Page 68 - JURNAL PENYELIDIKAN AKADEMIK

J u r n a l P e n y e l i d i k a n A k a d e m i k I P G M J i l i d 5 / 2 0 2 0 | 61

Figure 2: Timetable for CT RBT Training Course (source: MDEC, 2019)

PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK FOR CT RBT TRAINING

A framework can be mapped to the training of CT RBT course with reference to the
work of Brennan and Resnick (2012). There are three key dimensions for CT
professional development according to Brennan and Resnick (2012) framework: (i)
computational concepts, (ii) computational practices (the practices designers develop)
and (iii) computational perspectives (the perspectives designers form about the world
around them and about themselves). The three dimensions can be mapped to the
training of CT RBT as spelt out by MDEC and this was showed in Figure 3.

i. Computational Thinking Concepts (the concepts designers engage with as they
program)

Different definitions have been given to CT. Wing (2014) defines CT as the thought
processes involved in formulating a problem and expressing its solution(s) in such a
way that a computer – human or machine – can effectively carry out. CT is not just
about problem solving, but also about problem formulation. Grover and Pea (2017)
define CT as encompassing a range of specific thinking skills for problem solving
including abstraction, decomposition, evaluation, pattern recognition, logic and
algorithm design. CT is NOT ‘thinking like a computer’, rather it is about thinking like
a computer scientist. It is the problem-solving approaches commonly used by
computer scientists that constitute computational thinking.