Uncovering the Hidden Layers of Thinking: Extended Computational Thinking (CT) Strategies in Problem-Based Classrooms Learning

Authors

  • Mahadevaswamy Associate Professor, Dept. of ECE, Vidyavardhaka College of Engineering, Mysuru, Gokulam 3rd Stage, Mysuru
  • Manjunathaswamy S. Professor, Dept. of CSE, Sahyadri College of Engineering and Management, Mangalore
  • Sreenath M. V. Associate Professor, Dept. of ISE, Nitte Meenakshi Institute of Technology, Bengaluru
  • B. P. Pradeep Kumar Professor, Dept. of CSD, Atria Institute of Technology, Bengaluru
  • Pavithra G. Associate Professor, Department of ECE, Dayananda Sagar College of Engineering, Bengaluru, Kumaraswamy Layout, Bengaluru

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.16920/jeet/2026/v39is2/26002

Keywords:

Innovative Pedagogies and Active Learning; Project-Based and Problem-Based Learning (PBL)

Abstract

This study explores how broadened computational thinking (CT) models can support and enhance students’ approaches to problem solving within problem-based learning (PBL) settings. To evaluate the proposed model, the researchers introduced a structured framework that included clear metacognitive prompts, guidance for collaborative work, and support for iterative design. This framework was implemented with 70 undergraduate engineering students participating in a six-week PBL cycle. Evidence gathered over three semesters showed notable gains in students’ CT performance, more balanced group participation, reduced unnecessary task switching, and smoother workflow patterns. Regression findings indicated that equitable involvement, idea generation, and overall PBL process efficiency were strong predictors of growth in CT scores. Students’ use of plan-monitor-evaluate (PME) strategies further suggested deeper metacognitive activity. Overall, the results show that extended CT scaffolding enables PBL groups to produce stronger and more numerous outcomes, while also refining the reasoning and teamwork practices required to achieve them. These insights can help educators design PBL environments that foster more effective thinking and reinforce students’ understanding of the value of their collaborative and reasoning processes.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Downloads

Published

2026-02-18

How to Cite

Mahadevaswamy, S., M., M. V., S., Pradeep Kumar, B. P., & G., P. (2026). Uncovering the Hidden Layers of Thinking: Extended Computational Thinking (CT) Strategies in Problem-Based Classrooms Learning. Journal of Engineering Education Transformations, 39(Special Issue 2), 12–20. https://doi.org/10.16920/jeet/2026/v39is2/26002

References

Catasús, M. G., Cukurova, M., Maldonado-Mahauad, J., Prieto, L. P., Pérez-Sanagustín, M., & Sua, E. (2025). Collaborative learning analytics: A systematic review. Journal of Learning Analytics, 12(1), 1–30. https://doi.org/10.18608/jla.2025.8489

Esterházy, R., Rodriguez-Triana, M. J., Echeverría, V., Prieto, L. P., & Martinez-Maldonado, R. (2025). Advancing multimodal collaboration analytics: A scoping review. Journal of Learning Analytics, 12(1), 67-102. https://doi.org/10.18608/jla.2025.8625

Gamby, S., Kersaint, G., & Waters, T. (2022). Beyond “study skills”: A curriculum-embedded framework for metacognitive development in a college chemistry course. International Journal of STEM Education, 9, 61. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-022-00376-6

Halmo, S. M., Eddy, S. L., & Brownell, S. E. (2024). Metacognition and self-efficacy in action: How first-year life science students reflect while solving problems. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 23(4), ar45. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.23-08-0158

Hartmann, C., Rummel, N., & Bannert, M. (2022). Using HeuristicsMiner to analyze problem-solving processes: Exemplary use case of a productive-failure study. Journal of Learning Analytics, 9(2), 66–86. https://doi.org/10.18608/jla.2022.7363

Liu, Z., Gearty, Z., Richard, E., Orrill, C. H., Kayumova, S., & Balasubramanian, R. (2024). Bringing computational thinking into classrooms: A systematic review on supporting teachers in integrating CT into K–12 classrooms. International Journal of STEM Education, 11, 51. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-024-00510-6

López-Pernas, S., Saqr, M., Bustamante, R., & Klamma, R. (2022). A learning analytics perspective on educational escape rooms: Sequence mining and dashboards. Interactive Learning Environments, 31(7), 4323–4342. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2022.2041045

Montuori, C., Gambarota, F., Altoé, G., & Arfé, B. (2024). The cognitive effects of computational thinking: A systematic review and meta-analytic study. Computers & Education, 210, 104961. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2023.104961

Pan, Z., Cui, Y., Leighton, J. P., & Cutumisu, M. (2023). Insights into computational thinking from think-aloud interviews: A systematic review. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 37(1), 71–95. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.4029

Wise, A. F., Schwarz, B., Kizilcec, R. F., Berland, M., Gašević, D., & Kizilcec, R. (2023). Nine elements for robust collaborative learning analytics: A research agenda. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 18(4), 539–563. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-023-09389-x

Yang, Y., Yuan, J., & Chen, X. (2024). Effects and mechanisms of analytics-assisted reflective assessment in computer-supported collaborative inquiry. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 40(5), 1440–1457. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12915

Yang, Y., Yuan, K., Zhu, G., & Jiao, L. (2024). Collaborative analytics-enhanced reflective assessment to foster conducive epistemic emotions in knowledge building. Computers & Education, 209, 104950. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2023.104950

Zhang, L., Zhou, Y., & Mustapha, A. (2023). A study of the impact of project-based learning on student academic achievement: A meta-analysis. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, 1202728. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1202728

Zhang, W., Guan, Y., & Hu, Z. (2024). The efficacy of project-based learning in enhancing computational thinking among students: A meta-analysis of 31 experiments and quasi-experiments. Education and Information Technologies, 29(5), 5897–5929. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-12392-2

Most read articles by the same author(s)