Although computational thinking (CT) and computer science (CS) skills are important for all students, less attention exists in research and practice for CT and CS and students with disabilities. Researchers conducted a systematic review of the literature following the PRISMA protocol to examine the current state of literature regarding CT and/or CS instruction for students with disabilities; researchers also analyzed the existing literature with regards to quality indicators. Over the last decade (2014-2024), researchers found six articles focused on CT and/or CS and students with disabilities. Of these, two were found to be methodologically-sound based on the quality indicators from the Council for Exceptional Children, both conducted by the same research team and focused on block-based coding of robots. Overall, the researchers concluded the systematic review highlighted the lack of attention to CT and CS for students with disabilities and the need for both more research as well as high-quality research that adheres to quality indicators for the research design implemented.
AljehanyM. S.BennettK. D. (2019). Meta-analysis of video prompting to teach daily living skills to individuals with autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Special Education Technology, 34(1), 17–26. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162643418780495
2.
AzekaS.YadavA. (2021). A computational thinking integration model for primary and secondary classrooms. In Computational thinking in education (pp. 41–56). Routledge.
3.
BarnettJ. H.FrankelA. J.FisherK. W. (2018). Systematic review of evidence-based interventions in science for students with autism spectrum disorders. Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 53(2), 128–145. https://doi.org/10.1177/215416471805300203
4.
BouckE. C.SandsP.LongH.YadavA. (2021). Preparing special education pre-service teachers to teach computational thinking and computer science in mathematics. Teaching Education and Special Education, 44(3), 221–238. https://doi.org/10.1177/0888406421992376
5.
BouckE. C.YadavA. (2022). Providing access and opportunity for computational thinking and computer science to support mathematics for students with disabilities. Journal of Special Education Technology, 37(1), 151–160. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162643420978564
6.
CamachoR. S.GraneM. (2023). Computational thinking programs in primary education: A systematic review. Digital Education Review, 44(2023), 133–145.
7.
CookB. G.BuysseV.KlingnerJ.LandrumT. J.McWilliamR. A.TankersleyM.TestD. W. (2014). CEC’s standards for classifying the evidence base of practices in special education. Remedial and Special Education, 36(4), 220–234. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932514557271
8.
Council for Exceptional Children. (2014). Council for exceptional children: Standards for evidence-based practices in special education. Teaching Exceptional Children, 46(6), 206–212. https://doi.org/10.1177/0040059914531389
9.
Covidence (n.d.) Covidence systematic review software, Veritas Health Innovation. Available at. www.covidence.org
10.
CoyneM. D.CookB. G.TherrienW. J. (2016). Recommendations for replication research in special education: A framework for systematic, conceptual replications. Remedial and Special Education, 37(4), 253–255. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932516648463
11.
CredéM.TynanM. C.HarmsP. D. (2017). Much ado about grit: A meta-analytic synthesis of the grit literature. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 113(3), 492–511. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000102
DagieneV.HromkovicJ.LacherR. (2021). Designing informatics curriculum for K-12 education: From concepts to implementations. Informatics in Education, 20(3), 333. https://doi.org/10.15388/infedu.2021.22
15.
DamianidouD.EidelsA.Arthur-KellyM. (2020). The use of robots in social communications and interactions for individuals with asd: A systematic review. Advances in Neurodevelopmental Disorders, 4(2020), 357–388. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41252-020-00184-5
16.
DoganS.ÇolakA. (2014). Social robots in the instruction of social skills in autism: A comprehensive descriptive analysis of single-case experimental designs. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology, 19(2), 325–344. https://doi.org/10.1080/17483107.2022.2087772
17.
GroverS.PeaR. (2013). Computational thinking in K—12: A review of the state of the field. Educational Researcher, 42(1), 38–43. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X12463051
18.
HickmottD.Prieto-RodriguezE.HolmesK. (2018). A scoping review of studies on computational thinking in K-12 mathematics classrooms. Digital Experiences in Mathematics Education, 4(1), 48–69. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40751-017-0038-8
19.
HunsakerE. (2020). Computational thinking. In Ottenbreit-LeftwichA.KimmonsR. (Eds.), The K-12 educational technology handbook (1st ed.). Authors; CC BY license. https://edtechbooks.org/k12handbook
20.
IsraelM.ChandlerL.CoboA.WeisbergL. (2023). Increasing access, participation and inclusion within K-12 CS education through Universal Design for Learning and High Leverage practices. In SentenceS.BarendsenE.HowardN. R.SchulteC. (Eds.), Computer science education: Perspectives on teaching and learning in school (pp. 115–130). Bloomsbury Academic. https://doi.org/10.5040/978135096947.ch-010
21.
IsraelM.PearsonJ. N.TapiaT.WherfelQ. M.ReeseG. (2015). Supporting all learners in school-wide computational thinking: A cross-case qualitative analysis. Computers & Education, 82(2015), 263–279. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.11.022
22.
JungS.WonE. (2018). Systematic review of research trends in robotics education for young children. Sustainability, 10(4), Article 905. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10040905
KakavasP.UgoliniF. C. (2019). Computational thinking in primary education: A systematic literature review. REM: Research on Education and Media, 11(2), 64–94. https://doi.org/10.2478/rem-2019-0023
25.
*KnightV. F.WrightJ.DeFreeseA. (2019). Teaching robotics coding to a student with ASD and severe problem behavior. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 49(2019), 2632-2636. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-019-03888-3
26.
*KnightV. F.WrightJ.WilsonK.HooperA. (2019). Teaching digital, block-based coding of robots to high school students with autism spectrum disorder and challenging behavior. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 49(2019), 3113–3126. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-019-04033-w
27.
LachneyM.GreenB.AllenM. C.FoyL. (2021). Ethnocomputing and computational thinking. In YadavA.BerthelsenU. (Eds.), Computational thinking in education (pp. 112–135). Routledge.
28.
LeeS. J.FrancomG. M.NuatomueJ. (2022). Computer science education and K-12 students’ computational thinking: A systematic review. International Journal of Educational Research, 114(2022), Article 102006. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2022.102008
29.
MadillH. M.CampbellR. G.CullenD. M.ArmourM.-A.EinsiedelA. A.CiccocioppoA.-L.ShermanJ.StewinL. L.VarnhagenS.MontgomerieT. C.RothwellC. J.CoffinW. L. (2007). Developing career commitment in STEM-related fields: Myths versus reality. In Women and minorities in science, technology, engineering and mathematics. Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781847206879.00019
30.
MarshallS. L.GroomsA. A. (2002). Industry's push for computer science education: Is computer science really for all? Policy Futures in Education. [Advanced Online]. https://doi.org/10.1177/14782103211045601
31.
PageM. J.McKenzieJ. E.BossuytP. M.BoutronI.HoffmannT. C.MulrowC. D.ShamseerL.TetzlaffJ. M.AklE. A.BrennanS. E.ChouR.GlanvilleJ.GrimshawHobjartssonA.LaluM. M.LiT.LoderE. W.Mayo-WilsonE.McDonaldS.MoherD. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews BMJ, 372(71). https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71
32.
ParkJ.BouckE.DuenasA. (2019). The effect of video modeling and video prompting interventions on individuals with intellectual disability: A systematic literature review. Journal of Special Education Technology, 34(1), 3–16. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162643418780464
33.
ParkerR. I.VannestK. J.BrownL. (2009). The improvement rate difference for single-case research. Exceptional Children, 75(2), 135–150. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440290907500201
34.
PérezA. (2018). A framework for computational thinking dispositions in mathematics education. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 49(4), 424–461. https://doi.org/10.5951/jresematheduc.49.4.0424
35.
PlavnickJ. B.Marchand-MartellaN. E.MartellaR. C.ThompsonJ. L.WoodA. L. (2015). A review of explicit and systematic scripted instructional programs for students with autism spectrum disorder. Review Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 2(2015), 55–66. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40489-014-0036-3
36.
PriceC. B.Price-MohrR. M. (2018). An evaluation of primary school children coding using a text-based language (Java). Computers in the Schools, 35(4), 284–301. https://doi.org/10.1080/07380569.2018.1531613
37.
RandolphJ. J. (2008). A methodological review of the program evaluations in K-12 computer science education. Informatics in Education, 7(2), 237–258. https://doi.org/10.15388/infedu.2008.15
38.
RayM. J.IsraelM.LeeC. E.DoV. (2018). A cross-case analysis of instructional strategies to support participation of K-8 students with disabilities in CS for all. In Proceedings of the 49th ACM technical symposium on computer science education (pp. 900–905). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3159450.3159482
39.
RichK. M.YadavA.LarimoreR. A. (2020). Teacher implementation profiles for integrating computational thinking into elementary mathematics and science instruction. Education and Information Technologies, 25(4), 3161–3188. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10115-5
40.
RyooJ. J.TanksleyT.EstradaC.MargolisJ. (2020). Take space, make space: How students use computer science to disrupt and resist marginalization in schools. Computer Science Education, 30(3), 337–361. https://doi.org/10.1080/08993408.2020.1805284
41.
SnodgrassM. R.IsraelM.ReeseG. C. (2016). Instructional supports for students with disabilities in K-5 computing: Findings from a cross-case analysis. Computers & Education, 100(September), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.04.011
42.
SpoonerF.RootJ. R.SaundersA. F.BrowderD. M. (2019). An updated evidence-based practice review on teaching mathematics to students with moderate and severe developmental disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 40(3), 150–165. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932517751055
43.
SunL.ZhouD. (2023). Effective instruction conditions for educational robotics to develop programming ability of K-12 students: A meta-analysis. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 39(2023), 298–380. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12750
*TaylorM. S. (2018). Computer programming with pre-k through first-grade students with intellectual disabilities. The Journal of Special Education, 52(2), 78–88. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022466918761120
46.
*TaylorM. S.VaquezE.DonehowerC. (2017). Computer programming with early elementary students with Down syndrome. Journal of Special Education Technology, 32(3), 149–159. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162643417704439
47.
TekdalM. (2021). Trends and development in research on computational thinking. Education and Information Technologies, 26(5), 6499–6529. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10617-w
48.
TranY. (2019). Computational thinking equity in elementary classrooms: What third-grade students know and can do. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 57(1), 3–31. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633117743918
49.
U.S. Department of Education. (2020). Forty-second annual report to congress on the implementation of the individuals with disabilities education act. Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services. Retrieved from. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED612645.pdf
50.
WilleS.CenturyJ.PikeM. (2017). Exploratory research to expand opportunities in computer science for students with learning differences. Computing in Science & Engineering, 19(3), 40–50. https://doi.org/10.1109/MCSE.2017.43
WingJ. M. (2008). Computational thinking and thinking about computing. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London,Series A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 366(1881), 3717–3725. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2008.0118
53.
WongC.OdomS. L.HumeK. A.CoxA. W.FettigA.KucharczykS.BrockM. E.PlavnickJ. B.FleuryV. P.SchultzT. R. (2015). Evidence-based practices for children, youth, and young adults with autism spectrum disorder: A comprehensive review. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 45(7), 1951–1966. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-014-2351-z
54.
*WrightJ. C.KnightV. R.BartonE. E.Edwards-BowyerM. (2019). Video prompting to teach robotics and coding to middle school students with autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Special Education Technology, 36(4), 187–201. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162643419890249
55.
YadavA.HongH.StephensonC. (2016). Computational thinking for all: Pedagogical approaches to embedding 21st century problem solving in K-12 classrooms. TechTrends, 60(2016), 565–568. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-016-0087-7
56.
YadavA.LarimoreR.RichK.SchwarzC. (2019). Integrating computational thinking in elementary classrooms: Introducing a toolkit to support teachers. In Proceedings of society for information technology & teacher education international conference 2019. AACE.
*ZhangN.KeF.BarrettA.SokolikjZ. (2024). Work-in-progress—Improving computational thinking for learners with autism in the virtual world: A longitudinal study. In 10th international conference of the immersive learning research network. https://doi.org/10.56198/U6C0WYZ8W
