Inclusive pedagogies taxonomy: accessible instruction, connecting to homes and communities, and combating inequity¶

Theory · All theories
Evidence · 3 claims (3 for) · 3 studies (2 review, 1 theoretical), q2 · 0 of 3 report an effect size · 3 claims rest on one study

Description¶

The report organizes inclusive computing pedagogy into three categories. As printed, "The pedagogies are divided into three categories to emphasize different pedagogical approaches to inclusivity." Designing Accessible Instruction covers strategies such as Universal Design for Learning, pair programming, POGIL, explicit expectations, normalizing mistakes, and student choice of computational artifacts. Connecting to Students' Interests, Homes, and Communities covers drawing on student experiences, family perspectives, translanguaging, and community showcase. Acknowledging and Combating Inequity covers addressing power dynamics, recruiting marginalized students, challenging stereotypes, teaching about algorithmic bias, and creating artifacts that counter inequities. The taxonomy adapts prior frameworks from Israel et al., the Kapor Center, Madkins et al., and NCWIT.

Design Implications¶

Context¶

Requirements¶

• Educators should attend to each of the three approaches as they plan and teach lessons, especially related to computing

Constraints¶

• The practices listed are those most relevant to environments in which computing is occurring, whether standalone CS or integrated CT lessons

Target Learners¶

• all K-12 learners, especially students experiencing marginalization in computing

Target Learning Objectives¶

• inclusive participation in computing and computational thinking

Claims¶

• AP Computer Science participation is disproportionately low among girls and students of color [+W]
• Access to computing instruction in US schools is limited and inequitable by school level and poverty [+W]
• Lack of diversity in computing stems from social and structural barriers, not ability or interest [+W]

Related Theories¶

• A three-circle framework for computational thinking integration: skills, practices, and inclusive pedagogies

Examples¶

• Use empathy interviews with students to identify and address systemic inequities in computing participation

Key Sources¶

• Mills, K., Coenraad, M., Ruiz, P., Burke, Q., & Weisgrau J. (2021, December). Computational thinking for an inclusive world: A resource for educators to learn and lead. Digital Promise. https://doi.org/10.51388/20.500.12265/138