INTEGRATING COMPUTER SCIENCE LEARNING IN RURAL CLASSROOMS: FROM BARRIERS TO OPPORTUNITIES

A QUICK OVERVIEW

WHY THIS WORK

Rural communities nationwide hunger for highly engaging learning experiences integrating computer science across disciplines. With a lack of qualified teachers and slim resources, however, the thought of new standards, such as the Next Generation Science Standards or Computer Science Standards, immediately puts educators and administrators on the defensive. The integration of CS into existing curriculum, backed by growing evidence, is a viable solution for resource-strapped districts. 

WHAT THE WORK EXAMINES

The initial research question of our foundational RPP (i2i) was: “What are the key elements needed to support rural K-8 educators’ integration of CS into math and science instruction?” Over the course of 18 months, 30 i2i participants identified, discussed, and iterated on the barriers to integration of CS in the classroom. That work culminated in the Barriers Map, a network analysis map highlighting the barriers to CS integration and, more importantly, the connections between these barriers. From these connections, we identified critical levers to focus on and crafted new research questions that informed the work of the expanded RPP, WFR. At the culmination of i2i, we were left with a fully developed Barriers Map, a list of potential research questions, and a hope for more funding. Two years and a pandemic later, we secured funding to continue and expand the work of i2i into WFR.

Identifying Barriers to CS Integration

During the first iteration of our RPP (i2i) answered the research question “What are the key elements needed to support rural K-8 educators’ integration of CS into math and science instruction?”, by employing Design Based Research Methodology (DBR) as a means to gather, analyze, and share data. The network map was created after the completion of three project stages. During stage one, participants brainstormed possible barriers to CS integration, based on their own experiences. In stage two of the process, participants voted on which barriers were most prevalent. The three main barriers that emerged after the voting process were:

1. lack of common understanding of CS/CT 
2. lack of planning time for integration 
3. lack of examples of CS integration

In stage three, semi-structured interviews and surveys of 30 i2i teachers and administrators were created to unearth new barriers and to gain an in-depth understanding of the identified barriers. Data gathered from these sources was analyzed using a mixed-methods approach, and the results were coded and analyzed using Gephi software. From the interviews and focus groups, another barrier, lack of teacher buy-in, emerged as being equally important as the previous three barriers identified. 

Creating the Barriers Network Map

Next, the research team at MMSA created the Barriers Network Map, which was shared with the i2i participants. Small groups worked to discuss and refine the map, and the discussion and data helped create research questions for the next phase of the project. Our current iteration of the RPP, Workforce Ready 2030, which began two years after the conclusion of i2i, focuses on workforce development as an outcome related to CS development. However, we were able to use data gathered from our previous work to inform our current project and continue investigating research questions that emerged previously. 

INITIAL FINDINGS

Sharing the Findings

In addition to disseminating findings through the RPPforCS network online conference, WFR participants led a Virtual Learning Series in May 2020 that summarized the findings of the initial stages of the work for a broader audience of teachers, researchers, community members, and business owners. Researchers have reflected that the network analysis approach might be challenging for participants to utilize. It was evident, however, through the participant-designed and -led learning series, that the network approach was not only well within their grasp, but also allowed them to communicate their findings directly to a broad audience, which was powerful. 

Overview of the Findings

RPP participant Jess Wilkey, a teaching principal from Bethel, Maine, constructed the following findings:

An initial ranking system identified lack of common understanding, lack of planning time, and lack of CS integration examples as the three most prominent barriers to CS integration in the three participating districts. In-depth interviews with teachers, administrators, and tech integrators across all three districts uncovered underlying connections to other problems of practice. 

This network analysis represents the results. Lines represent connections. Thicker lines illustrate more connections, and larger nodes illustrate that more people mentioned it as a barrier.

Figure 1: Barriers

This next rendition highlights the connections between the seven most connected barriers. Understanding the connections between these frequently identified barriers can lead to a better understanding of where to begin CS integration efforts.

Figure 2: Connected Barriers

Once identified, connections between barriers can represent potential pathways for advancing CS integration. The rendition below shows the three main areas: Blue = lacking planning time, red = lacking common understanding, yellow = lacking CS integration examples. These three pillars can be foundational for CS integration efforts. Progress and/or success in one area suddenly provides access to a much larger section of the network analysis map (ie. progress towards solving/mitigating other barriers).

Figure 3: Main Opportunity Pathways

The network mapping approach allows us to see myriad factors, both in and out of school, that contribute to the current rural landscape of CS integration and how those factors relate to one another. For example, teachers find it easy to identify barriers, but understanding the context and impact of the barriers is a challenge. This step can be made easier by the boundary mapping approach. For example, “Lack of Planning Time” was frequently cited as a barrier in initial surveys, but thoughtful discussions and analyses among the participants revealed that the problem of not having enough time was not just about the number of hours in a day. Instead, it was revealed through the mapping approach that “Lack of Planning Time” is largely impacted by (i) the prioritization of specific subject areas that are tested by the state and (ii) a belief that CS learning has to be born out of nothing (note, however, that integration can be a lighter lift once an educator recognizes connections between CS content and already existing practices and learning requirements). The boundary mapping approach thus deepens the understanding of the most interconnected and impactful barriers (represented by colored nodes), which in turn, represent boundaries that we understand to be related to successful integration strategies.

Arriving at the Current Research Questions

The research questions we are currently focused on, particularly question 3, are a direct result of previous work on the network map.

1. How do educators and business leaders identify and prioritize CS workforce skills and practices they see as important for students to learn? 
2. What supports need to be in place to enable and empower the integration of CS workforce skills into existing classroom activities?
3. How does the RPP process allow us to develop a better understanding of the barriers surrounding CS integration in the rural classroom?

IMPACT AND USE OF THE WORK

The network analysis graph allowed the participants to shift their thinking about CS integration from a problem-focused approach to an opportunity-focused approach. As participants grew more knowledgeable, they were able to identify tools and professional learning to increase CS integration. Key tools identified included model CS Integrated lessons, Classroom Observation Protocols for identifying opportunities for integration, and more opportunities for engaging with local businesses to increase community buy-in. As participants’ understanding increased, so did their ability to communicate their ideas to their peers, generating more conversations about CS integration and laying the groundwork for school and community engagement. Connections between barriers were reexamined as potential pathways for CS integration. 

During a planning meeting for stage 2 of the project, previous i2i participants were invited to a one-day workshop at the MMSA office in Augusta, Maine. As part of the retreat, a small group revisited the network map, which had been created two years previously (pre-Covid). They noted that some of the barriers had changed; for example, one district noted that lack of technology was no longer a barrier for them as Covid funding had allowed them to purchase needed equipment. A large part of the discussion centered around using the word “barriers.” It was noted that “barrier” connoted an insurmountable task. It was suggested during this meeting that going forward, the word “problem” should replace “barrier” since a problem is something that could be solved. Additionally, it was suggested that in addition to asking new RPP participants to brainstorm barriers (problems) during their project team onboarding to the RPP, they also think about what solutions and/or an ideal situation may look like. Finally, districts acknowledged that as the RPP continues its work, new problems may emerge, some may be solved, and not all districts encounter the same problems at the same time, and some may not encounter the same at all. 

NEXT STEPS

In August 2022 we held a 2-day retreat where we welcomed 15 returning i2i participants and 25 new participants to kick off the new iteration of the RPP, STEM Workforce 2030. During that retreat all 33 members were asked to complete a survey which included Likert scale measures for rating barriers previously identified by the i2i RPP, as well as areas where they could add additional barriers that were not listed. Currently, we are creating a new version of the map using data from these surveys. In the next few months, the new map will be presented to participants and discussed. Participants have expressed interest in asset-based models and what visualizing solutions to the problems presented in the map might look like. Moving forward, we recognize that the network map is not a static document, but one to be revisited, updated, and discussed. It has proven to be a map in the truest sense of the word in that it shows us where we have been and where we are going. 

Kate Kastelein and Brittney Nickerson are Research Associates at Maine Mathematics and Science Alliance; Rhonda Tate is Principal Investigator at STEM Workforce Ready 2030 and the study discussed in this article; and Jess Wilkey is Teaching Principal at Maine School Administrative District 44 (MSAD 44).

Suggested citation: Kastelein, K., Nickerson, B., Tate, R., & Wilkey, J. (2023). Integrating Computer Science Learning in Rural Classrooms: From Barriers to Opportunities. NNERPP Extra, 5(1), 2-8. https://doi.org/10.25613/B2RW-Z896