Quotes from Teaching with Scratch in Compulsory Secondary Education by A.M. Ortiz-Colón and J.L. Maroto Romo, 2016:
- “The article analyzes the impact that the use of Scratch has in a group of students of Compulsory Secondary Education [Jaén, Spain]” […] “in the subject of Natural Science”.
- “we have studied the evolution of creative thought and analyzed the considerations made by […] students and teachers.”
- “The research results indicate that with the use of Scratch language students get better grades and are more motivated.”
This post also includes links to other Scratch research papers cited in the article.
- “Scratch is a project that has had great acceptance in schools since 2006 with the creation of the website of Scratch 1.0 project, being in 2013 when it reaches its greatest success with version 2.0.”
- “Scratch integrates constructivism and learning through action” […] “Creative thinking from the LLK [Life Long Kindergarten at MIT], is an iterative process that involves imagining what you want to do, creating what you have imagined, using the created material,sharing it and reflecting it on the outcome and potential improvements.”
- “[Scratch] is based on three fundamental principles because the programming language is playful, meaningful and social“
- “25 students (1st Year) in a high school” […] “with computers in every classroom.”
- “if the student is capable of creating a suitable program in […] twelve sessions, we can see that the overall goal […] is
- “a Natural Science teacher [with] no previous experience”
- “The corpus data were some notes, the researcher’s journal, the rubric and a satisfaction survey of students and teachers, designed ad hoc.”
- “the group improved to good effect in attitude, aptitude, behavior, teamwork, problem solving, effort to succeed, carrying out of tasks, resolution of complex activities, application of the logical mathematical thinking in the projects developed in Scratch and
motivation for the development of the formative process in the competences worked on.”
- “The students expressed that the learning of the subject was funny“
- “the teaching staff, who were surprised by the results achieved, the atmosphere in the classroom and the teamwork”
- “A considerable dispersion of the standard deviation is observed when a wide repertoire of answers is found and it is far from homogeneity”
- “Project evaluation is done through a rubric [with] the following criteria: process (10 %), functioning (10 %), graphic interface (10%), creativity (10 %), programming (20 %), Computational thinking (15%), Publication (5 %) and content of the area (20 %).”; In a scale of 1 to 5, the average of descriptors is:
- Highest scores:
- Publication (4.3), Content of the area (4.16), Creativity (4.04), Computational thinking (4.04)
- Mid scores:
- Graphic interface (3.55), Functioning (3.4)
- Lowest scores:
- Process (2.6), Programming (2.7)
- Highest scores:
- Correlation between variables:
- Strong correlation:
- Process & Publication: 0.984
- Publication & Graphic interface: 0.8
- Content of the area & Graphic interface: 0.856
- Programming & Creativity: 0.688
- Content of the area & Programming: 0.559
- Weak correlation:
- Publication & Content of the area: 0.386
- Strong correlation:
- “[Scratch] increases students’ motivation in their everyday work”
- “positive changes were observed in students regarding the management of Scratch, being 65% students who have uploaded their own project, along with 35% who have not succeeded.”
- “[Scratch] has allowed interdisciplinary work with different areas of the curriculum as Social Sciences, Geography and History – Earth, and natural resources and Mathematics.”
- “Scratch research should progress not only in curriculum content, but towards the development of skills, emotions, and/or core competencies […] to make education a form of transition from primary school to secondary education through constructivist methodologies“
- “we have found the lack of maintenance of computer equipment, absenteeism of students and the lack of training of teachers in Scratch.”
-  Urrea, C., Badilla, E., Miranda, X. y Barrantes, D., Make to think: ideas, spaces and tools. Actualidades investigativas en educación, 2012, 12(1), 1–21.
-  Papert, S., The children’s machine: rethinking school in the age of the computer (book, chapter “4. Teachers”). New York, Basic books, 1993.
-  Resnick, M., Behavior construction kits. Communications of the ACM, 1993, 36(7), 64–71. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/159544.
-  Resnick, M. y Silverman, B., Some reflections on designing construction kits for kids. Proceedings of the 2005 conference on
Interaction design and children, 2005, pp. 117–122. Boulder, Colorado: ACM Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1109540.1109556
-  Resnick, M., Sowing the seeds for a more creative society. Learning and Leading with Technology, 2007, 35(4), 18.
-  Bustillo-Bayón et al., Analysis of the training process of a group of prisoners in a Scratch´s workshop. RELATEC, 2014, vol 13 (1) 37-49.
-  Resnick, M., Maloney, J., Monroy-Hernández, A., Rusk, N.,Eastmond, E., Brennan, K., Millner, A., Rosenbaum, E., Siver, J.,
Silverman, B., y Kafay, Y., Scratch: Programming for all. Communications of the ACM (CACM), Vol. 52 n. 11 pg.60-67, 2009.
-  López-Escribano, C. & Sánchez-Montoya, R., Scratch in Special Education: Programming for All. RED, Revista de Educación a Distancia, 2012, Nº 34.
-  López García, J. C. Rubric for assessing Scratch projects, 2013. EDUTEKA http://www.eduteka.org/rubricaScratch.php
-  Yin, R. K., Case study research: Design and methods (3rd ed.) (book). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2003.
- Papers from the Life-Long Kindergarten (archive)
- F.Wyffels, B.Martens, S.Lemmens: Starting from scratch: experimenting with computer science in Flemish secondary education. In Proceedings of the 9th Workshop in Primary and Secondary Computing Education (WiPSCE ’14). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 12-15. 2014.
- Workshop in Primary and Secondary Computing Education (WiPSCE): website, Google Schoolar.