[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":3,"doc-seo-588287-105":59,"doc-detail-588287-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",[7,13,18,23,28,33,38,43,48,51,55],{"id":8,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":10,"show_sort_weight":11,"slug":12},1,"Document","Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":14,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":15,"show_sort_weight":16,"slug":17},2,"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":19,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":20,"show_sort_weight":21,"slug":22},4,"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":24,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":25,"show_sort_weight":26,"slug":27},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":29,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":30,"show_sort_weight":31,"slug":32},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":34,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":35,"show_sort_weight":36,"slug":37},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":39,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":40,"show_sort_weight":41,"slug":42},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":44,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":45,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":47},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":46,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":49,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":50},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":52,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":53,"show_sort_weight":52,"slug":54},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":56,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":57,"show_sort_weight":24,"slug":58},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":60,"data":61},"ok",{"site_id":62,"language":63,"slug":64,"title":65,"keywords":66,"description":67,"schema_data":68,"social_meta":123,"head_meta":125,"extra_data":127,"updated_unix":129},105,"en","computational-thinking-assessment-in-primary-and-secondary-education-a-meta-synthesis-of-tools-methods-and-pedagogical-approaches","Computational Thinking Assessment in Primary and Secondary Education - A Meta-Synthesis of Tools, Methods and Pedagogical Approaches","","Despite widespread adoption of computational thinking (CT) in education, assessing it remains difficult due to diverse definitions, frameworks, and classroom implementations. This meta-synthesis compiles evidence from 12 reviews across five international databases, examining assessment tools, methods, and pedagogical practices for primary and secondary settings. It analyzes which CT skills and components are targeted, how they are measured, and where gaps persist. Results show heavy emphasis on programming skills, limited attention to cognitive processes and collaboration, and a need for broader assessment approaches.",{"@graph":69,"@context":122},[70,84,105],{"@type":71,"itemListElement":72},"BreadcrumbList",[73,77,79,82],{"item":74,"name":75,"@type":76,"position":8},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":78,"name":9,"@type":76,"position":14},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/",{"item":80,"name":40,"@type":76,"position":81},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/",3,{"item":83,"name":65,"@type":76,"position":19},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/computational-thinking-assessment-in-primary-and-secondary-education-a-meta-synthesis-of-tools-methods-and-pedagogical-approaches/588287/",{"url":83,"name":65,"@type":85,"image":86,"author":91,"headline":65,"publisher":94,"fileFormat":97,"inLanguage":63,"description":67,"dateModified":98,"datePublished":99,"encodingFormat":97,"isAccessibleForFree":100,"interactionStatistic":101},"DigitalDocument",{"url":87,"@type":88,"width":89,"height":90},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/computational-thinking-assessment-in-primary-and-secondary-education-a-meta-synthesis-of-tools-methods-and-pedagogical-approaches/588287.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":92,"@type":93},"Aditya","Person",{"url":74,"name":95,"@type":96},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-30","2026-10-15",true,{"@type":102,"interactionType":103,"userInteractionCount":24},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":104},"ViewAction",{"@type":106,"mainEntity":107},"FAQPage",[108,114,118],{"name":109,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":111},"Why is computational thinking (CT) assessment challenging in primary and secondary education?","Question",{"text":112,"@type":113},"Assessment is challenging because CT has diverse definitions, assessment frameworks, and varying classroom applications. These differences make it harder for educators to understand and evaluate CT consistently.","Answer",{"name":115,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":116},"What does the meta-synthesis analyze about CT assessment?",{"text":117,"@type":113},"It synthesizes evidence from 12 reviews to examine the tools, methods, and pedagogical practices used to assess CT components and skills. It also identifies the focus areas of existing syntheses and their limitations.",{"name":119,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":120},"What gaps are highlighted in current CT assessment practices?",{"text":121,"@type":113},"The findings report a prevalent focus on programming skills, with less emphasis on cognitive processes and collaborative aspects of CT. The study also calls for development of assessment tools and methods covering a broader range of CT skills.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":83,"og:type":124,"og:title":65,"og:site_name":95,"og:description":67},"article",{"robots":126,"canonical":83},"index,follow",{"doc_id":128,"site_id":62},588287,1792167157,{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":131},{"doc_id":128,"user_id":132,"nickname":92,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":39,"category_name":40,"doc_title":65,"doc_description":67,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":24,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":8,"is_downloadable":8,"audit_status":8,"page_count":139,"language":140,"language_code":63,"site_id":62,"html_lang":63,"table_of_contents":141,"faqs":142,"seo_title":143,"seo_description":67,"update_tm":144,"read_time":145,"preview_page_count":4},962085564549,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_085a072bc5b1113ac321206ff7593b45","Computational Thinking Assessment in Primary and Secondary Education:  \nA Meta-Synthesis of Tools, Methods And Pedagogical Approaches  \nSanna Forsström1  \nMelissa Bond2  \n1University of Stavanger, Norway  \n2University College London, UK  \nDOI: 10.21585/ijcses.v6i4.208  \nAbstract  \nDespite the widespread adoption of computational thinking (CT) across educational levels, challenges persist in its assessment due to diverse definitions, frameworks, and practical applications in classroom settings. This meta-synthesis investigates the assessment of computational thinking (CT) in primary and secondary education, synthesising evidence from 12 reviews across five international databases, focusing on tools, methods, and pedagogical practices employed in assessing CT, with the aim to outline practical approaches for evaluating CT components. The review delves into the primary focuses of these syntheses, the CT skills and components assessed, and the methods and tools utilised, identifying gaps in current practices. The findings highlight a prevalent focus on programming skills, with less emphasis on cognitive processes and collaborative aspects of CT. The synthesis also points to the need for developing assessment tools and methods that encompass the broader spectrum of CT skills, suggesting avenues for future research and practical application in educational settings.  \nKeywords: Assessment, Computational Thinking, Review of reviews, Meta-synthesis  \n1. Introduction  \nThe shift towards digital education is reshaping the educational field, introducing new teaching methodologies and broadening the horizons of learning. As the educational sector navigates through advancements in artificial intelligence, data management, cloud computing, and green technologies, teachers encounter various obstacles. These include managing the classroom, assessing student learning outcomes, dealing with ethical issues, and the effective use of digital tools (González-Pérez & Ramírez-Montoya, 2022) . Central to overcoming these challenges is enhancing students' computational thinking (CT) skills, which are essential for promoting teamwork, critical analysis, and ethical decision-making (González-Pérez & Ramírez-Montoya, 2022; Ye et al., 2022) .  \nThe widespread adoption of computational thinking in primary and secondary education highlights its significance (Balanskat & Engelhardt, 2015). Nonetheless, there exists a diversity in how CT is understood among teachers, policymakers, and the media. This ranges from focusing on the core principles of computer science to its application across various disciplines (Lodi & Martini, 2021). The evolution of CT spans from Papert’s (1980) vision of empowering individuals and enriching their understanding of complex topics through computational strategies to Wing’s (2006) perspective. Wing viewed CT as not merely a set of technical skills but a comprehensive methodology for problem-solving, system design, and understanding human behaviour through computational principles, such as the ways individuals think, act, and interact. This underscores the necessity of integrating CT into education as a foundational skill alongside reading, writing, and arithmetic.  \nFollowing Wing's (2006) foundational work, numerous researchers have aimed to clearly define computational thinking (CT) and outline its key components (Lodi, 2020) . Despite the creation of various frameworks to categorise CT into multidimensional constructs, the task of assessing  \nCT in primary and secondary education remains challenging. The diverse definitions and classifications, particularly those focusing on cognitive processes, such as logical reasoning or creativity, present difficulties for teachers in both understanding and evaluating CT.  \nPrevious systematic reviews have examined the assessment of CT from different angles. Much of this research has focused on the theoretical aspects of CT assessment as part of research methodology (e.g., Araujo et al., 201","cbCaiaewX37XDbwX","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaiaewX37XDbwX","pdf",668570,37,"English","# Introduction\n## Background and Rationale\n## Research Questions\n# Methodology\n## Review-of-Reviews Approach","[{\"question\":\"Why is computational thinking (CT) assessment challenging in primary and secondary education?\",\"answer\":\"Assessment is challenging because CT has diverse definitions, assessment frameworks, and varying classroom applications. These differences make it harder for educators to understand and evaluate CT consistently.\"},{\"question\":\"What does the meta-synthesis analyze about CT assessment?\",\"answer\":\"It synthesizes evidence from 12 reviews to examine the tools, methods, and pedagogical practices used to assess CT components and skills. It also identifies the focus areas of existing syntheses and their limitations.\"},{\"question\":\"What gaps are highlighted in current CT assessment practices?\",\"answer\":\"The findings report a prevalent focus on programming skills, with less emphasis on cognitive processes and collaborative aspects of CT. The study also calls for development of assessment tools and methods covering a broader range of CT skills.\"}]","Computational Thinking Assessment in Primary and Secondary Education - A Meta-Synthesis of Tools, Methods and Pedagogical Approaches | PDF",1792064918,93]