Manifestations of computational thinking practices on preservice mathematics teachers’ pen-and-paper problem-solving

The development of computational thinking has been declared a necessity for everyone in the current digital era. Most studies dedicated to the development of computational thinking have focused on using plugged activities. However, in developing countries like South Africa, most schools struggle with resource provision which can inhibit the integration of computational thinking in all learners. This article considers an alternative approach to computational thinking in mathematics education using pen-and-paper problem-solving. Through the adoption of exploratory qualitative research with a purposeful sample of five preservice teachers, the manifestation of computational thinking in pen-and-paper problem-solving is explored. Adopting the combination of the metacognitive framework and Schoenfeld’s framework for problem-solving, this study explains from the perspectives of preservice teachers how computational thinking practices manifest in pen-and-paper problem-solving. The thematic analysis conducted in this study revealed that computational thinking practices such as abstraction, decomposition and algorithmic thinking, and evaluation were observed in preservice teachers’ pen-and-paper problem-solving. Two interesting findings emerged from this study: (1) there was no discernible difference between decomposition and algorithmic thinking in preservice teachers’ pen-and-paper problem-solving, and (2) there was no clear evidence of pattern recognition as an important computational thinking practice in preservice teachers’ pen-and-paper problem-solving. Contribution: The first finding indicates that during pen-and-paper problem-solving, it might be difficult to differentiate between decomposition and algorithmic thinking. The second finding indicates that more studies need to be conducted, directed towards how pattern recognition manifest in pen-and-paper problem-solving. Conclusions and recommendations are made for this study.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Pythagoras
Published
2025-11-21
DOI
https://doi.org/10.4102/pythagoras.v46i1.855
Primary Topic
Mathematics Education and Teaching Techniques
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Manifestations of computational thinking practices on preservice mathematics teachers’ pen-and-paper problem-solving

Sfiso C. Mahlaba
Pythagoras
Mathematics Education and Teaching Techniques
article

Manifestations of computational thinking practices on preservice mathematics teachers’ pen-and-paper problem-solving

Sfiso C. Mahlaba
article en

Abstract

The development of computational thinking has been declared a necessity for everyone in the current digital era. Most studies dedicated to the development of computational thinking have focused on using plugged activities. However, in developing countries like South Africa, most schools struggle with resource provision which can inhibit the integration of computational thinking in all learners. This article considers an alternative approach to computational thinking in mathematics education using pen-and-paper problem-solving. Through the adoption of exploratory qualitative research with a purposeful sample of five preservice teachers, the manifestation of computational thinking in pen-and-paper problem-solving is explored. Adopting the combination of the metacognitive framework and Schoenfeld’s framework for problem-solving, this study explains from the perspectives of preservice teachers how computational thinking practices manifest in pen-and-paper problem-solving. The thematic analysis conducted in this study revealed that computational thinking practices such as abstraction, decomposition and algorithmic thinking, and evaluation were observed in preservice teachers’ pen-and-paper problem-solving. Two interesting findings emerged from this study: (1) there was no discernible difference between decomposition and algorithmic thinking in preservice teachers’ pen-and-paper problem-solving, and (2) there was no clear evidence of pattern recognition as an important computational thinking practice in preservice teachers’ pen-and-paper problem-solving. Contribution: The first finding indicates that during pen-and-paper problem-solving, it might be difficult to differentiate between decomposition and algorithmic thinking. The second finding indicates that more studies need to be conducted, directed towards how pattern recognition manifest in pen-and-paper problem-solving. Conclusions and recommendations are made for this study.

PythagorasVol. 46(1)
University of Johannesburg (ZA)
Openalex Percentile: Top 63%
Mathematics Education and Teaching Techniques
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Manifestations of computational thinking practices on preservice mathematics teachers’ pen-and-paper problem-solving — Sfiso C. Mahlaba · Pythagoras (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS