxonomy the case of Ireland stands out, just to cite one example, the
created that categorizes the different levels showing how case of England, which have been advancing very fast in the
lesson plans can be designed. The proposed taxonomy implementation of the teaching of computational thinking in
proposes the following main categories, from which school. However, progress has also been observed in Latin
subcategories are derived, to guide future computational American countries, such is the case of a study conducted
thinking assessment designs: by researchers at the Universidad del Cauca Colombia, where

Frontiers in Computer Science 11 frontiersin.org

Belmar 10.3389/fcomp.2022.997222

Cruz et al. (2013) and their team published a study entitled computational thinking into their teaching practice? (Bocconi
“ChildProgramming Process: A Software Development Model et al., 2016).
for Kids,” which was aimed at training children at an early age With respect to the integration of computational thinking
(8–10 years old) with the concepts and skills of software creation in compulsory education, four important areas emerge for
(agile methodologies), which allowed fostering teamwork and policy makers and stakeholders to focus on: consolidated
introducing computational thinking skills. understanding of computational thinking, comprehensive
In 2017, researchers Lockwood and Mooney from Maynooth integration, systemic deployment, and policy support. A
University, Ireland, asked a fundamental question about resurgence in the integration of computational thinking and,
computational thinking: computational thinking in education, more broadly, computer science into compulsory education is
where does it fit? It should be noted, that in Ireland, computer evident, as indicated by the recent wave of curriculum reforms.
science is not yet an assessed subject at state level, such as In total, eleven countries in Europe have recently completed
mathematics, language, or science. Although steps have been a reform process that includes computational thinking and
taken to include it, so far, all that is available to the students related concepts. Another seven are currently planning to
in the curriculum is a short course in programming. While introduce computational thinking in compulsory education. In
programming is a very useful skill and one that can be beneficial addition, seven other countries are integrating computational
to students in a wide variety of careers, it is not the only part thinking based on their long tradition in computer science
of computer science that is of interest to consider. Although education, mainly in upper secondary schools. Some of them
scholars have not been able to agree on a universal definition, are expanding computer science education to include primary
according to Wing (2006), she gives two visions that define and lower secondary levels (Bocconi et al., 2016).
computational thinking, which are (a) computational thinking In 2013, the document “Computing programmes of study:
will be fundamental to new discoveries in all fields of endeavor, key stages 1 and 2 National curriculum in England” was
and (b) it will be an integral part of early childhood education published in England by the Department for Education
(Lockwood and Mooney, 2017). for its curriculum. The document states that a high-quality
Furthermore, it should be noted to say the authors, computational thinking education prepares students to use
who thinking computationally, is of enormous benefit to computational thinking and creativity to understand and change
all disciplines. In Ireland, researchers in the Department of the world. Computer science has deep links with mathematics,
Computer Science at Maynooth University, designed the PACT science, design, and technology and provides information
program (PACT is an acronym for Programming Algorithms = about natural and artificial systems. The core of computer
Computational Thinking). The goal was to introduce computer science is computer science, in which students are taught the
science to Irish high school students and teachers through principles of information management and computation, how
programming and algorithms, with the idea of improving digital systems work, and how to use this knowledge through
computational thinking skills in participating students. Now programming. Based on this knowledge, students are equipped
in its fourth year, the PACT program has been delivered to use information technology to create programs and a variety
in over 60 schools and to over 1,000 students. With the of applications (Radin and Hawley, 2013).
introduction of programming into the curriculum and the In 2017, the education system in England, according
call from administrators and governments to include more to evidence, shows that computer science education in
computer science content in schools (Lockwood and Mooney, the UK is fragmented and fragile. Its future development
2017). and sustainability depends on swift and coordinated action
In 2016, the European Commission, specifically the Joint by governments, industry, and non-profit organizations.
Research Center (JRC) for policy reporting, published the Neglecting opportunities to act could damage both the
paper “Developing computational thinking in compulsory education of future generations and economic prosperity as a
education—Implications for policy and practice,” which seeks nation. The broad subject of computer science, which covers
to shape the implementation of computational thinking in the three vital areas of computing, has become compulsory
compulsory education. The document points out that, in in schools in England for ages 5–16. Students aged 5–14 have
the recent years, computational thinking, which includes computer science lessons 1 h per week, and some schools
the concepts of coding, programming, algorithmic thinking, take the opportunity to teach computer science within other
among others, has been promoted as skills that are fundamental subjects. However, most teachers are teaching an unfamiliar
to everyone like numeracy and literacy. At this point, school subject without adequate support. Moreover, they may
the questions arise: how can we define computational be the only teacher in their school with this task. Governments
thinking as a key twenty-first century skill for schoolchildren; need to address a growing shortage of computer science teachers
what are the central features of computational thinking (Calderon et al., 2017).
and its relationship with programming in compulsory On the other hand, Asia has also been given the importance
education; how can teachers be trained to effectively integrate that the implementation of teaching computational thinking in

Frontiers in Computer Science 12 frontiersin.org

Belmar 10.3389/fcomp.2022.997222

school should have. An example of this is the progress made English in urban areas, 70% of the population resides in rural
in South Korea, China, and Japan, among others. The case of areas where education is conducted in their own local language
Japan, which, although it is a technologized country with 99% (Shah, 2019).
robotized factories in the 1980s, encounters the same problems To prepare the students to creatively engage in the
as all countries in terms of teaching computer programming in digital age, CSpathshala proposes an activity-based disconnected
schools: the shortage of teachers to teach this subject, in addition computational thinking curriculum for primary and secondary
to the lack of training in science, In other words, there are schools. The computational thinking curriculum is highlighted:
few teachers and these few are not always well-trained to teach teaching computation without computers, community-created
programming, which generates the second floor for students teaching materials: 200 lessons, no cost to schools, subset
to achieve the skills of computational thinking. In Japan, the of teaching materials translated into Gujarati, Hindi, and
teaching of computer programming in schools was implemented Marathi (dialects in India), 30,000 schools in Tamil Nadu
in April 2020, and the curriculum requires them to teach it in a learn computational thinking as part of the math curriculum.
playful way, which further complicates Japanese teachers due to This includes 425 residential welfare schools, conducting 90
the lack of research in the field and the absence of didactics in awareness workshops and training programs, at no cost to the
the teaching of programming (Gougeon and Cross, 2021). schools, 5,400 volunteer participants from 2,650 institutions.
Meanwhile, in South Korea, although computational With this plan, a light is seen in learning computational thinking
thinking education is still in its early stages of nationwide skills, which though seems big, India is bigger with more than
implementation, there has been some research evidence 1.4 billion population, but the growth of CSpathshala (https://
supporting the effectiveness of learning programming skills and cspathshala.org/) is spiraling exponentially (Shah, 2019).
related computational thinking skills. Computational thinking Undoubtedly, other countries are also doing the same, as
in K-12 contexts, education has been conducted in the areas of seen in the publications of Russia, China, Taiwan, Canada,
(a) innovating specific pedagogical approaches to computational the United States, Spain, Brazil, and Colombia, among others.
thinking, (b) developing assessment tools to measure students’ Even smaller countries such as Chile in Latin America, which
computational thinking knowledge, skills, and attitudes, (c) more timidly, only implemented elective courses in the third
expanding coding education in physical computing and maker and fourth years of secondary school as a first step in the
education, and (d) training teachers in computational thinking implementation of the teaching of computational thinking in
skills. Large-scale research revealed that students, teachers, school. In Chile, although there is no decisive support from
and parents have positive perceptions about the needs and the State in this area, the Kodea Foundation of Chile has
effectiveness of software education in schools (So et al., 2020). created a curriculum with didactic material from first grade
A very remarkable case is India, a country with many to fourth grade, which allows schools to have free access to
inhabitants, with multiple deficiencies in infrastructure, and everything necessary to incorporate computational thinking at
education, in addition to a linguistic diversity, within all these school (www.ideodigiltal.cl).
difficulties has been proposed to implement computational
thinking, not only with the idea of leaving and improve the
economic conditions of its inhabitants, but as a tool based on
the skills that will allow it to develop in the XXI century with Comments on other reviews considered
the advantage that its population is knowledgeable about new
technologies, and thus provide more job opportunities anywhere In 2016, Brackmann et al. conducted a review on
in the world. computational thinking entitled “Computational thinking:
The National Computer Science Policy for school education Panorama of the Americas” in which he reflects on the impact
in India advocates the development of a curriculum model of computers in the life of human beings, whose technology
that would include knowledge enhancement and generic skill advances exponentially, a pace that unfortunately schools cannot
development, focusing on digital literacy. The computer science follow, or at least cannot follow closely, since the development
education that has been introduced in urban sectors in of the economy around technology encourages its development,
India focuses mainly on digital literacy and some computer and for schools it is more difficult to follow that pace since
programming. The implementation of computer science in the they depend on public policies, where states are much slower
curriculum has not been easy and has had to go through several in adapting to changes. The review defines the concept of
challenges. According to the government reports, India has computational thinking as the skills of abstraction, critical
more than 1.6 million schools offering K-12 education to 300 thinking, collaboration, and problem-solving, among other
million students. The problem is compounded by the fact that skills. This publication describes an overview of the state of the
education in the country is administered by two national boards art of computational thinking in the Americas, to contextualize
of education, with each of India’s 29 states having its own board and guide the incorporation of computational thinking in basic
of education! While the common language of instruction is education schools (Brackmann et al., 2016).

Frontiers in Computer Science 13 frontiersin.org

Belmar 10.3389/fcomp.2022.997222

In the review made by Hsu et al. (2019), he bases the main new research can be based, highlighting the search for code-
part of his findings on defining and redefining the concept centered skills and the search for skills from interdisciplinary
of computational thinking, but lacks a detailed description of practices. It is highlighted that of the 80 articles reviewed by
the skills that compose it, such as those mentioned in the Kité et al. 49% of the published research focused on code,
previous paragraph, and does not touch on the relevance of highlighting specific issues of computational programming,
such skills being incorporated in the TIMSS test, and that such as algorithms, abstraction, modularization, debugging,
this will generate an increase in the gap between countries parallelization, loops, and conditionals (Kite et al., 2021).
that have incorporated such knowledge vs. those who have The importance of teaching computational thinking through
not yet done so. He mentions Chile as an example, but in computational programming has the characteristic of being
that country, the National Digital Languages Plan is more of a concrete matter, which allows going from the concrete to
an idea that is still not implemented in 2022, as there are 2 the abstract that are the skills of computational thinking. It
elective courses for 3rd year and 4th year of secondary education, is beautiful to see the students who make their first program
which schools are not obliged to teach and which in general that is taught in programming and that only displays by
are not taught because they do not have teachers. Returning console the message “hello World,” they feel satisfaction and
to the review of Hsu et al. (2019), it does not mention or feel that they have made their first achievement, and perhaps
inquire how significant it would be to have one or more didactic without knowing it, they have acquired their first practice
strategies for teaching computer programming (scaffolding) of abstraction. One way to integrate computational thinking
and thereby transition to computational thinking skills such as in all students, says Kite et al. (2021), is to incorporate
abstraction, decomposition, sequencing, algorithmization, and its teaching in the basic and high school curriculum in a
problem-solving-oriented skills. mandatory way, which helps to mitigate the digital divide
It should be noted that the present review is a part of a between students, as opposed to making it voluntary, which
larger research, whose main objective is the construction and will generate students who will have advantages over those
validation of a test to be applied in the first year of higher who for some reasons or another prefer other types of
education with computer science students taking the subject of subjects, whether art, history, or craft workshops (Kite et al.,
introduction to programming with the Python programming 2021).
language. Thus, it seems very pertinent to share the results and Finally, as well as the code-centered review by Kite et al.
conclusions of Tang et al. (2020), which conducted a thorough (2021), the review by Ogegbo and Ramnarain (2021), which
review of the assessment of computational thinking. Part of his focuses on the teaching of computational thinking in science
results and conclusions indicates that of the studies carried out, classrooms, stands out. Regarding the conceptualization of
all of them are made for students in elementary and secondary computational thinking, both the articles reviewed by the
education, and no dedication to higher education is observed, author and the systematic reviews all conclude that there
which is shared by this author, since of all the articles reviewed is no agreement on the skills of computational thinking,
in the total search, which were more than 200, of which 101 a concept that remains under permanent construction and
articles were reviewed exhaustively, the focus is undoubtedly on is redefined as it is applied in different contexts, such as
school education rather than at the level of vocational training. in the arts, language, or science. It should be noted that
Another aspect that is important to note is that the studies were computational thinking has important consequences for the
conducted in informal education, which undoubtedly affects teaching of science subjects at all levels of education, primary,
student’s performance, since there is not the incentive of formal secondary, and tertiary or higher, especially now that it has been
education that implies that failing a subject would lead the incorporated into the TIMSS tests, a situation that will mark
student to repeat a course, so the pressure on the student to do future generations. For Ogegbo, an important result yielded by
well on the test would be greater, and thus, the results would be his review is the concrete concepts of computational thinking
better (Tang et al., 2020). skills, which would be composed of: (a) “Decomposition”
In the code-centered review conducted by Kite et al. (2021), skill that involves dividing a complex task into smaller parts
they highlight the importance of computational programming into manageable components; (b) “Pattern recognition” which
for transitioning to learning computational thinking and involves identifying and defining trends within a problem;
point out that they recognize the historical relationship of (c) “Abstraction,” a skill that involves identifying particular
computational thinking with computer science. In the review, similarities and differences between comparable problems to
Kite et al. (2021) point out that there are significant gaps in work toward a solution, i.e., understanding the problem in
the conceptualization of computational thinking, highlighting its timeless dimension and not linked to a particular subject;
the teaching of computational thinking and the professional (d) “Algorithm design,” which involves the development of
development of teachers who will be in charge of teaching step-by-step guidelines to solve a problem; and “Automation,”
computational thinking, which gives rise to the idea on which which involves the use of technological tools to mechanize

Frontiers in Computer Science 14 frontiersin.org

Belmar 10.3389/fcomp.2022.997222

the solutions to the problems posed (Ogegbo and Ramnarain, the savings in wages would be US$41 billion (Manyika et al.,
2021). 2017).
It should be noted that both the code-based approach and The speed of substitution of human labor by automated
the science classroom approach have certain similarities in systems is also affected by demographics. On the one hand,
terms of applicability, since in the area of science, applications it is expected that by 2050, over one-third of the world’s
through the use of code are of greater applicability, which has population will be over the age of 50, an indicator that only
a greater tendency to obtain concrete results. Computational covered 17.5% of the world’s population in 1950. On the
thinking skills are very important for the society of the twenty- other hand, according to published analyses, people over 50
first century, which will allow the generations in formation years of age have limitations when performing complex tasks
to insert themselves in the global world in an advantageous involving technology, being largely surpassed by people of
way and that the new reality of the digital world is a factor younger ages. This is consistent with the studies that point to the
that facilitates life and that the complexity is neutralized by conclusion that the older a country’s population is, the greater
the new set of skills that computational thinking delivers. the acceleration in the adoption of automated systems. The
Several aspects in which computational thinking may impact latter would explain why, in relative terms, countries such as
are that it will increase the gap between those who have the United States and the United Kingdom lag behind Germany,
their skills with those who do not have it, in addition to Japan, and South Korea in industrial robotics (Rivera-Taiba,
being voluntary in some countries and mandatory in others, 2019).
some will be at an advantage over others, and there is also In this work, among other things, we seek to link the
the economic gap between the countries of those who have effect of the advance in the implementation of algorithms
already implemented it and currently only make improvements, as executors of repetitive functions at work, which will leave
and those who are still only a topic of discussion that is out of the labor activity a significant number of jobs and
very distant. those who work in them around the world. Thus, jobs such
as accountants, secretaries, cashiers, truck and bus drivers,
warehouse workers, and instructors in various areas will be
the first to lose their respective jobs. Other professions such as
Economic and employment impact doctors, engineers, architects, and researchers are less feasible
to automate; however, there will also be certain types of
A diagnosis made in 2017 points out that the emerging functions of these professionals that will be automated. In
society seen from the technologicalization, is dictated by this context, it is important to have adequate training in
algorithms, artificial intelligence, automated processes, and information technology to be competitive in the world ahead,
robots, which impacts the work and the population, a scenario since in the future, there will be two main categories of
that does not bring good hopes for those who are not part jobs: either you are highly specialized or you will have to
of the doings in technology, because the technological era will dedicate yourself to the area of services such as gardening
bring workers, low wages, and unemployment. This is the or delivery.
uncertainty of millions of people in the world. The advance
of automation threatens at least 14% of current jobs in the
world, a figure that has been ratified by the OECD for the last Conclusions
2 years. In total, 14% of jobs in the 36 richest economies in
the world have a high probability of being automated (García, At the conclusion of this review, and after having read
2018). and analyzed a multitude of articles, of which dozens of them
A study by McKinsey Global Institute indicates that in correspond to other reviews, the author, as a computer science
Chile, 3.2 million jobs could be replaced by automated systems engineer, notes that research runs on two separate threads,
in the next 20 years. In more developed nations such as the on the one hand, the various computer implementations
USA, the impact of automation would be 46% of current developed by computer engineers and, on the other hand,
employment. But in Mexico, the McKinsey report estimates educators, This has generated that in those countries where
that robots and software could do 52% of the work that the teaching of computational thinking has been implemented
exists in that country, while in Peru, the percentage reaches or is in the implementation stage, there is a lack of
53%, in Brazil 50% and in Argentina 48%. In the Chilean trained teachers in computer science to carry out such a
case, the report estimates that retail and commerce in general monumental task, and where there are, they are absolutely
would save US$9 billion in wages if 51% of the jobs that have insufficient. The concept of computational thinking and the
the potential to be automated were replaced; manufacturing skills that compose it are still being discussed in education,
industries would save US$6 billion and the administrative and whereas computer science publishes multiple applications that
public sector would save US$10 billion in wages. Nationally, educators do not understand or do not have the tools to

Frontiers in Computer Science 15 frontiersin.org

Belmar 10.3389/fcomp.2022.997222

transfer this knowledge to the new generations through the of the twenty-first century, is of utmost importance in terms
educational system. of its progressive impact on the future of humanity. It should
In the analyzed and compared reviews of Shute et al. (2017), be noted that in countries where computational thinking is
Moreno-León et al. (2018), Hsu et al. (2019), Li et al. (2020), being implemented in schools, it has become a fundamental
Tang et al. (2020), Kite et al. (2021), and Ogegbo and Ramnarain policy, so that these countries are the ones who will dominate
(2021), among others, coincidences were found in that all the the economy, technology and manage advanced knowledge.
articles take as initial reference (Wing, 2006) from where the Moreover, these countries will train the professionals who
concept of computational thinking and its skills were mentioned will occupy the best jobs, those with STEM characteristics,
and defined for the first time. Afterward, there are coincidences essentially engineers, doctors, and scientists, among others.
that there is no consensus among researchers regarding the skills In addition, it should be noted that these countries are
that define computational thinking, and finally, we all agree that mainly located in Europe, Asia, Oceania, and North America.
computational thinking is the fundamental skill of the twenty- Unfortunately, the countries of the continents of Africa and
first century. As for the differences between the reviews, they are Latin America are not in this group of advanced countries, with
rather superficial, some spend more time on qualitative research, the exception of some, such as Brazil, Colombia, Peru, Chile,
and others on analyzing quantitative research, but no significant and Argentina, among others, whose universities are working
differences are evident. on projects aimed at implementing computational thinking
From the reviews and articles read, the contribution in schools. This leads to the conclusion that in the coming
made by Grgurina (2021) stands out in her work entitled decades, the socioeconomic differences between rich and poor
“Getting the Picture: Modeling and Simulation in Secondary countries will become even more extreme. Thus, the poorest
Computer Science Education,” in whose work she incorporates countries will see their development possibilities diminish and
the concept of modeling and simulation as foundational skills their economies will continue to be based on mineral extraction
of computational thinking, so that it includes formulating and tourism.
problems, organizing and analyzing data logically, representing When comparing the progress of countries in the teaching
data through models, and automating solutions. Thus, looking of computational thinking in schools, it is necessary to see the
toward school-based training, these skills enhance attitudes progress of the states in public policies that establish this subject
such as: confidence in dealing with complexity, persistence in the compulsory curriculum, as is the case of England in 2013
in working with difficult problems, tolerance for ambiguity, and the countries of Europe in general since 2016, or other
the ability to deal with open-ended problems, and the Asian countries such as Japan, South Korea, and China where
ability to work with others to achieve a common goal and computational thinking is defined as the skills of the twenty-first
communicate it. Grgurina describes computational thinking century and will be the engine of technological and economic
in terms of its main concepts, such as: data collection, development. However, in developing countries, such as Latin
data analysis, data representation, problem decomposition, America and Africa, although there are several initiatives of
abstraction, algorithms and procedures, automation, modeling, universities in doing research on the teaching of computational
and simulation. thinking, the states have other priorities, so the issue is not in
From the comparisons with the aforementioned reviews, the discussion of public policy, but rather, the development of
it stands out that the present review emphasizes the lack of the teaching of computational thinking is done by particular
evaluation instruments at the three educational levels to measure initiatives of universities and some other foundation, which
the computational thinking and the inexistence of didactic leaves them behind in the race to create and develop new
strategies to implement the teaching of computational thinking, technologies to deliver better employment alternatives and thus
in this sense, it will propose in two future publications a didactic greater welfare to the population.
methodology for the teaching of computational programming However, there is still hope for those countries where large
and a test to measure its results. It should be borne in mind investments in technology are arriving and leading to the hiring
that something that is not mentioned in any of the reviews is of many professionals and technicians in the technological area,
that computational programming is the necessary scaffolding which has prompted the updating of the educational system,
for teaching computational thinking, so it is necessary to at least in the interest of meeting the growing demand for
differentiate from those who see both concepts as synonymous, advanced professionals, which begins to turn the machinery of
when in fact, they are two different rungs of the same ladder. The the state, which slowly show proposals for the implementation of
above implies that it will necessarily be necessary to implement computational thinking in schools. An example of a European-
the teaching of computational programming as a previous step rich country is England, which implemented the teaching of
for students to acquire the skills of computational thinking. computational thinking in schools since 2013.
Undoubtedly, the implementation of computational It is also diagnosed that in the coming years, there will
thinking in the educational system: primary, secondary, and be a high number of jobs that will be automated, jobs such
tertiary, which will prepare future professionals with the skills as supermarket cashiers, bank tellers, truck and bus drivers,

Frontiers in Computer Science 16 frontiersin.org

Belmar 10.3389/fcomp.2022.997222

warehouse operators, and accountants, and all those that programming and thereby transition to the knowledge of
perform repetitive tasks and that constitute activities that can computational thinking.
be performed by an algorithm. This will inevitably lead to A gender study that shows the participation of women in the
massive job losses of 3 to 4 million in the case of Chile in the world of computational sciences.
next 10–20 years, and in developed countries where, although A study that makes an inventory of the instruments duly
the impact will be less, it will also cause greater social and validated to measure computational thinking at the three
economic instability. educational levels.
A guideline proposed to countries that have not yet begun A study that quantifies and shows the didactic strategies that
the process of implementing the teaching of computational exist to teach computational programming.
thinking in schools should be the following: A study of the universities in the world that have
incorporated the teaching of computational thinking in teacher
- Put the subject in the public discussion. training curricula.
- Governments should seek the support of experts in
technology and education to make a diagnosis of
the situation. Data availability statement
- Implement an educational reform that incorporates
the teaching of computer programming in The original contributions presented in the study are
compulsory education. included in the article/supplementary material, further inquiries
- That teacher-training universities update their curricula to can be directed to the corresponding author.
incorporate the teaching of programming languages such
as Scratch, Alice, and Python, so that they can successfully
Author contributions
implement the new challenges.
- That industry becomes a part of the educational process
The author confirms being the sole contributor of this work
by investing in software development and educational
and has approved it for publication.
robotics in order to push the teaching process in an
accelerated manner.
Funding
Finally, in the language subject, Scratch should be learned
to generate animations of the stories they have to read, to This research was carried out entirely with our
make the subject entertaining and responsive to the children’s own resources.
concerns. In natural sciences, some aspects of nanotechnology,
its elements, and how infinitely small things are part of our
natural world should be shown. In history, different levels should Conflict of interest
incorporate all the continents, and their history can be recreated
with Scratch or Alice applications, building applications such The author declares that the research was conducted in
as Age of Empires. In the arts, designs should be created with the absence of any commercial or financial relationships
apps, not working with paintings, which besides being messy, that could be construed as a potential conflict
limit creativity, and move away from the central focus, which of interest.
is technology training. Educational robotics and gamification
should be the main branches that collaborate in the training of
future professionals. Publisher’s note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the
The limitations of this review and authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated
recommendations to be made organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the
reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or
A study that allows us to know the number claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed
of teachers trained by country, to teach computer or endorsed by the publisher.

Frontiers in Computer Science 17 frontiersin.org

Belmar 10.3389/fcomp.2022.997222

References
Adell-Segura, J., Llopis-Nebot, M. Á., Esteve-Mon, F. M., and Valdeolivas- Fanchamps, N., Specht, M., Hennissen, P., and Slangen, L. (2020). The Effect
Novella, M. G. (2019). The Debate on Computational Thinking in Education. of Teacher Interventions and SRA Robot Programming on the Development of
Castello: RIED; Iberoamerican Journal of Distance Education. Computational Thinking. Hong Kong: The Education University of Hong Kong.
Alyahya, D., and Alotaibi, A. (2019). Computational thinking skills and its Fotaris, P., Mastoras, T., Leinfellner, R., and Rosunally, Y. (2016). Climbing
impact on TIMSS achievement: an instructional design approach. Issues Trends up the leaderboard: an empirical study of applying gamification techniques to a
Learn. Technol. 7, 3–19. doi: 10.2458/azu_itet_v7i1_alyahya computer programming class. Electro. J. e-learn. 14, 94–110.
Angeli, C., and Giannakos, M. (2020). Computational thinking education: Issues García, F. (2018). Editorial computational thinking. IEEE Rev.
and challenges. Comput. Hum. Behav. 105, 106185. Iberoam. Tecnol. Aprendizaje Salamanca: University Press. 13, 17–19.
doi: 10.1109/RITA.2018.2809939
Angeli, C., and Valanides, N. (2020). Developing young children’s
computational thinking with educational robotics: an interaction effect Gómez, M., Palacio, L., Manrique, B., Villada, B., and Arbeláez, S. (2019).
between gender and scaffolding strategy. Comp. Hum. Behav. 105, 105954. “Successful experiences of teaching programming and robotics in elementary and
doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2019.03.018 middle school education,” in 2019 14th Iberian Conference on Information Systems
and Technologies (CISTI) (IEEE), 1–6.
Atas, M. (2015). The reduction of speaking anxiety in EFL learners through
drama techniques. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 176, 961–969. González, M. (2015). “Computational thinking test: design guidelines and
content validation,” in Proceedings of EDULEARN 15 Conference (Bogota),
Bain, C., Dabholkar, S., and Wilensky, U. (2020). Confronting frame alignment
2436–2444.
in CT infused STEM classrooms. CoolThink@ JC 91: 91–94.
Gougeon, L., and Cross, J. S. (2021). “Japanese elementary schools’ playful
Bergner, N., Röpke, R., Schroeder, U., and Krömker, D. (2018).
programming curriculum considerations: readiness, limitations and teacher
Hochschuldidaktik der Informatik HDI. Berlin: University Press.
training,” in 2021 IEEE International Conference on Engineering, Technology &
Bocconi, S., Chioccariello, A., Dettori, G., Ferrari, A., and Engelhardt, K. (2016). Education (TALE) (Wuhan: IEEE), 23–28. doi: 10.1109/TALE52509.2021.9678771
Developing Computational Thinking in Compulsory Education – Implications for
Grgurina, N. (2021). Getting the Picture: Modeling and Simulation in Secondary
Policy and Practice; EUR 28295 en JRC: European Union.
Computer Science Education Naples: University Press.
Brackmann, C., Barone, D., Casali, A., Boucinha, R., and Muñoz-
Grover, S., and Pea, R. (2018). Computational thinking: a competency whose
Hernandez, S. (2016). “Computational thinking: panorama of the
time has come. Comp. Sci. Educ. Perspect. Teach. Learn. Sch. 19:1257–58.
Americas,” in 2016 International Symposium on Computers in
doi: 10.5040/9781350057142.ch-003
Education (SIIE) (Salamanca: IEEE), 1–6. doi: 10.1109/SIIE.2016.775
1839 Hsu, Y. C., Irie, N. R., and Ching, Y. H. (2019). Computational thinking
educational policy initiatives (CTEPI) across the globe. TechTrends 63, 260–270.
Brackmann, C., Román, M., Robles, G., Moreno, J., Casali, A., and Barone,
doi: 10.1007/s11528-019-00384-4
D. (2017). “Development of computational thinking skills through unplugged
activities in primary school,” in Proceedings of the 12th Workshop on Primary and Huang, P., and Hwang, Y. (2013). An exploration of EFL learners’ anxiety and
Secondary Computing Education (Madrid), 65–72. doi: 10.1145/3137065.3137069 e-learning environments. J. Lang. Teach. Res. 4, 27.
Brown, N., and Wilson, G. (2018). Ten quick tips for teaching programming. Jiménez Toledo, J. A., Collazos, C. A., and Ortega, M. (2021). discovery model
PLoS Comput. Biol. 14, e1006023. doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1006023 based on analogies for teaching computer programming. Mathematics 9, 1354.
doi: 10.3390/math9121354
Buitrago, F., Casallas, R., Hernández, M., Reyes, A., Restrepo, S., and
Danies, G. (2017). Changing a generation’s way of thinking: teaching Khenner, E. (2019). Introduction to informatics as part of the university-
computational thinking through programming. Rev. Educ. Res. 87, 834–860. wide general education curriculum. Международный научный журнал
doi: 10.3102/0034654317710096 «Современные информационные технологии и ИТ-образование»
15, 805–814. doi: 10.25559/SITITO.15.201904.805-814
Calderon, A., Catherine, T., and Crick, T. (2017). An Investigation into
Susceptibility to Learn Computational Thinking in Post-Compulsory Education. Kite, V., Park, S., and Wiebe, E. (2021). The code-centric nature of
doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-93566-9_14 computational thinking education: a review of trends and issues in
computational thinking education research. Sage Open 11, 21582440211016418.
Carnegie Mellon Center for Computational Thinking. (2010). Available online
doi: 10.1177/21582440211016418
at: https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~CompThink/
Klunnikova, M., Bazhenova, I., Pak, N., and Kirgizova, E. (2020). Developing
Cheng, Y., Sun, P., and Chen, N. (2018). The essential applications of educational
students computational thinking with a recursive polydisciplinary approach. J.
robot: requirement analysis from the perspectives of experts, researchers and
Phys. 1691, 012190. doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/1691/1/012190
instructors. Comput. Educ. 126, 399–416. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2018.07.020
Kong, S., Hoppe, H., Hsu, T., Huang, R., Kuo, B., Li, K., et al. (2020). Proceedings
Ching, Y., Hsu, Y., and Baldwin, S. (2018). Developing computational thinking
of International Conference on Computational Thinking Education 2020. Hong
with educational technologies for young learners. TechTrends 62, 563–573.
Kong: The Education University of Hong Kong.
doi: 10.1007/s11528-018-0292-7
Lee, P., and Low, C. (2020). Implementing a computational thinking curriculum
Coppelli, G. (2018). Economic globalization in the 21st century.
with robotic coding activities through non-formal learning. CoolThink@
Between globalization and de-globalization. Estudios Int. 50, 57–80.
JC 150:150–151.
doi: 10.5354/0719-3769.2018.52048
Li, Y., Schoenfeld, A. H., diSessa, A. A., Graesser, A. C., Benson, L. C., English, L.
Cruz, S. S. T., Rojas, O. E., Hurtado, J. A., and Collazos, C. A. (2013).
D., et al. (2020). On computational thinking and STEM education. J. STEM Educ.
“ChildProgramming process: a software development model for kids,” in
Res. 3, 147–166. doi: 10.1007/s41979-020-00044-w
2013 8th Computing Colombian Conference (8CCC) (Armenia: IEEE), 1–6.
doi: 10.1109/ColombianCC.2013.6637535 Liang, Y., and Hsu, T. (2020). Comparison of the learning behaviors of the third
grader students integrating robots and the computational thinking board game in
CSTA Computational Thinking Task Force. (2011). Operational Definition of
Singapore and Taiwan. CoolThink@ JC 47, 47–51.
Computational Thinking for K-12 Education (Vol. 2013).
da Cruz Alves, N., Von Wangenheim, C., Hauck, J., Borgatto, A., Lockwood, J., and Mooney, A. (2017). Computational thinking in education:
and de Andrade, D. (2020). An item response theory analysis of the where does it fit? A systematic literary review. arXiv Preprint arXiv:1703.07659.
sequencing of algorithms & programming concepts. CoolThink@ JC 9, 1–11. Manyika, J., Chui, M., Miremadi, M., Bughin, J., George, K., Willmott, P., et al.
doi: 10.5753/educomp.2021.14466 (2017). A future that works: automation. Employ. Product. 148, 1–135.
Daungcharone, K., Panjaburee, P., and Thongkoo, K. (2019). Master, A., Cheryan, S., Moscatelli, A., and Meltzoff, A. N. (2017). Programming
A mobile game-based C programming language learning: results experience promotes higher STEM motivation among first-grade girls. J. Exp. Child
of university students’ achievement and motivations. Int. J. Psychol. 160, 92–106. doi: 10.1016/j.jecp.2017.03.013
Mob. Learn. Organ. 13, 171–192. doi: 10.1504/IJMLO.2019.0
98184 McLaren, B., Adams, D., Mayer, R., and Forlizzi, J. (2017). A computer-based
game that promotes mathematics learning more than a conventional approach. Int.
de Paula, B., Burn, A., Noss, R., and Valente, J. (2018). Playing beowulf: J. Game Based Learn. 7, 36–56. doi: 10.4018/IJGBL.2017010103
bridging computational thinking, arts and literature through game-
making. Int. J. Child Comp. Interact. 16, 39–46. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcci.2017. Moreno-León, J., Román-González, M., and Robles, G. (2018). “On
11.003 computational thinking as a universal skill: a review of the latest research on

Frontiers in Computer Science 18 frontiersin.org

Belmar 10.3389/fcomp.2022.997222

this ability,” in 2018 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON) Shah, V. (2019). CSpathshala: bringing computational thinking to schools.
(Santa Cruz de Tenerife: IEEE), 1684–1689. doi: 10.1109/EDUCON.2018.8363437 Commun. ACM 62, 54–55. doi: 10.1145/3343445
Ogegbo, A. A., and Ramnarain, U. (2021). A systematic review of Sharma, K., Papavlasopoulou, S., and Giannakos, M. (2019). Coding games
computational thinking in science classrooms. Stud. Sci. Educ. 58, 203–230. and robots to enhance computational thinking: how collaboration and
doi: 10.1080/03057267.2021.1963580 engagement moderate children’s attitudes? Int. J. Child Comp. Interact. 21,
65–76. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcci.2019.04.004
Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann,
T. C., Mulrow, C. D., et al. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: an Shute, V. J., Sun, C., and Asbell-Clarke, J. (2017). Demystifying
updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. Int. J. Surg. 88, 105906. computational thinking. Educ. Res. Rev. 22, 142–158. doi: 10.1016/j.edurev.2017.
doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2021.105906 09.003
Paucar-Curasma, R., Villalba-Condori, K., Arias-Chavez, D., Le, N. T., Garcia- So, H. J., Jong, M. S. Y., and Liu, C. C. (2020). Computational thinking education
Tejada, G., and Frango-Silveira, I. (2022). Evaluation of computational thinking in the Asian Pacific region. Asia Pac. Educ. Res. 29, 1–8. doi: 10.1007/s40299-019-0
using four educational robots with primary school students in Peru. Educ. Knowl. 0494-w
Soc. 23, e26161. doi: 10.14201/eks.26161
Souza, I., Andrade, W., and Sampaio, M. (2019). “Analyzing the effect of
Pellas, N., and Vosinakis, S. (2018). The effect of simulation games on learning computational thinking on mathematics through educational robotics,” in 2019
computer programming: a comparative study on high school students’ learning IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE) (Covington, KY: IEEE), 1–7.
performance by assessing computational problem-solving strategies. Educ. Inform.
Tang, X., Yin, Y., Lin, Q., Hadad, R., and Zhai, X. (2020).
Technol. 23, 2423–2452. doi: 10.1007/s10639-018-9724-4
Assessing computational thinking: a systematic review of empirical
Pérez, D., Hijón, R., Bacelo, A., and Pizarro, C. (2020). Can computational studies. Comput. Educ. 148, 103798. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2019.1
thinking be improved by using a methodology based on metaphors and scratch 03798
to teach computer programming to children?. Comp. Hum. Behav. 105, 105849.
Topalli, D., and Cagiltay, N. (2018). Improving programming skills
doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2018.12.027
in engineering education through problem-based game projects with
Pérez, D., Hijón, R., and Martín, M. (2018). A methodology proposal based scratch. Comput. Educ. 120, 64–74. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2018.
on metaphors to teach programming to children. IEEE Rev. Iberoam. Tecnol. 01.011
Aprendizaje 13, 46–53. doi: 10.1109/RITA.2018.2809944
Vallance, M., and Towndrow, P. (2016). Pedagogic transformation, student-
Portnoff, S. (2018). The introductory computer programming course is first and directed design and computational thinking. Pedagogies Int. J. 11, 218–234.
foremost a language course. ACM Inroads 9, 34–52. doi: 10.1145/3152433 doi: 10.1080/1554480X.2016.1182437
Psycharis, S., Kalovrektis, K., and Xenakis, A. (2020). A conceptual framework Wing, J. (2006). Computational thinking. Commun. ACM 49, 33–35.
for computational pedagogy in STEAM education: determinants and perspectives. doi: 10.1145/1118178.1118215
Hellenic J. STEM Educ. 1, 17–32. doi: 10.51724/hjstemed.v1i1.4
Wing, J. (2011). Research notebook: computational thinking—what and why.
Radin, B. A., and Hawley, W. D. (2013). The Politics of Federal Reorganization: Link Magaz. 6.
Creating the US Department of Education. Washington: Elsevier.
Wu, L., Looi, C., Multisilta, J., How, M., Choi, H., Hsu, T., et al. (2020). Teacher’s
Repenning, A. (2017). Moving beyond syntax: lessons from 20 years perceptions and readiness to teach coding skills: a comparative study between
of blocks programing in AgentSheets. J. Vis. Lang. Sent. Syst. 3, 68–91. Finland, mainland China, Singapore, Taiwan, and South Korea. Asia Pac. Educ.
doi: 10.18293/VLSS2017-010 Res. 29, 21–34. doi: 10.1007/s40299-019-00485-x
Rivera-Taiba, T. (2019). Effects of automation on employment in Chile. J. Econ. Yi, L., and Ting, H. (2020). “Effects of using mobile phone programs to control
Anal. 34, 3–49. doi: 10.4067/S0718-88702019000100003 educational robots on the programming self-efficacy of the third grade students,”
Rojas, A., and García, F. J. (2020). Assessment of computational thinking for in Proceedings of International Conference on Computational Thinking Education.
learning computer programming in higher education. J. Dist. Educ. 20, 1–36. p. 31–35.
doi: 10.6018/red.409991 Zhang, K., Chen, X., and Wang, H. (2019). “Research on the mixed-learning
Román-González, M., Pérez-González, J., and Jiménez-Fernández, C. (2017). model and the innovative talent cultivation mechanism based on computational
Which cognitive abilities underlie computational thinking? Criterion validity of thinking,” in Recent Developments in Intelligent Computing, Communication and
the Computational Thinking Test. Comput. Hum. Behav. 72, 678–691. Devices (Singapore: Springer), 59–65. doi: 10.1007/978-981-10-8944-2_8
Seow, P., Wadhwa, B., Lim, Z., and Looi, C. (2020). Towards Using Zhou, T., and Hsu, T. (2020). Learning behaviors analysis of the six grader
Computational Modeling in Learning of Physical Computing: An Observational students integrating educational robots with the computational thinking board
Study in Singapore Schools Singapore: University Press. game. CoolThink@ JC 144, 144–148.

Frontiers in Computer Science 19 frontiersin.org