OntoScractch: ontologies to evaluate computational thinking learning through Scratch
Abstract
This paper presents an ontology-based knowledge abstraction to model Scratch projects and evaluations of the computational thinking abilities demonstrated in them through time, as a way of supporting analyses and the use of inference mechanisms that help in the understanding of the student's knowledge, his learning path and other related aspects. The results have proven the efficiency and the potential of this abstraction, being capable of faithfully represent, through SPARQL queries, the evaluation methodology of computational thinking abilities of the tool Dr. Scratch.
Keywords:
Ontology Engineerig, Semantic Modeling, Ontologies, Computational Thinking, Scratch
References
(2020a). Scratch. https://scratch.mit.edu/statistics/. Acessado em 11/07/2020.
(2020b). Scratch wiki. https://en.scratch-wiki.info/. Acessado em 07/07/2020.
Araujo, C., Lima, L. V., and Henriques, P. R. (2019). An ontology based approach to teach computational thinking. In 2019 International Symposium on Computers in Education (SIIE), pages 1–6. IEEE.
Blikstein, P. (2008). O pensamento computacional e a reinvenção do computador na educação. Education & Courses.
BLINKSTEIN, P. (2019). O pensamento computacional e a reinvenção do computador na educação. 2008.
Brennan, K. and Resnick, M. (2012). New frameworks for studying and assessing the development of computational thinking. In Proceedings of the 2012 annual meeting of the American educational research association, Vancouver, Canada, volume 1, page 25.
Campos, F., Soster, T., and Blikstein, P. (2019). Sorry, i was in teacher mode today: Pivotal tensions and contradictory discourses in real-world implementations of school makerspaces. In Proceedings of FabLearn 2019, pages 96–103.
De França, R. S. and do Amaral, H. J. C. (2013). Proposta metodologica de ensino é avaliação para o desenvolvimento do pensamento computacional com o uso do scratch. In Anais do Workshop de Informatica na Escola, volume 1, page 179.
Dousay, T. A. (2017). Defining and differentiating the makerspace. Educational Technology, pages 69–74.
Horridge, M. and Musen, M. (2015). Snap-sparql: A java framework for working with sparql and owl. In International Experiences and Directions Workshop on OWL, pages 154–165. Springer.
Junior, J. L. N. V., Primo, T. T., Pernas, A. M., and Junior, D. A. M. (2019). A framework for collecting and analyzing interactions in scratch projects. In XIV Latin American Conference on Learning Technologies (LACLO), pages 50–54. IEEE.
Moreno-Leon, J., Robles, G., and Román-González, M. (2015). Dr. scratch: Automatic analysis of scratch projects to assess and foster computational thinking. RED. Revista de Educacion a Distancia, (46):1–23.
Oluk, A. and Korkmaz, O. (2016). Comparing students’ scratch skills with their computational thinking skills in terms of different variables. Online Submission, 8(11):1–7.
Seiter, L. and Foreman, B. (2013). Modeling the learning progressions of computational thinking of primary grade students. In Proceedings of the ninth annual international ACM conference on International computing education research, pages 59–66.
Sirin, E., Parsia, B., Grau, B. C., Kalyanpur, A., and Katz, Y. (2007). Pellet: A practical owl-dl reasoner. Journal of Web Semantics, 5(2):51–53.
Troiano, G. M., Snodgrass, S., Argımak, E., Robles, G., Smith, G., Cassidy, M., TuckerRaymond, E., Puttick, G., and Harteveld, C. (2019). Is my game PK, Dr. Scratch? Exploring programming and computational thinking development via metrics in studentdesigned serious games for stem. In Proceedings of the 18th ACM International Conference on Interaction Design and Children, pages 208–219.
Wilson, A., Hainey, T., and Connolly, T. (2012). Evaluation of computer games developed by primary school children to gauge understanding of programming concepts. In European Conference on Games Based Learning, page 549. Academic Conferences
InternationalLimited.
(2020b). Scratch wiki. https://en.scratch-wiki.info/. Acessado em 07/07/2020.
Araujo, C., Lima, L. V., and Henriques, P. R. (2019). An ontology based approach to teach computational thinking. In 2019 International Symposium on Computers in Education (SIIE), pages 1–6. IEEE.
Blikstein, P. (2008). O pensamento computacional e a reinvenção do computador na educação. Education & Courses.
BLINKSTEIN, P. (2019). O pensamento computacional e a reinvenção do computador na educação. 2008.
Brennan, K. and Resnick, M. (2012). New frameworks for studying and assessing the development of computational thinking. In Proceedings of the 2012 annual meeting of the American educational research association, Vancouver, Canada, volume 1, page 25.
Campos, F., Soster, T., and Blikstein, P. (2019). Sorry, i was in teacher mode today: Pivotal tensions and contradictory discourses in real-world implementations of school makerspaces. In Proceedings of FabLearn 2019, pages 96–103.
De França, R. S. and do Amaral, H. J. C. (2013). Proposta metodologica de ensino é avaliação para o desenvolvimento do pensamento computacional com o uso do scratch. In Anais do Workshop de Informatica na Escola, volume 1, page 179.
Dousay, T. A. (2017). Defining and differentiating the makerspace. Educational Technology, pages 69–74.
Horridge, M. and Musen, M. (2015). Snap-sparql: A java framework for working with sparql and owl. In International Experiences and Directions Workshop on OWL, pages 154–165. Springer.
Junior, J. L. N. V., Primo, T. T., Pernas, A. M., and Junior, D. A. M. (2019). A framework for collecting and analyzing interactions in scratch projects. In XIV Latin American Conference on Learning Technologies (LACLO), pages 50–54. IEEE.
Moreno-Leon, J., Robles, G., and Román-González, M. (2015). Dr. scratch: Automatic analysis of scratch projects to assess and foster computational thinking. RED. Revista de Educacion a Distancia, (46):1–23.
Oluk, A. and Korkmaz, O. (2016). Comparing students’ scratch skills with their computational thinking skills in terms of different variables. Online Submission, 8(11):1–7.
Seiter, L. and Foreman, B. (2013). Modeling the learning progressions of computational thinking of primary grade students. In Proceedings of the ninth annual international ACM conference on International computing education research, pages 59–66.
Sirin, E., Parsia, B., Grau, B. C., Kalyanpur, A., and Katz, Y. (2007). Pellet: A practical owl-dl reasoner. Journal of Web Semantics, 5(2):51–53.
Troiano, G. M., Snodgrass, S., Argımak, E., Robles, G., Smith, G., Cassidy, M., TuckerRaymond, E., Puttick, G., and Harteveld, C. (2019). Is my game PK, Dr. Scratch? Exploring programming and computational thinking development via metrics in studentdesigned serious games for stem. In Proceedings of the 18th ACM International Conference on Interaction Design and Children, pages 208–219.
Wilson, A., Hainey, T., and Connolly, T. (2012). Evaluation of computer games developed by primary school children to gauge understanding of programming concepts. In European Conference on Games Based Learning, page 549. Academic Conferences
InternationalLimited.
Published
2020-11-24
How to Cite
ARAUJO, Nícolas de; PRIMO, Tiago Thompsen; PERNAS, Ana Marilza.
OntoScractch: ontologies to evaluate computational thinking learning through Scratch. In: BRAZILIAN SYMPOSIUM ON COMPUTERS IN EDUCATION (SBIE), 31. , 2020, Online.
Anais [...].
Porto Alegre: Sociedade Brasileira de Computação,
2020
.
p. 1823-1832.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5753/cbie.sbie.2020.1823.
