Taxonomy of pedagogical approaches in scripts of computational processes: tutoring vs. simulation, each with two sub-categories¶

Theory · All theories
Evidence · 3 claims (3 for) · 1 study (1 qualitative), q2 · 1 of 1 report an effect size · 3 claims rest on one study

Description¶

The article derives a two-branch taxonomy classifying prospective teachers' Scratch scripts of computational processes by the pedagogical approach they reflect. The first branch, "Tutorial", contains scripts that "do not demonstrate dynamic computational processes but serve as instructional tools for learning or assessing the said processes"; the second, "Simulation", represents domain processes dynamically, with sub-categories for demonstration only and for demonstration plus exploration, where users "alter parameters, influencing the simulations’ execution". The authors state the primary distinction lies in the teaching approaches reflected: tutoring aligns with a traditional multimedia teaching model, while simulations involve active domain entities behaving by domain-specific rules.

Design Implications¶

Context¶

Requirements¶

• Scripts must be classified by indicators of pedagogical approach: tutorial for learning or assessment, simulation for demonstration only or demonstration and exploration

Constraints¶

• The taxonomy was derived from one course's summative assignment submissions and the authors caution that generalization must be applied very carefully due to the convenience sample

Target Learners¶

• prospective teachers across preschool, elementary, and secondary programs

Target Learning Objectives¶

• identifying and expressing computational thinking through scripts of computational processes in any school subject

Claims¶

• Most Prospective Teachers Produce Dynamic Simulations [+M]
• Inquiry Simulations More Likely In Sciences [+M]
• Exploration simulations increased with teaching age level and were concentrated in secondary science subjects [+W]

Related Theories¶

• 4P4CT framework: four learner-centered pedagogies for teaching computational thinking across all subjects

Examples¶

• Incorporate CT skills into all teacher preparation programs, for all subject matters, with iterative guidance for non-STEM teachers

Key Sources¶

• Ragonis, N., & Hazzan, O. (2026). Computational Thinking Across Disciplines: A Taxonomy of Pedagogical Approaches as Reflected in Prospective Teachers’ Simulations of Computational Processes. Informatics in Education, 25(1), 173–199. https://doi.org/10.15388/infedu.2506.019