Teacher PCK-Focused PD Model

The PD provider in Case Model 6 worked with a subset of teachers within three schools located throughout New York City.

During Year 1, PD focused on the following:

• Building teachers’ understanding of and engaging in CT pedagogy and CS/CT foundational concepts
• Seeing examples of CT-integrated lessons
• Learning implementation strategies
• Learning to use digital tools, such as Scratch

PD sessions were held with each school individually and divided into two sessions to accommodate different grade bands (grades K–2 and 3–5).

Year 2 focused more on schoolwide vision and classroom implementation. The PD provider continued working with teachers on CS/CT foundational concepts and implementation strategies.

• PD provider to school ratio: 1 to 3
• Years the school participated in PD program: 2018–2022
• Primary focus of PD: Teacher self-efficacy

Because Case Model 6 consisted of three schools located throughout New York City, one school was selected as the focus school for research efforts.

Located in Brooklyn, the focus school served children in pre-K through grade 6. The majority of students are Black, and very few of the student population are English Language Learners (only 6%).

• School Funding Type: Public
• Grades: Pre-K–6
• School size/enrollment: 234
• Race/ethnicity: Hispanic 37%, Black 61%
• English language learners: 31%
• Poverty and economic need: 95%
• Borough: Brooklyn

In Year 1, schoolwide integration was started by a subset of teachers across multiple grade levels within the three schools volunteering to participate. Teachers attended virtual monthly PD meetings that exposed them to CS/CT concepts and integration practices. One of the participating schools also created a CT coach role within the school as an additional support.

In Year 2, the participating teachers from Year 1 continued to attend the PD to deepen their CT content knowledge. No additional teachers were enrolled in the program.

• Vision of schoolwide integration developed by: Collaboratively between the administration in each school, the in-school tech or CT coach (when applicable), and the PD provider
• Content area(s): Determined by individual teachers in math, ELA, or science
• Grade levels: K–5

CT-integrated lessons were developed by the PD provider by modifying a content-agnostic existing CS/CT curriculum. Teachers received examples of the lessons during PD sessions, which also focused on pedagogical strategies and CT content knowledge to help them recognize additional places within their existing curriculum where CT can be integrated. Assessment practices were not a focus, since the purpose of the PD was to help teachers increase their CT knowledge and pedagogical strategies.

• Lesson development: Collaboratively between PD providers and teachers using existing curriculum
• Primary instructional approaches used in lessons: Using academic language and using computational tools and technology
• Primary assessment practices used: Assessments were not a focus of PD

Teachers who attended PD gained CT knowledge that can be applied to all subjects. This flexibility allows them to apply CT regardless of changes in grades or content areas in the future. However, since teachers volunteer to participate, there can be inconsistency across different grades and subjects.

Additionally, teachers taught CT-integrated lessons infrequently, which resulted in a lack of rhythm of teaching CT on a consistent basis. This lack impacts sustainability as it creates a variability in the use of CT within lessons and a lack of accountability in overall CT application.