Cited by 202Teaching and Learning ProgrammingChild Development and Digital TechnologyGender and Technology in Education

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 52 of the 52 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Developing Computational Thinking with Educational Technologies for Young Learners

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s11528-018-0292-7

Cites

52 of 52 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Brennan, K., & Resnick, M. (2012). New frameworks for studying and assessing the development of computational thinking. Paper presented at Annual American Educational Research Association meeting. BC, Canada: Vancouver.
  2. Metz, S. S. (2007). Attracting the engineering of 2020 today. In R. Burke & M. Mattis (Eds.), Women and minorities in science, technology, engineering and mathematics: Upping the numbers (pp. 184–209). Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing.
  3. Resnick, M. (2013). Learn to code, code to learn. In EdSurge Retrieved September 27, 2017, from https://www.edsurge.com/news/2013-05-08-learn-to-code-code-to-learn .

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 202

Metadata

Authors
Ching, Y.-H., Hsu, Y.-C., & Baldwin, S.
Affiliations
Boise State University (US)
Corresponding author
Ching, Yu-Hui
Venue
TechTrends
Published
2018-04-30
Volume
62
Issue
6
Pages
563-573
ISSN
  • 1559-7075 (ISSN-L)
  • 8756-3894
OpenAlex
W2800019557
Cited by
202
References
52
Citations by year
2026: 14 · 2025: 20 · 2024: 34 · 2023: 40 · 2022: 30 · 2021: 26 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 21
FWCI
18.59
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • TechTrends (publishedVersion)
  • ScholarWorks (Boise State University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Science Applications › Teaching and Learning Programming
  • Social Sciences › Education › Child Development and Digital Technology
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender and Technology in Education
Keywords
computational thinking, young learners, educational technology, early childhood education, technology integration in teaching, educational technology challenges

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review