At all the levels of the framework, it is essential to start with the science content and then integrate CT to improve the lesson. But this can often be easier in theory than in practice. From my experience, one of the first challenges teachers have is determining which CT practices should be highlighted at the Exist level (see Table 2 for the core CT practices). Given that there is so much overlap between the CT practices and the science and engineering practices (SEPs) and crosscutting concepts (CCCs), there are often multiple CT practices that seem relevant and worth discussing with students. While teachers could attempt to highlight all the practices, I’ve found that the discussions are richer when the focus is on one or two CT practices (see Table 3 for examples of how the CT practices align with the CCCs and SEPs). The process of determining which CT practices will be most appropriate starts at the beginning of the lesson planning process.

Understanding by Design—Backwards planning

Most educators have heard of the concept of backwards planning—and potentially in the context of unit planning while reading Understanding by Design by Grant Wiggins and Jay McTighe (see Online Resources). The same principles of backwards planning at the unit level can be applied to great effect when considering how to intentionally integrate CT.

To begin, start by laying out the NGSS performance expectations (PEs) and your daily objective. Next, break the objective down into a comprehensive list of knowledge, skills, and mindsets (in addition to using the disciplinary core ideas [DCIs] for knowledge and the SEPs for skills, I’ve found the NGSS Evidence Statements are helpful in making sure I stay within the scope of the PEs; see Online Resources). Once you have a clear picture of what students need to know and what they need to be able to do, begin to look for overlap between the science content/skills and the CT practices. Do students need to create a physical, mental, or mathematical model? Chances are high that they will need to use abstraction to determine which details to keep and which to remove. Are you asking students to plan an investigation? This might require developing an algorithm, or if they have recently planned a similar investigation (such as in the 5E Model with the Explore and Elaborate phases), they might be using pattern recognition to determine which steps need to be repeated in the new investigation.

With the overlapping CT practices identified, now build out the exemplar responses you want to see from students. At the Exist level, this is likely not an end-of-class assessment. Instead, what do you want to hear students saying about abstraction and the model they are building during the lesson? What should they be doing when they collaboratively write a procedure for an experiment that builds from a previous lab? Consider asking students if they can describe their own examples of the CT practices, or utilize the new vocabulary as part of their discussions. The more students are making connections to other content or experiences, the more fluent they will become with the CT practices.

Conclusion

The importance of integrating CT across all content areas has never been clearer. But integrating CT intentionally requires more than just getting students to write a program in Scratch or analyze data in Google Sheets. It requires us as educators to think critically about which CT practices will best enhance or extend our students’ understanding of their science content. That thinking starts when we begin to plan our lessons—from the very first time we consider our standards and objectives!

How else are you integrating CS into your middle school science classroom? Do you have a great resource or experience to share? Let me know via email!