14 What Conversation Is This Code a Part of?
Sara Vogel; Christopher Hoadley; Lauren Vogelstein; Wendy Barrales; Sarane James; Laura Ascenzi-Moreno; Jasmine Y. Ma; Joyce Wu; Felix Wu; Jenia Marquez; Stephanie T. Jones; and Computer Science Educational Justice Collective
Chapter Overview
This chapter builds on the notion of “literate programming” from Chapter 13 to consider which conversations coding and computing are a part of. The chapter presents a framework called “syncretic computational literacies,” or the “three circles,” that extends the conversations that coding and computer science education (CS Ed) are a part of. It invites CS educators to consider how code can be connected not only to computational literacies but also to community literacies that center students’ interests and backgrounds and disciplinary literacies that connect CS with other school subjects. The chapter concludes with resources for planning CS lessons that make code a part of broader conversations across multiple literacies.
Chapter Objectives
After reading this chapter, I can:
- Explain the concept of syncretic computational literacies and how this approach supports equity-oriented CS education.
- Identify ways to make CS instruction part of larger conversations that connect to students’ lives.
Key Terms:
academic language; community literacies; computational literacies; disciplinary literacies; equity as transformation; hybridity; syncretic; syncretic computational literacies
John’s Story
A key goal of CS Ed that pushes toward equity as transformation is ensuring that CS learning opportunities center students’ values and experiences (Grapin et al., 2023; see Chapter 4 for more on equity as transformation). Transformation also involves inviting students to interrogate the status quo of what computing “should” be to include CS and CS Ed in larger conversations. John and Ms. Kors offer an example of one kind of transformative CS learning opportunity. Ms. Kors had asked students to use Scratch to share personal narratives, making their experiences and communities relevant to CS Ed. Let’s consider how John took up this invitation in his project.
John’s Family History Scratch Project
For his family history project, John chose to create a Scratch animation depicting a key moment from his lived experience: when he and his family walked from Eritrea to Ethiopia for three days at the beginning of their journey as refugees.
His project involved coding Scratch sprites that represented the different members of his family and timing the appearance of speech bubbles to depict their conversations as they embarked on their journey. Through his code, John was able to share traits of his family members. He made decisions about which images to use to depict each member of the family, which “text to speech” voices to use for people of different ages and genders, and what dialogue to use to share the ways that they took care of each other.
When asked why he chose to tell this particular family story, John shared that he wanted to tell his class where he came from and to remind them that traveling to a new country means you will miss where you are from:
“I want to tell where I came from and I want to tell people that, like you could travel ano-any country and like you’ll miss your fr-place.” (John, Focus Group, 5/31/2019).
In choosing to share such an intense and challenging experience, John was able to start conversations in school about his experiences as a refugee that he had not previously shared with teachers. Although this was not Ms. Kors’ original intention behind the project, it served as a generative starting point. When asked about the part of his story that he put into Scratch, John shared vivid details from his experience: “I was walk like, I was walking like the, the place like this, it was too sunny. Uh, then, like, we only walk like at the night time. Like, we cannot walk, like at the sun time. […] Only sometimes. Like I bleed [John gestures towards his nose]. My mother cannot let me go at this time. I go in the dark time.” (Observation, February 8, 2019).
At the end of the project, during a parent-teacher conference with Ms. Kors, John was able to share his project with his mom. John and his mother shared a tender moment reflecting on this experience while speaking in Tigrinya. John’s mother then shared more about their experiences as refugees with John’s teacher, elaborating on why this project was so meaningful to her and her family.
Ms. Kors’ project was transformational because it centered John’s experiences in ways that were powerful for everyone involved and brought CS into a broader conversation about immigration. John’s story can help us think deeply about the ideas we are trying to express through code, as well as our motivations, purposes, and intended audiences for computing. To tell his story, John brought in knowledge and practices related to computing (e.g., making decisions in Scratch to depict his family members). John also related the project to the social history of his region of origin and his own family history. And he leveraged practices related to storytelling that are typically taught in language arts.
Code in Conversation
In Chapter 13, we considered how code as a “literate” language resource can offer bi/multilingual learners a way to express themselves and participate in conversations that involve CS and coding.[1] But to truly advance equitable practices in CS toward transformation, we also need to examine the nature of the computing conversations that students take part in (Ko et al., 2020). What is being discussed in these conversations? Toward what ends are these conversations moving? Who is taking part? Who is left out?
Even as computing tools, technologies, and cultures have enabled expression and creativity, they have also played a role in advancing inequities, including language injustice as we saw in Chapter 11, and the other forms of inequity explored in this book (see Chapters 2–4, 5, 8, and 15). When we support bi/multilingual learners to participate in CS, we run the risk of uncritically introducing students into fields and industries that have historically marginalized them and their communities and may continue to marginalize them today. These settings might send the message to students that language and learning practices associated with school-based CS and other academic disciplines are more valuable than the language and practices used in students’ own communities (Vogel, 2021).
To avoid these pitfalls, educators can attune themselves to the conversations happening around computing that are taking place away from current centers of power, like the tech industry and university CS departments. Educators can help students start new conversations and use practices and language that they learn outside of school to have them. As scholar Yasmin Kafai has argued, “computational participation” is not just about understanding the tools that students inherit but also about changing and remaking a world mediated by computation (Kafai, 2016).
Achieving this equity-as-transformation vision is what we explore in this chapter. As we connect our theories of translanguaging pedagogy (Chapter 12) with the literate programming approach (Chapter 13), we repeatedly pose the question:
There are many conversations that students might have about, with, and through code. As we aim to support equitable participation for bi/multilingual learners in CS Ed, we can consider expanding the types and range of conversations we have with students. We can engage them with computing tools and ideas that go beyond those typically sanctioned by CS courses and industry.
Syncretic Learning and Literacies
We believe that, similar to how we teach writing across the academic curriculum, computing can and should be connected to domains outside of traditional coding, or what many consider “pure CS.” Extending computing might include connecting it to family and community, like John’s project did. It could involve integrating computing with other academic disciplines, like language arts and storytelling, also like John’s project. In fact, the most important computing conversations touch communities in different ways and go beyond disciplinary boundaries.
Guiding students to connect CS to conversations they are having in other school subjects, in their homes, or in their on- and offline communities enriches learning across the curriculum. Making these connections also supports a more culturally responsive approach to school and learning. There’s no best model for this. Ms. Kors’ project offers one example, but there are many possible ways to extend computing into larger conversations. Teachers might infuse CS into other subjects like science or social studies through interdisciplinary approaches. Or they might incorporate units that explore the intersections of computing and diverse fields and domains into a stand-alone CS course.
When we bridge school and home knowledge by putting them in conversation with each other, we take up a syncretic approach to learning. Syncretic means combining different traditions, perspectives, and practices to create something new. The term helps us highlight that when people bring practices from different spaces (like home and school) together, tensions and sparks result that allow us to create new kinds of literacies. These new literacies transform and improve what and how we learn (Gutiérrez, 2014).
Often, everyday and out-of-school knowledge are brought into classrooms to provide a pathway to accessing forms of school knowledge (sometimes called hybridity in research like Gutiérrez et al., 1999). Hybridity as an approach can support equity as access. By contrast, syncretism supports equity as transformation as it highlights how new ideas emerge when home and school knowledge are brought together and both are treated as legitimate. For example, when Elizabeth Acevedo joined language from her various communities in her poetry (see Chapter 12), she not only brought poetry into the conversations in her communities, but she also advanced poetry itself (Acevedo, 2015).[2] When John carefully selected which text-to-speech voices he wanted to code into Scratch sprites to depict his family members, he opened up new conversations with his teachers about programming and the representation of age and gender in digital media.
We call the merging together of literacies from different school disciplines, from CS, and from home and community, syncretic computational literacies. Teachers can intentionally plan for syncretic computational conversations. One bilingual middle school science teacher did this as she realized that her students were talking about Hurricane María shortly after it devastated Puerto Rico in the fall of 2017. She considered what was “computational” and what was “scientific” within those conversations. Based on her reflections, she developed a unit that guided students to use Scratch to create computational models of the impacts of the storm. The models also leveraged students’ own personal experiences and family histories related to hurricanes and storms.[3]
When supporting teachers to think “syncretically,” we encourage them to start conversations that enable their students to draw on literacies from three areas: community literacies, disciplinary literacies, and computational literacies. Ms. Kors’ assignment and John’s project is a good example of what syncretic computational literacies might look like.
Community Literacies
Community literacies include ways of reading, writing, speaking, creating, and interacting with the world that students learned from friends, family, and other communities. Community literacies encompass all the conversations that are outside of what school traditionally centers. This could include literacies that connect to home languages, as well as cultural practices that aren’t part of official, academic language. Such practices may come from television shows, dinnertime conversations, or online fan sites. In the case of John’s family story, community literacies included conversations about immigration, identity, and belonging.
Disciplinary Literacies
Disciplinary literacies include ways of reading, writing, speaking, creating, and interacting with the world in ways that are connected to school subject areas. Disciplinary literacies include scientific discourse in science class, literary discourse in language arts class, historical reasoning in social studies class, and so on. Scientists learn to have discussions around hypotheses and data using certain terms and language practices, mathematicians learn to use a certain kind of argument for a proof, and poets learn to play with and defy the grammatical patterns of prose. Similarly, students learn these specialized ways of talking, writing, and thinking in their school subjects. These literacies help students communicate with others in and about those disciplines. John’s story incorporated disciplinary literacies related to storytelling and narratives from language arts.
Computational Literacies
Computational literacies include real-world conversations where students can use code and computing — not only the way professional programmers might talk to each other but also other CS literacies that underpin computing in a variety of settings. This can include how expert spreadsheet users debug their macros, how digital artists talk about and share their work, how students express their concerns with the ethics of hacking or modding games, and even how CS is used to uphold and bolster racism, sexism, and other societal hierarchies. Some of the computational literacies that John used to tell his story included sequencing and timing speech bubbles to show a conversation and making coding decisions to depict members of his family.
Syncretic Computational Literacies
While community, disciplinary, and computational literacies are each important in their own right, they become more powerful when they are brought into conversation with each other. In this way, they have the potential to become transformative. Figure 1 illustrates our concept of syncretic computational literacies.
Figure 1
Syncretic Computational Literacies
Community, disciplinary, and computational literacies already exist in the world, and students already practice them to varying degrees and in different ways. However, these different literacies are not equally valued, and they are rarely brought together. School curricula often undermine and devalue the knowledge of bi/multilingual learners’ communities. And even among academic disciplines, CS is often held apart, framed as an inaccessible way of thinking that only people who have a “techy” bent are able to comprehend.
As CS Ed becomes part of the K-12 schooling core, educators have the opportunity to challenge this siloed reality. Instead of constructing walls and boundaries around the CS field, practitioners can work toward syncretic goals for CS Ed. Such goals value community knowledge as it overlaps with and exists alongside knowledge from computing and other disciplines. If we want to achieve CS for all, we have to dismantle our ideas about computing being a separate and obscure way of thinking and communicating.
One of the best ways to do that is by breaking down the barriers between computing conversations and all of the other conversations our students are having. Because computing is such a new area of conversation for many students, it also provides opportunities for emergent bilinguals to think strategically about language, to anchor computing in diverse cultures, and to bridge home and school conversations. As CS teacher Michelle expressed: “When teachers attempt to marry knowledge that comes from the community with that of academic subjects and computational creativity, students benefit by merging ideas to create a richer understanding of all three.” We are bound to create exciting new avenues for CS when it can include the richness of multiple named languages and interweave the significant ways people use the languages of different academic disciplines.
Using Syncretic Computational Literacies (the Three Circles) to Design Learning
Looking at CS from a syncretic perspective means drawing inspiration for learning environments from the many conversations about, with, and through code that occur in spaces beyond formal CS classes and professional programming jobs. It means noticing and surfacing the tensions between the different ways of knowing, computing, and using language that come together in these conversations. Having syncretic conversations empowers students to use code to serve their communities, push back against inequitable computing practices, and support their growth and identity development.
“Syncretic computational literacies” is a mouthful. The Participating in Literacies and Computer Science (PiLa-CS) project also frequently calls this idea “the three circles,” as visualized in Figure 1 above.[4] Though the idea may appear simplistic, it is clarifying and powerful: you can use the three circles to understand the types of emerging literacies students participate in. You can also use the three circles to brainstorm what kinds of conversations students could have in class and how to design units to support students to have these conversations in your classroom. The three circles can inform how you use the translanguaging pedagogy framework of stance, design, and shifts. For instance, the three circles can be used to think about how to respond in the moment with shifts as students bring in language to the classroom. A teacher might ask: “How can I embrace how students are using language and link it to other literacies?” The three circles can also be used as a tool to think about designing units or activities. Resource 1 is a worksheet that can be used as a tool to bring three circles thinking into unit design.
Tarek Elabsy is a CS educator who has designed activities for his students that bring together community, disciplinary, and computational literacies. As you read his example, try to identify aspects of the three circles and how they came together to create something new:
I have a student who is a passionate video game player, and he’s also learning a lot about different cultures through his family, particularly through their Spanish-speaking traditions. I worked with him to create a video game where he used his coding skills to tell a story about his family’s heritage. He incorporated elements of his culture into the game, which made it both engaging and meaningful to him.
This project was a great example of how we can blend different aspects of students’ lives to support their learning. It brought together this student’s interests in video games, their knowledge of their culture, and their skills in computer science.
Designing and developing syncretic computational conversations in classrooms is one way to promote equitable practices in CS Ed. Doing so breaks down traditional boundaries between school disciplines and communities that have systematically marginalized bi/multilingual learners. It helps us change what counts as academic knowledge in a way that uplifts the brilliance that bi/multilingual learners already bring to the classroom. And it helps us envision what it would be like to have generative computing conversations not only in the offices of tech companies but throughout society and with youth.
Revisiting John’s Story
Michelle, an art teacher who incorporates CS into her instruction, reflected on what she learned from hearing about Ms. Kors’ assignment and what it meant for John and for herself in her own context:
It is important to expand the norms associated with CS programming to include the interests of less represented participants. John’s experience of using Scratch to animate his family’s story was such a value to him and the other students in his class. Learning these skills through storytelling and personal history gives kids a creative purpose for the code they use. It also ties family history and community to schooling. Teachers like myself who teach subjects outside of “pure CS” can use programs like Scratch to acquaint our students with CS language within our “other” subject areas. This allows children to gain more resources for communication that they can draw on in the future.
As John’s story has shown across these chapters, contrary to myths that computing is “too hard” for bi/multilingual learners, through approaches like translanguaging, coding can become a valuable resource for communication and expression.
Reflection Questions:
- Now that you’ve read all of John’s story, what stands out to you most about his experiences and Ms. Kors’ instructional decisions?
- Reflect on a time when you experienced something syncretic, either related to computing or in another part of your life. What were the different pieces that were brought together? What new something was created as a result?
Takeaways for Practice:
- Use Resource 1 below to brainstorm a syncretic unit that integrates community, disciplinary, and computational literacies.
Glossary
References
Acevedo, E. (2015). Afro-Latina. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tPx8cSGW4k8
Grapin, S. E., Pierson, A., González-Howard, M., Ryu, M., Fine, C., & Vogel, S. (2023). Science education with multilingual learners: Equity as access and equity as transformation. Science Education, 107, 999-1032. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21791
Gutiérrez, K. D. (2014). Integrative research review: Syncretic approaches to literacy learning. Leveraging horizontal knowledge and expertise. In 63rd Literacy Research Association Yearbook, 48-61. Literacy Research Association.
Gutiérrez, K. D., Baquedano‐López, P., & Tejeda, C. (1999). Rethinking diversity: Hybridity and hybrid language practices in the third space. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 6(4), 286-303. https://doi.org/10.1080/10749039909524733
Kafai, Y. B. (2016). From computational thinking to computational participation in K-12 education. Communications of the ACM, 59(8), 26-27. https://doi.org/10.1145/2955114
Ko, A. J., Oleson, A., Ryan, N., Register, Y., Xie, B., Tari, M., … & Loksa, D. (2020). It is time for more critical CS education. Communications of the ACM, 63(11), 31-33. https://dl.acm.org/doi/pdf/10.1145/3424000
Vogel, S. (2021). “Los programadores debieron pensarse como dos veces”: Exploring the intersections of language, power, and technology with bi/multilingual students. ACM Transactions on Computing Education (TOCE), 21(4), 1-25. https://doi.org/10.1145/3447379
Resource 1: Three Circles Worksheet
Three Circles Worksheet: Planning for Syncretic Conversations
Ready to support your emergent bilingual students in integrating CS activities?
The PiLa-CS team has created a guide [5] to support you in designing a unit that brings together computing, different subject areas, and students’ community and language practices.
Need more fine-grained strategies for supporting multilingual learners in CSed? Check out the Educator Resources on our website at https://pila-cs.org.
- In this chapter we use the term “bi/multilingual learners” to emphasize these students’ linguistic resources. We also opt to use this term because it is strengths-based. We use it synonymously with “emergent bilinguals.” These terms stand in contrast to terms such as “English Language Learner” or “Limited English Proficient.” See the On Terminology section of this guide for an explanation on our use of different identity-related terms. ↵
- Watch Acevedo perform her poem at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tPx8cSGW4k8 ↵
- For more on this unit and others like it, see the PiLa-CS Educator Resources page at https://www.pila-cs.org/educator-resources ↵
- PiLa-CS is a research-practice partnership focused on supporting bi/multilingual learners in CS Ed. For more information, see the Preface. ↵
- Access the guide at https://nyuscholars.nyu.edu/en/publications/planning-for-syncretic-conversations-your-turn-to-start-a-syncret ↵
