skip to main content
10.1145/3308561.3354608acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesassetsConference Proceedingsconference-collections
poster

Computational Thinking as Play: Experiences of Children who are Blind or Low Vision in India

Published:24 October 2019Publication History

ABSTRACT

Torino is a tangible programming environment designed for teaching the computational thinking curriculum in the UK to children who are blind or low vision (henceforth, just children) in an inclusive setting. In this paper we describe the experience of children in Bangalore, India, when Torino was introduced to them as a toy for creating and sharing stories, songs and music. We conducted 12 play sessions with 12 children (4 girls and 8 boys) with diverse backgrounds belonging to three different schools for the blind. We briefly present the reasons for play being central to our effort of bringing computational thinking to children who are blind and low vision in India, and share some experiences of the children and some insights that we have gathered so far: Children not only enjoyed every session, they rapidly moved from playing with pre-created examples, to making changes, to demanding that their favorite stories be told. In observing such play, we could infer that they have grasped the basic concepts of computational thinking? flow of control, variables, loops? though not articulated in that vocabulary.

References

  1. 2014. World Health Organization. Universal Eye Health: A Global Action Plan 2014--19. https://www.who.int/blindness/AP2014_19_English.pdf.(2014).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. 2015. Computing Our Future. Computer programming and coding: Priorities, school curricula and initiatives across Europe. http://fcl.eun.org/documents/10180/ 14689/Computing+our+future_final.pdf/ 746e36b1-e1a6--4bf1--8105-ea27c0d2bbe0 . (2015).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. 2016. Computer programming seen as key to Japan place in fourth industrial revolution. Japan Times. https://bit.ly/2JnLwrJ . (2016).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. 2017. CSpathshala. Curriculum. https://cspathshala.org/ . (2017).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. 2018. EuropeanSchoolnet launches its first study visit on Computational Thinking in Norway and Sweden. EuropeanSchoolnet. http://www.eun.org/news/detail?articleId=1845581 . (2018).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. 2019. CodeJumper. https://codejumper.com/ . (2019).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Patrick Bateson, Paul Patrick Gordon Bateson, and Paul Martin. 2013. Play, playfulness, creativity and innovation . Cambridge University Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Jeffrey P. Bigham, Maxwell B. Aller, Jeremy T. Brudvik, Jessica O. Leung, Lindsay A. Yazzolino, and Richard E. Ladner. 2008. Inspiring Blind High School Students to Pursue Computer Science with Instant Messaging Chatbots. In Proceedings of the 39th SIGCSE Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (SIGCSE '08) . ACM, New York, NY, USA, 449--453. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1352135.1352287Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. S Bocconi, A Chioccariello, G Dettori, A Ferrari, K Engelhardt, P Kampylis, and Y Punie. 2016. Exploring the field of computational thinking as a 21st century skill. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Education and New Learning TechnologiesJuly 2016Barcelona, Spain Page . 4725--4733.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. Stefania Bocconi, Augusto Chioccariello, and Jeffrey Earp. 2018. The Nordic approach to introducing Computational Thinking and programming in compulsory education. Report prepared for the Nordic@ BETT2018 Steering Group. doi: https://doi. org/10.17471/54007 (2018).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Elizabeth Bonawitz, Patrick Shafto, Hyowon Gweon, Noah D Goodman, Elizabeth Spelke, and Laura Schulz. 2011. The double-edged sword of pedagogy: Instruction limits spontaneous exploration and discovery. Cognition 120, 3 (2011), 322--330.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Michael E. Caspersen, Judith Gal-Ezer, Enrico Nardelli, Jan Vahrenhold, and Mirko Westermeier. 2018. The CECE Report: Creating a Map of Informatics in European Schools. In Proceedings of the 49th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (SIGCSE '18) . ACM, New York, NY, USA, 916--917. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/3159450.3159633Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Anita Ghai. 2019. Rethinking disability in India . Routledge India.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Gwen Gordon. 2014. Well Played: The Origins and Future of Playfulness. American Journal of Play 6, 2 (2014), 234--266.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Peter Gray. 2013. Free to learn: Why unleashing the instinct to play will make our children happier, more self-reliant, and better students for life . Basic Books.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Shaun K. Kane and Jeffrey P. Bigham. 2014. Tracking @Stemxcomet: Teaching Programming to Blind Students via 3D Printing, Crisis Management, and Twitter. In Proceedings of the 45th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (SIGCSE '14) . ACM, New York, NY, USA, 247--252. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2538862.2538975Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Stephanie Ludi and Tom Reichlmayr. 2011. The use of robotics to promote computing to pre-college students with visual impairments. ACM Transactions on Computing Education (TOCE) 11, 3 (2011), 20.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Regina M Milteer, Kenneth R Ginsburg, Deborah Ann Mulligan, and others. 2012. The importance of play in promoting healthy child development and maintaining strong parent-child bond: Focus on children in poverty. Pediatrics 129, 1 (2012), e204--e213.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. Cecily Morrison, Nicolas Villar, Anja Thieme, Zahra Ashktorab, Eloise Taysom, Oscar Salandin, Daniel Cletheroe, Greg Saul, Alan F Blackwell, Darren Edge, and others. 2018. Torino: A tangible programming language inclusive of children with visual disabilities. Human--Computer Interaction (2018), 1--49.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Michael Palmer. 2011. Disability and poverty: A conceptual review. Journal of Disability Policy Studies 21, 4 (2011), 210--218.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. Peter Seow, Chee-Kit Looi, Meng-Leong How, Bimlesh Wadhwa, and Long-Kai Wu. 2019. Educational Policy and Implementation of Computational Thinking and Programming: Case Study of Singapore. In Computational Thinking Education . Springer, 345--361.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Andreas M. Stefik, Christopher Hundhausen, and Derrick Smith. 2011. On the Design of an Educational Infrastructure for the Blind and Visually Impaired in Computer Science. In Proceedings of the 42Nd ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (SIGCSE '11) . ACM, New York, NY, USA, 571--576. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1953163.1953323Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Anja Thieme, Cecily Morrison, Nicolas Villar, Martin Grayson, and Siân Lindley. 2017. Enabling Collaboration in Learning Computer Programming Inclusive of Children with Vision Impairments. In Proceedings of the 2017 Conference on Designing Interactive Systems (DIS '17) . ACM, New York, NY, USA, 739--752. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/3064663.3064689Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Computational Thinking as Play: Experiences of Children who are Blind or Low Vision in India

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      ASSETS '19: Proceedings of the 21st International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility
      October 2019
      730 pages
      ISBN:9781450366762
      DOI:10.1145/3308561

      Copyright © 2019 Owner/Author

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for third-party components of this work must be honored. For all other uses, contact the Owner/Author.

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 24 October 2019

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • poster

      Acceptance Rates

      ASSETS '19 Paper Acceptance Rate41of158submissions,26%Overall Acceptance Rate436of1,556submissions,28%

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader