TL;DR: The current state of discourse on computational thinking in K-12 education by examining mostly recently published academic literature that uses Wing's article as a springboard, identifies gaps in research, and articulates priorities for future inquiries as mentioned in this paper.
Abstract: Jeannette Wing’s influential article on computational thinking 6 years ago argued for adding this new competency to every child’s analytical ability as a vital ingredient of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) learning. What is computational thinking? Why did this article resonate with so many and serve as a rallying cry for educators, education researchers, and policy makers? How have they interpreted Wing’s definition, and what advances have been made since Wing’s article was published? This article frames the current state of discourse on computational thinking in K–12 education by examining mostly recently published academic literature that uses Wing’s article as a springboard, identifies gaps in research, and articulates priorities for future inquiries.
TL;DR: The new NSF cyber-enabled discovery and innovation initiative in a nutshell is computational thinking for science and engineering, with the hope of encouraging the community to think about the scientific drivers of the authors' field.
Abstract: Summary form only given. My vision for the 21st Century: computational thinking will be a fundamental skill used by everyone in the world. To reading, writing, and arithmetic, let's add computational thinking to every child's analytical ability. Computational thinking has already influenced other disciplines, from the sciences to the arts. The new NSF cyber-enabled discovery and innovation initiative in a nutshell is computational thinking for science and engineering. Realizing this vision gives the field of computing both exciting research opportunities and novel educational challenges. The field of computing is driven by technology innovation, societal demands, and scientific questions. We are often too easily swept up with the rapid progress in technology and the surprising uses by society of our technology, that we forget about the science that underlies our field. In thinking about computing, I have started a list of "Deep Questions in Computing," with the hope of encouraging the community to think about the scientific drivers of our field.
TL;DR: In this article, the authors present a research-based expert consensus definition of critical thinking, argues that human dispositions are neither hidden nor unknowable, describes a scientific process of developing conventional testing tools to measure cognitive skills, and summarizes recent empirical research findings that explore the possible relationship of critical-thinking skill and the consistent internal motivation, or disposition, to use that skill.
Abstract: Theorists have hypothesized that skill in critical thinking is positively correlated with the consistent internal motivation to think and that specific critical thinking skills are matched with specific critical thinking dispositions. If true, these assumptions suggest that a skill-focused curriculum
would lead persons to be both willing and able to think. This essay presents a researchbased expert consensus definition of critical thinking, argues that human dispositions are neither hidden nor unknowable, describes a scientific process of developing conventional testing tools to measure cognitive skills and human dispositions, and summarizes recent empirical research findings that explore the possible relationship of critical thinking skill and the consistent internal motivation, or disposition, to use that skill. Empirical studies indicate that for all practical purposes the hypothesized correlations are not evident. It would appear that effective teaching must include strategies for building intellectual character rather than relying exclusively on strengthening cognitive skills
TL;DR: Chia as discussed by the authors argues that the traditional education system stultifies rather than develops the requisite attributes and skills to produce entrepreneurs, and proposes that if entrepreneurs are to be developed, considerable changes are required in both the content and process of learning.
Abstract: Examines the characteristics and role of the entrepreneur and the challenges for business schools posed by the need to develop more enterprising individuals. Argues that the traditional education system stultifies rather than develops the requisite attributes and skills to produce entrepreneurs, and proposes that if entrepreneurs are to be developed, considerable changes are required in both the content and process of learning. In particular it suggests that there needs to be a shift in the emphasis from educating “about” entrepreneurship to educating “for” it. Stresses equally that entrepreneurship should not be equated with new venture creation or small business management, but with creativity and change. In this context proposes that educational institutions need to change the process of learning to enable their students to develop their right brain entrepreneurial capabilities as well as their left‐brain analytical skills. As Chia argues, business schools need to weaken the thought processes so as to encourage and stimulate the entrepreneurial imagination.