Transformative Computing Education: A Four-Year Exploratory Case Study of Teacher Perceptions Towards Elementary Computer Science Integration

Abstract

Despite recent expansions in K-12 computer science (CS) education, entrenched equity gaps persist, and elementary students are notably underserved. Early experiences shape identities and interests, yet best practices for elementary CS remain understudied. Over four years, this study explored elementary teacher perceptions of both the learning experiences offered in CS education and the reported impact of those experiences on teacher perceptions of their students. Results indicate that high-quality, integrated CS experiences have the potential to transform both the student learning experiences as well as teacher perceptions of what students can accomplish. The results have significant bearing for broadening participation in CS education and creating a more equitable CS landscape.

1. Introduction

Computer science (CS) education, typically defined as the study of computers and algorithmic processes, encompassing principles, hardware and software design, applications, and societal impacts (Tucker et al., 2003, p. 6), has expanded significantly in the United States within K-12 education (Code.org et al., 2023, 2024). This expansion has led to efforts at local, state, and national levels in support of teaching and integrating CS knowledge and skills in K-12 classrooms (Code.org et al., 2023, 2024). However, despite widespread efforts, significant and entrenched equity gaps remain within CS education that must be addressed for all students to be afforded opportunities within the field (Karlin et al., 2025; Davis et al., 2022).

One of the primary growth drivers in CS education is the idea that all K-12 students need to develop foundational CS literacies to participate in civic and professional life (Y. B. Kafai & Proctor, 2022). In terms of professional life, workforce development is an often-leveraged rationale for promoting CS education (e.g., Blikstein & Moghadam, 2019; Code.org et al., 2024). While there are CS-specific workforce roles that will need to be filled, many argue that regardless of a student’s professional path, competency in CS (including artificial intelligence [AI] literacy) will be required to be successful (Code.org et al., 2023; Vegas et al., 2021). While workforce development is often a key rationale for promoting CS education, this perspective may overlook the broader benefits of CS learning, such as fostering 21st-century skills like problem-solving, critical thinking, and collaboration, which can all be supported and developed through CS learning experiences (S. J. Lee et al., 2022).

In addition to workforce development, equity and justice-centered rationales play a crucial role in driving inclusive CS initiatives (Jones & Melo, 2020; Koshy et al., 2022; Vakil, 2018). Given that students interact with technology daily, understanding the potentially harmful and problematic ways in which this occurs is necessary to explore and challenge within CS education (Jones & Melo, 2020; Vakil, 2018).

Based on these rationales, it is widely agreed upon that today’s students will benefit from high-quality, rigorous, and meaningful K-12 CS education experiences (e.g., The White House, 2016). However, while these benefits often exist for those students who have access to K-12 CS education integration and coursework, barriers remain that prevent this reality for all students.

One (of many barriers) that was explored in this study is the impact of teachers’ perceptions of students and their abilities. Historically, and across disciplines, teacher perceptions of students have been repeatedly shown to impact students’ experiences and performance within school (Brophy, 1983; Jussim & Harber, 2005; Rosenthal & Jacobson, 1968). Within Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM) education, emerging research has also shown this to be the case (S. W. Lee et al., 2015). As a result, addressing and improving teacher perceptions of students and their ability is critically important for expanding participation in STEM and CS as well as for addressing longstanding issues of equity and exclusion within the field (S. W. Lee et al., 2015).

1.1. Importance of Elementary CS Education

In 2016, the K-12 Computer Science Framework was released by a national coalition of stakeholders, setting forth a vision for coherent, scalable CS education across the United States (K-12 Computer Science Framework, 2016). In the time since, a growing body of initiatives, funding, and research has been focused on K-12 CS education, particularly at the high school level (Code.org et al., 2024). However, this secondary CS focus does not address how CS participation and engagement gaps begin to emerge at the elementary level (Master et al., 2017). In other words, elementary school is a crucial time for students as they begin to develop their disciplinary identities and consider emerging interests, passions, and future directions (Gee, 2000; Nasir, 2002; Tan et al., 2020).

Additionally, the knowledge base around best practices for CS education at the elementary level is limited (Karlin et al., 2025; Meulen et al., 2021; NASEM, 2021). Often, when CS is taught at the elementary level, it is integrated within other subject areas, but limited studies exist exploring what that integration looks like, or the impact it has on teachers and students (NASEM, 2021). While current research suggests that less than 30% of elementary students encounter CS (Banilower et al., 2018; NASEM, 2021), there are fewer studies that have examined issues of equity of participation (Karlin et al., 2025; NASEM, 2021).

1.2. Importance of Broadening Participation in CS

As previously noted, the field of CS is rife with longstanding, entrenched equity issues (Childs et al., 2024). These equity issues are found across all levels of K-12 education, including in elementary schools and classrooms (Karlin et al., 2025). In addition to being problematic, equity gaps in CS also lead to concerns from both workforce and innovation perspectives (Blikstein & Moghadam, 2019; Stiles, 2017). When we include multiple, diverse perspectives within CS, our field’s creative and disciplinary capacity is expanded (Santo et al., 2019). When these equity gaps are not addressed, students are less prepared for a future where CS knowledge and skills are required for a wide range of professions (e.g., Blikstein & Moghadam, 2019).

Importantly, critical scholars have cautioned that when efforts to broaden participation in CS focus narrowly on workforce preparation and economic development, they risk obscuring the broader purposes and possibilities of CS education, such as fostering civic engagement, supporting everyday problem-solving and 21st-century skills, and cultivating joy and connection (e.g., Bers, 2022; Jones & Melo, 2020; Ryoo, 2019). In response, emerging research has emphasized the importance of designing student- and community-centered CS curricula that include real-world connections, highlighting how these approaches can reframe CS perceptions and create more inclusive learning experiences (e.g., Jones & Melo, 2020; Ryoo, 2019).

1.3. Importance of Skill Development in CS

High-quality CS experiences have the potential to support the development of K-12 students’ 21st-century skills such as problem-solving, creativity, critical thinking, and collaboration (Karlin et al., 2024; S. J. Lee et al., 2022). Across K-12 settings, the importance of supporting and developing these skills for students has been consistently argued for by researchers and stakeholders alike (S. J. Lee et al., 2022; NASEM, 2021). CS education combines creativity with logical reasoning and provides opportunities for students to apply knowledge in meaningful ways and to see themselves as capable problem solvers (Y. B. Kafai & Proctor, 2022; S. J. Lee et al., 2022). Through designing, testing, and refining ideas, students practice persistence and iterative reasoning that extends beyond computing (NASEM, 2021; Tucker et al., 2003).

CS learning also fosters clear communication and shared reasoning as students discuss ideas, build on peers’ thinking, and take ownership of their own learning (Ryoo, 2019). Research shows that CS education enhances adaptability, confidence, and collaborative mindsets central to 21st-century skill development (S. J. Lee et al., 2022; NASEM, 2021). Developing these skills through high-quality CS education builds a foundation for students to thrive as learners and contributors in CS and related fields, while also preparing them with the creativity, ethical reasoning, and problem-solving abilities needed for lifelong learning and participation in an increasingly digital society (Y. B. Kafai & Proctor, 2022; Vegas et al., 2021).

One approach for introducing these types of CS learning experiences to students is computational thinking (CT). CT is a foundational literacy and problem-solving framework that helps students analyze and solve complex, real-world problems by drawing on CS practices like problem decomposition, pattern recognition, abstraction, and algorithm design (Wing, 2006; International Society for Technology in Education, 2024). For example, the International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE) has developed a commonly used framework of K-12 CT competencies that explores what these practices can look like in action (see: https://iste.org/standards/computational-thinking-competencies, accessed on 27 October 2025). By leveraging CT as an entry point to CS, learners can become familiar with the core literacies and foundational skills of CS prior to engaging in more advanced computational activities (Wing, 2006; Yadav et al., 2016). CT also lends itself to cross-disciplinary integration approaches, providing opportunities in both STEM and the humanities for onramps to CS through CT integration (Yadav et al., 2016). Overall, CT can serve as a helpful entry point and foundational framework for bringing CS knowledge and skills into K-12 classrooms.

1.4. Importance of Joyful Learning Experiences in CS

The development of these aforementioned skills can also be supported through the incorporation of joyful experiences in the classroom (Jeet & Pant, 2023). As defined in the literature, joyful learning often encompasses experiences that include curiosity, passion, excitement, and deep engagement with the topic at hand (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990; Montessori, 1948/1967; Ward & Dahlmeier, 2011). When students participate in joyful learning, they are more likely to be engaged and develop the types of skills centered in the learning experience (Karlin et al., 2024; Jeet & Pant, 2023). Joyful learning can also support transformative classroom experiences, shifting learning to be more humanistic, student centered, active, meaningful, and collaborative (Freire, 1970; hooks, 1994).

Joyful learning has also been shown to support increases in student persistence and confidence (Goldenberg et al., 2020; Scharber et al., 2021), which can help close equity and performance gaps, particularly for historically underrepresented students (Buffum et al., 2016; Ying et al., 2021). In short, by bringing joyful experiences into CS education, we can better support the development of 21st-century skills while also working to address equity gaps.

1.5. Importance of Teacher Perceptions of Student Ability

Decades of research demonstrate that teacher perceptions of students can impact their performance in disciplinary learning and assessment (Brophy, 1983; Rosenthal & Jacobson, 1968). The expectations a teacher holds regarding individual student abilities often impact teacher behavior, and thus student performance (Rosenthal & Jacobson, 1968). The view a teacher holds regarding a student’s potential can be a self-fulfilling prophecy, with positive expectations, or perceptions, leading to positive student outcomes, and negative expectations, or perceptions, leading to negative student outcomes (Brophy, 1983).

More specific to STEM education, the literature suggests that teacher expectations are particularly influential on one’s decision to pursue studies in STEM fields (S. W. Lee et al., 2015). Focusing more narrowly on CS education, the field has seen that perception-related biases and stereotypes can create disparities for historically underserved students (El-Hamamsy et al., 2023). By addressing negative teacher perceptions about what students are capable of in STEM and CS education, we can not only support improved educational outcomes for students but also support broadening participation efforts to create more inclusive CS pathways.

1.6. Research Questions

To address these above issues and explore teacher voices and perceptions, we conducted a four-year exploratory case study in partnership with four elementary teachers to better understand teacher perceptions of both the learning experiences offered in CS education, and the reported impact of CS learning experiences on teacher perceptions of their students. Two research questions guided this study:

(1)

What are teachers’ perceptions of how CS can transform elementary learning experiences?

(2)

In what ways, if any, do teachers’ perceptions of their students change through engagement in CS learning experiences?

2. Materials and Methods

We conducted an exploratory, descriptive case study (Yin, 2018) with the unit of analysis being the co-design and implementation of a series of CS events and activities for fourth-grade students over a four-year period. University IRB and school district ethics approval were both received.

2.1. Context

This study was part of a larger Research-Practice Partnership (Coburn & Penuel, 2016) and occurred across two sites. On the university side, the researchers were part of a College of Education (COE) at a large, Southern California university that is categorized as a Minority-serving institution (MSI) and Hispanic-serving institution (HSI). The fourth-grade teacher participants in this study worked at Market Street Public Elementary school (pseudonym) in South Los Angeles, which serves approximately 700 K-5 students annually. The school demographics include 97% minority students (71% Hispanic/Latine, 16% Black, 5.6% Asian or Asian/Pacific Islander, 3.6% multiracial, 1.0% Native Hawaiian, 3.1% white), as well as 81% economically disadvantaged students and an average of 8% of students with disabilities. During the four years of this study, the school did not offer a CS course or any formal CS experiences at any grade level.

2.2. Participants

Participants included fourth-grade teachers at Market Street Elementary. Their demographics and CS-specific backgrounds are presented below in

Table 1. Inservice teacher participant demographics (all names are pseudonyms).

Name	Overview
Andres	Andres is a Mexican-American man with 17 years experience teaching fourth-grade at Market Street Elementary. He reported some self-taught CS experience from watching videos and experimenting with CS activities and curricula.
Kerry	Kerry is a Korean-American woman who has spent 16 years teaching kindergarten, first-, fourth-, and fifth-grade students at Market Street Elementary. She has past CS experience by using code.org’s hour of code activities in her classroom.
Sammie	Sammie is an Asian-American woman who has spent two years teaching fourth-grade at Market Street Elementary. She reported having no CS background or experience.
Catalina	Catalina is a Mexican-American woman who spent 17 years teaching fourth-grade at Market Street Elementary and is now the Title 1 coordinator and TSP advisor (targeted student population). She reported having no CS background or experience.

. All four teachers participated in the study for all four years.

2.3. Co-Design Process and Annual CS Event

Each year of the study, the research team met with the fourth-grade team at Market Street Elementary School for three co-design sessions related to the planning and implementation of an annual CS event, which included three to four CS activity stations. The shared goal of these co-design sessions was to work collaboratively to create integrated CS activities that aligned with the teachers’ core curriculum topics and were accessible for all fourth-grade students, including English language learners and those with special needs. Additionally, the co-designed activities aligned with state level computer science standards and addressed introductory level coding and programming topics. The co-designed activities intentionally embodied joyful learning practices and varied each year to remain relevant and connected to the current curriculum. They also featured both robotics (Bee-Bots and Dash robots) as well as unplugged activities (no computer or device needed). On the event day, the research team along with 30–50 preservice teachers from the research team’s university facilitated a series of hands-on, integrated CS activities that had been co-designed by the inservice teachers and research team. Following each event, the four teachers and the research team engaged in a reflective focus group interview to identify successes, challenges, and opportunities for improvement, supporting an iterative design process that refined activity implementation over time. Additional details on the co-design and implementation work, as well as examples of co-designed artifacts, can be found in Karlin et al. (2024).

2.4. Data Sources

To improve trustworthiness and inform a more holistic understanding of inservice teacher experiences, we collected data across multiple sources during the four years of the study:

(1)

Co-design sessions (n = 12). Co-design sessions occurred with the research team and four teachers. We recorded and transcribed three co-design sessions each year, which occurred leading up to an annual CS event that included three or four activity stations for all fourth-grade students. Sessions were 60–90 min each and included all four inservice teachers. The co-design sessions were transcribed by a human transcription service, and the transcription was used for analysis.

(2)

Reflective Focus Group (n = 4). After each year’s event concluded, the four inservice teachers participated in a reflective, in-person focus group interview that lasted 45 to 60 min. The interview was transcribed by a human transcription service, and the transcription was used for analysis.

2.5. Data Analysis

Thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2006) was used across both data sources to find and uncover emergent, universal themes aligned with our research questions. Overall, an inductive, or bottom-up approach was used, with themes emerging from the data, without researchers trying to fit themes into a pre-existing coding scheme (Braun & Clarke, 2006). Analysis for this study began at the conclusion of the four years of data collection. Initially, two researchers individually read through all co-design session transcripts and interview transcripts. During this primary examination, low-level initial codes were developed by each of the two researchers (Braun & Clarke, 2006; Lindgren et al., 2020). These low-level codes included minimal abstraction and represented initial identification of topics and ideas being discussed by the teachers (Braun & Clarke, 2006; Lindgren et al., 2020). Individual quotes from teachers could be coded with multiple codes if there were multiple relevant ideas discussed in a quote. For example, a quote from Andres at the end of Year 3 that read “The kids knew what they had to do. And as a teacher, I was able to just stand back, observe, watch, and just have fun with it at the end” was coded as “teacher experience,” “student experience,” and “fun.” After this initial low-level coding occurred, two researchers individually looked for larger, abstracted trends and emergent themes (Braun & Clarke, 2006; Lindgren et al., 2020). For example, one researcher combined codes of “solving challenges” and “analyzing problems” into the larger emergent theme of “problem solving.”

Next, the two researchers met and discussed their abstracted, individual emergent themes and explored where overlap, alignment, and misalignment existed to engage in refinement of themes (Braun & Clarke, 2006). For example, the emergent themes from one researcher of “critical thinking” and “problem solving” from the second researcher were combined into a single emergent theme. Once themes were refined and finalized, both researchers again went individually through all co-design session transcripts and interview transcripts to conduct a final coding of emergent themes. The two researchers then met again to discuss and agree upon how each transcript quote was coded based on the final emergent themes. When disagreement occurred, the two researchers discussed and engaged in arbitration until 100% agreement on all themes was reached (Saldaña, 2015). Saturation occurred when emergent themes that were discussed by all four teachers across all four years were found. For example, the theme of “growth mindset” emerged from several participants but not all, and was not discussed in all four years, and, therefore, is not explored below in the findings.

Member checking (Merriam, 1991) also occurred throughout and at the conclusion of analysis to ensure the four inservice teacher voices were accurately reflected in the emergent themes. Member checking first occurred when the initial list of finalized, emergent, saturated themes had been created. The themes were shared with the four teachers, and they were asked if they had any ideas, thoughts, challenges, or questions around the list of themes. For example, one of the teachers said they were surprised that the theme of “creativity” was not an emergent theme that had been discussed by all four teachers over all four years. To confirm, the lead researcher went back through all transcripts and initial coding to confirm that the theme of “creativity” was not a major emergent theme. It was not, however, as it was a minor theme, and related to the major emergent theme of 21st-century skills, it is reported on below in Section Additional 21st-Century Skills. A final round of member checking occurred after the teacher quotes and reflections for this study were selected, to confirm that the teachers agreed that these quotes aligned with the reported themes. Here, all four teachers were an agreement that their quotes accurately aligned with the emergent themes. These emergent themes are reported on below and are centered around the study’s two research questions.

2.6. Limitations

The study’s limitations center around the self-reported interview response data, which may have a potential for self-presentation bias (Kopcha & Sullivan, 2007). We have attempted to mitigate this bias through multiple data sources. Additionally, case studies typically have limited generalizability, particularly given the small number of participants. We have attempted to address this limitation through a rich, in-depth description of both the context and of the results shared below so readers may find connections between this study and their own unique contexts.

3. Results

Results are presented below and organized by research question. Only themes that were universal (i.e., discussed as important by all four inservice teachers) are reported. In other words, for every year of the study, 100% of teacher participants agreed on the themes reported below. While changes over time were found (e.g., teacher initial hesitancy around CS turned to excitement, see Karlin et al., 2024), the results for this study reflect our overall goal of determining which findings were universally salient and consistent over the four-year period.

3.1. RQ1: Transforming Learning Experiences Through CS

For research question one, three universal emergent themes were found throughout the analysis process: (1) Transforming learning through real-world connections with CS; (2) transforming learning with the integration of 21st-Century Skills from CS; (3) transforming learning through joyful CS experiences.

3.1.1. Real-World Connections

Across all four years, teachers discussed how CS lent itself to the integration of real-world connections and experiences, something that they all discussed as being beneficial and transformative in relation to the typical learning experiences their students participated in. For example, Kerry noted how:

All the lessons we’ve planned tie in with real-world problems. This year, we learned about why bees are important in our Life Science unit and students were able to extend their learning with CS activities. These activities help students understand that what they are learning in class does extend beyond the classroom.

Catalina shared similar ideas about how CS helps extend learning experiences to see that what they are learning is relevant everywhere in their lives:

I think also having students understand that computer science doesn’t live inside four walls. The minute they step out of this school, it’s everywhere. It’s on our phone, it’s on all the advertisements, it’s on their video, it’s on our TVs, it’s everywhere. And I don’t think they realize what’s inside of this little device or iPads and all that, it’s all coding. I think if we make that relationship, hopefully they’ll be even more engaged like, “What, everything is coded?” And we need to definitely make that connection to the real world, and what it really means in the real world. Because it doesn’t just live and breathe here in the class and the school, it’s everywhere. We’re living in the 21st century.

Finally, another example comes from Andres, who discussed how designing solutions to real-world problems can help the students connect with the content in more meaningful ways, sharing:

The activities are often project-based, encouraging students to tackle authentic challenges, such as designing a solution to reduce pollution or protect the environment, which makes learning more meaningful. I also appreciate how technology, like coding and robotics, is seamlessly integrated into the work. These experiences have a powerful impact on student learning because they give students a voice, encourage critical thinking, and offer multiple entry points for different learning styles. The combination of group work, real-world relevance, and tech integration truly supports deeper understanding and engagement.

Overall, the idea of real-world relevance and connections was addressed across years and participants as being centrally important for creating transformative learning experiences that were more meaningful and engaging for their students. These types of connections to real-world experiences that were discussed by all four teachers and centered throughout the CS activities have been suggested to support and enhance student problem-solving skills as well as other 21st-century skills (S. J. Lee et al., 2022).

3.1.2. 21st-Century Skills

The integration of 21st-century skills through CS activities was also discussed by all four teachers across the four years of data. While there are multiple 21st-century skills (see https://www.battelleforkids.org/insights/p21-resources/, accessed on 15 November 2025), the ones that were universal for the teachers in the study were collaboration and problem-solving. Both are explored further below.

Collaboration

The support and development of collaboration skills through CS integration repeatedly emerged as being a critical, important part of the CS experiences. For example, Kerry reflected on how, during the annual CS activities, she “saw a lot of social interaction with the students. Even the shy ones who never volunteer, they were eager to participate in all the activities. I saw a lot of teamwork within themselves. It was very engaging for everyone.” Andres reflected on similar ideas about students’ teamwork, noting about the event days how there was “nothing but positiveness coming out of it. Everybody was working together people were excited about what it was that they’re doing.”

Finally, Catalina dug deeper into the specifics of what this collaboration looked like during one of the activities with Bee-Bots, sharing how students collaborated to assign each other roles to address the problem at hand:

For the bee [station], they each had a role. They gave each other a role. You had the scribe. He’s like, “Okay. So put left too,” and they’re working like, “No, no, no.” The other student was like, “No, shouldn’t they go in that…” The other student was literally writing step by step how the bee should be… I mean, their notes are so specific and it was like, “We don’t have room, turn it around,” and they were just writing and writing all their notes. That was something nice to see and there were different ways how students [approached the problem].

Overall, the importance of and opportunity for collaboration through CS-integrated activities was repeatedly discussed by all four teachers. As shared above through the teacher quotes, this idea of collaboration was also directly tied to the surfacing of problem-solving skills throughout the activities.

Problem Solving

Teachers consistently discussed how the CS-integrated activities supported the development of problem-solving skills across all four years. For example Andres described how student problem-solving was central to the entire process and made particularly evident through the integration of robotics, saying: “The kids have to put all these pieces together, like a puzzle and at the end, you execute it, your plan…and now you have an actual robot and it’s actually doing what you asked it to do so it’s just bringing to life those things that you were actually doing before.” Kerry also shared a memory connected to students’ usage of physical or embodied computing approaches to problem-solving, saying: “I actually had a group of kids that were holding the Bee-Bot, they were standing on the mat, and they were physically turning their bodies.”

Finally, another example came from Catalina, who shared how collaboration and problem-solving often went hand-in-hand throughout the CS-integrated activities:

I visited every group and everyone was engaged. There was so much engagement. Even the ones that tend to go to the dark side, there was none of that. They were engaged, they were problem solving. They were negotiating like, “No, what do we do with this?” “Okay, let’s try.” There was nothing like, “No, it’s my way or…” Everyone was actually working together and they were listening to each other. And sometimes that’s hard to do in the classroom because they want to do it their way. So definitely they were very engaged in a lot of teamwork, working collaboratively and most importantly, listening to each other.

Overall, problem-solving was regularly explored by all teachers across the years. Frequently, these 21st-century skills of collaboration and problem-solving were also discussed in conjunction with the opportunity for these CS-integrated activities to spark joy for their students.

Additional 21st-Century Skills

The 21st-century skills framework includes four core skills: Creativity and Innovation, Critical Thinking and Problem Solving, Communication, and Collaboration. As discussed above, the skills of collaboration and problem-solving were consistently discussed by all four teachers over all four years. The remaining 21st-century skills of communication and creativity were also discussed; however, they did not reach saturation by being discussed by each teacher every year. Even though these two skills did not reach saturation, we believe it is important to explore them here as they demonstrate how all the 21st-century skills were indeed addressed by participants over the course of the study.

In regard to the skill of creativity, at the end of year three, Catalina reflected on how these experiences:

develop those deep-thinking skills, critical thinking skills, and creativity. Because when they were out there, kids were seriously thinking outside the box… this allows students to really spark that curiosity and creativity, which they don’t normally have in the classroom.

In addition to discussing creativity as an occasional theme, the skill of communication also arose in analysis. For example, at the end of year two, Andres reflected on how students were able to build communication skills through a variety of ways, including integrating artistic approaches in student presentations:

I had some students that are artists so when it came down to designing their own robot, they were like, “Oh, my robot’s going to do this,” and they were trying to be specific, and very detailed to what it was that they were drawing and presenting. So I think for the kids, we were able to reach so many different students…in different ways, so that was a good thing.

Overall, while the 21st-century skills of problem-solving and collaboration reached saturation and were consistently discussed by all four teachers over all four years, the skills of communication and creativity also emerged as minor themes throughout the data.

Joyful Learning

Finally, the importance and power of sparking joy within learning was also noted and discussed by all four teachers across the four years. For example, in addition to discussing how CS brought in 21st-century skills, Kerry also noted how these activities sparked joy within her students:

What stands out the most in terms of the student learning experiences is that CS activities are all hands-on, which creates interactive learning experiences for the students. With limited resources at our school, this was probably their only chance to be actively engaged in CS activities, and I can see how much it brings out the joy in learning. It also helps them with teamwork and problem-solving skills, which can be challenging sometimes.

Here, with Kerry describing the hands-on CS activities, she explores a learning process consistent with Freire’s (1970) problem-posing education, rather than a banking model that positions students as passive recipients of content. In terms of transformative learning, this hands-on, interactive learning experience invites students to test ideas through action, revise understandings, and see themselves as capable and active agents in the learning process (Freire, 1970). Additionally, this type of hands-on, interactive learning experience reflects and aligns with hooks’ (1994) ideas that transformative learning should involve a focus on building a learning community in which students recognize one another’s presence, experience, and expertise, and learn through collective effort and attention to each other’s voices and perspectives.

Sammie noted how these types of joyful learning experiences can also dramatically shift a student’s daily experience, sharing how these activities helped one student move through hard feelings:

I think the kids had a lot of fun and that specific day too. I had one student who was just… There’s problems at home and he had his hood on the whole entire day. He was crying. And so, when he was out here doing everything, he had his hood off, he was smiling, laughing with his partner so that was nice to see too. And I think I strategically paired up some kids that don’t really talk to each other and it was nice seeing that too, seeing them collaborate and actually have a discussion with their partner about, for example, the Bee-Bot and where to go and all of that so that was nice to see.

In this example, the student’s visible shift from crying and withdrawn to smiling and laughing with a peer suggests a movement towards humanization, engagement, and recognition that students’ emotional realities matter in the classroom (hooks, 1994). Additionally, by fostering partner discussions, the activity positions students’ voices and relationships as resources for learning, which hooks (1994) argues reshapes and transforms classroom dynamics when everyone’s presence is acknowledged.

Andres shared similar sentiment, reflecting on how these activities often brought laughter and smiles to his students, sharing:

As a whole, when I looked at everything that was going on, I saw a lot of kids smiling, laughing, trying to figure out how something worked. I had some kids come up to me, “Yes! We passed level one and we’re able to flip the mat over and do level two,” and just going between each station and just seeing the kids, how involved they were, it was a good feeling for me.

Andres describes a scenario where again, students are moving away from traditional banking models of education, and instead moving towards knowledge-making through inquiry, where learning emerges through ongoing invention with the world and with others (Freire, 1970). Additionally, the students’ smiling, laughing, cheering, and joyfulness showcase a shared celebration of success, where collective energy helps sustain and transform learning (hooks, 1994).

Finally, Catalina reflected on overlapping ideas, noting how much excitement and joy emerged from students during these activities:

There was so much excitement, so much positive energy. They were overwhelmed and just excited to go to the next station. They weren’t like, “Oh, what else is in this station?” instead they were just like, they were running. So I know I saw a lot of that. Even with our kiddos, like I said earlier, that are normally not… They’re introverted because they’re not academically prone, so they were even excited. I saw a lot of happy faces…And it sparked their joy. And sometimes as teachers, it’s so daunting. I’m like, “Oh my gosh, Fulanita do this… Juani, do this.” and “Oh, he didn’t listen.” But that day everybody was so, just sparked their joy in teaching and learning and the kids were so excited.

In this reflection from Catalina, the participation of students who are usually quiet suggests these CS activities helped support multiple identities and multiple ways of being, aligning with hooks’ (1994) framing of education as a practice of freedom and transformation. Additionally, Catalina’s expression of renewed joy also reflects a shift where her teaching becomes a mutual experience with students and the teacher learning together through dialog and co-investigation (Freire, 1970). Overall, the presence of joy was seen as a transformational piece of the CS learning experiences, with teachers noting how this type of joy helped inspire learning and even shift their own perceptions of what their students could accomplish.

3.2. RQ2: Transforming Teacher Perceptions of Students Through CS

For research question two, all four inservice teachers discussed the transformative power of these CS learning experiences in (re)shaping their perspectives of what students could accomplish. For example, Andres described the impressive growth he saw in a previous student as a result of the CS activities:

There was this one kid, he’s a fifth grader now, and we had set up the Bee-Bots outside for the fair that they had going on…And he came, he looked at the mat, he entered his program. And ideally everybody had to follow the maze, get here, get there, get there. This guy, I’m like, “What are you doing?” “Just wait.” He did everything in reverse. So he had his Bee-Bot going backwards. So he was going backwards and he just created his own route to go about doing it. So at the end, I’m like, “Look at you, fancy show off.” But the fact that he was able to take that, which we initially started, you have to follow this path. And at the end like, “No, not only am I going to fit it, but I’m going to reverse it all on you.”

This quote from Andres demonstrates how his student exceeded his initial expectations by inventing a reverse route, which then prompted Andres to update his own beliefs about the student’s capability. In Rosenthal and Jacobson’s (1968) original Pygmalion study, they explore how these types of expectations can set the stage for student performance and become self-fulfilling in terms of achievement and outcomes. When Andres responds to the student with praise and recognition, he communicates admiration and signals higher expectations and encouragement to support continued problem-solving. Additionally, when teachers recognize unexpected competence, it can help support shifts in expectations that lead to more supportive interactions and reinforce student capability (Rubie-Davies & Hattie, 2025).

Similarly, Sammie described how the CS activities bring out new experiences for her students, which provides a sense of fulfillment for her:

I am able to see my students thrive in doing something that they have had almost no exposure to or experience in…What’s great is that every time we have the CS event at our school, my shy students come out of their shell and show a different side of them. They are communicating with their peers and are confident in what they are doing. As a teacher, it’s fulfilling to see!

Here, Sammie’s observation of this event being a space where students can thrive, including shy students becoming more communicative and confident, showcases that when students are expected to succeed, this can lead to increased confidence and participation. This observation fits a Pygmalion-type process in which teacher beliefs shape interaction opportunities that can then translate into improved performance and behavior (Rosenthal & Jacobson, 1968). Additionally, these types of early exposure CS activities can positively influence students’ perceptions not only of themselves, but of the discipline and promote more equitable participation among diverse learners (El-Hamamsy et al., 2023).

Kerry shared how these activities provided a reminder to her of how much her students could accomplish, while also making connections to the RQ1 themes of collaboration, problem-solving, and joyful learning, sharing:

It really amazes me to see how tech savvy our students are. They get right into the task and are so engaged in problem solving. I like how students work in small groups (2–3 students) to tackle the challenges and communicate with one another to problem solve. The best part is seeing all the smiles on their faces as they are working together.

Similarly to the examples above, Kerry’s description of students collaborating enthusiastically while problem-solving reflects how positive expectations can shape interaction and student behavior. The collaborative learning described by Kerry aligns with research indicating that exposure to CS and CT activities can promote problem-solving skills and positive attitudes toward learning in STEM contexts (El-Hamamsy et al., 2023). When teachers expect students to engage productively with challenging tasks, students are more likely to demonstrate persistence, communication, and shared problem-solving behaviors.

Andres also reflected on how different this type of learning was from what was typically occurring in many classrooms, sharing how these types of transformative experiences can reshape how teachers see their students and the importance of truly valuing and hearing students’ perspectives:

So sometimes unfortunately just because of whatever the [classroom] situation might be, we put a wall to certain things because we need to make sure that we’ve taken care of certain things, and we don’t always listen to what the kids have to say. And if we just take a moment, we’ll be surprised at what they can teach us still or how much they know. And again, with today’s society where they’re learning so much, we have to make sure that we listen to them. Because if we’re not, somebody else will.

Here, Andres’ statement highlights how teacher assumptions can also create barriers to recognizing student capability. Brophy (1983) notes that expectancy effects are more likely when teachers maintain inaccurate expectations despite evidence to the contrary. Additionally, Rubie-Davies and Hattie (2025) emphasize that teachers’ biased beliefs about students can translate into differential interactions that produce negative self-fulfilling outcomes, making attentiveness to the student’s voice a necessity when working against expectancy-driven inequities. As Andres notes, by intentionally pausing to not only solicit but to value student thinking, teachers can signal higher expectations for competence and agency, thereby helping to interrupt self-fulfilling cycles (Rosenthal & Jacobson, 1968).

Finally, Catalina provided a specific example of how these activities regularly shifted her perceptions around certain students who she previously saw as struggling, and now sees them through different eyes with new possibilities and potential:

And I saw this last year, I can still remember, and I have the picture still. [That student], he’s always in the office. This is a student who, for whatever reason, he’s always on the dark side and…not academically motivated. But when they were outside with the Bee-Bots, I never thought he could actually think. And I’m just being honest, [I saw him and thought] like “Wow, he actually is very creative.” He was the first one out of the whole group that was there that saw the pathway or [solution]. And to see him so engaged, which is very rare to see in the classroom, and he was just jet focused. These kids, they’re smart but… they need to be engaged in a different way. He actually succeeded and was the first one to solve that maze. And I was blown away. Because I’m going to be honest, I’m like, “He doesn’t do anything. He doesn’t do this.” But he was able to solve that. So to me that was so powerful because…That shows me he is capable of learning, but we need to give kids more time to learn in that way.

This closing, vulnerable quote from Catalina illustrates a clear shift in teacher expectations when a student previously perceived as disengaged and unreachable demonstrates strong problem-solving ability. Catalina explicitly describes a student with a negative reputation and shares that she has a low expectation for the student’s thinking. Observing the student succeed provides strong disconfirming evidence as reported by Catalina, and Brophy (1983) argues that when expectations remain open to corrective feedback, like in this example, they are less likely to become self-fulfilling. As shown throughout this study, CS activities can offer alternative ways for students, even those not thriving in traditional classroom experiences, to demonstrate competence and expertise. Overall, this type of early CS exposure can support learning and narrow gaps but also shift teacher perceptions of what students can achieve.

4. Discussion

As explored in this study, teacher voices and experiences over four years showcased how CS learning experiences have not only the potential to transform learning experiences for students, but to also transform their own perceptions of what students are capable of in the classroom. Because this study followed the same four teachers across four consecutive years in a school that did not offer a formal CS course, it showcases how elementary CS integration can lead to shifts in both student learning and teacher beliefs. Importantly, changing what teachers notice and name for their students’ capabilities is a consequential lever for shifting who is seen as belonging in computing. These ideas are explored further below.

4.1. CS Integration Can Transform Learning Experiences

The results from this study suggest that CS activities have the potential to transform student learning experiences, particularly around the integration of real-world connections, joyful learning experiences, and 21st-century skills. Notably, these shifts were described in the context of CS being introduced through integrated, co-designed experiences rather than through a stand-alone CS course, suggesting a practical entry point for elementary schools where CS is not yet established. As described in the results, across the four years of this study, teachers consistently reported observing heightened collaboration and problem-solving during the CS-integrated activities. This finding aligns with similar work from S. J. Lee et al. (2022) that showed CS can support and improve students’ creative and problem-solving skills. As shown in our findings, supporting the development of problem-solving skills was a primary finding, and supporting the development of creativity was a minor emergent theme. More research is needed to further explore the extent of this impact and the types of CS activities that best support the development of real-world connections and 21st-century skills.

While foundational AI literacy was not a part of this study, it should be explored in future research. AI has emerged as a highly impactful force within K-12 education, which makes the urgency of early, equity-centered computing foundations clear. The same findings and principles highlighted within this study may also be beneficial when introducing emerging computing literacies like AI, which future work could explore. AI literacy has been defined as, “an individual’s ability to clearly explain how AI technologies work and impact society, as well as to use them in an ethical and responsible manner and to effectively communicate and collaborate with them in any setting” (Chiu et al., 2024, p. 4). Having AI literacy is necessary not just for students in the K-12 setting, but for teachers as well (U.S. Department of Education, 2023). For example, it would be considered unethical for a high school student to use AI to fully complete a programming assignment. In contrast, it could be considered a job requirement for a Microsoft employee to use AI to write code (Novet & Vanian, 2025). This knowledge of ethical and responsible AI use would better prepare K-12 students for futures where the integration of AI will undoubtedly become more ubiquitous. As the individuals in charge of guiding student learning, teachers also need a firm understanding of ethical and responsible AI use to support the development of students’ creative and critical thinking skills. One way to begin this work is through the integration of CT in the classroom. Just as CT can provide a beneficial onramp to engaging with CS knowledge and skills, it can also serve as an entry point for engaging with AI literacy (e.g., Y. Kafai & Grover, 2026). Future research could employ the methods and design approaches described throughout this study to address the development of foundational AI skills within K-12 education. Research could also explore how CT integration could be leveraged as a starting point for building towards deeper AI literacy and understanding.

4.2. Real-World Connections, Problem-Solving, and Collaboration

In our findings, real-world connections, problem-solving, and collaboration emerged as deeply interwoven pieces of transformative learning through CS. All four teachers consistently described how grounding CS tasks in tangible, authentic problems helped students see clear links between computing and their day-to-day lives. As reported by the teachers, these real-world connections not only increased student motivation and sense of relevance but also created entry points for complex thinking. These findings align with other research in K-12 CS education, showcasing how CS education experiences can drive learning in critical 21st-century skills (e.g., S. J. Lee et al., 2022). Prior studies also show that when students apply computing concepts to real-world concepts, such as designing solutions, modeling data, or exploring social issues, this can help students see the relevance of CS and deepen their understanding of other content areas (Y. B. Kafai & Proctor, 2022; Ryoo, 2019). Through seeing their students take ownership of design decisions, revise their approaches and troubleshoot problems that arose, and support each other’s thinking, teacher participants consistently reported on the benefits derived from CS activities. Importantly, teachers’ descriptions suggest these collaborative, real-world tasks made student thinking more visible and helped surface competence in students who were quieter, less confident, or previously positioned as struggling in more traditional classroom routines.

4.3. Joyful Learning

Calls for expanding CS and STEM education often focus on workforce development rationales; however, stakeholders looking to transform and improve K-12 education have suggested that when learning experiences are grounded in joyful learning, they can be more impactful (e.g., Karlin et al., 2024; Freire, 1970; hooks, 1994). When learning experiences are grounded in sparking student joy, our learners can better find and connect with their own intrinsic motivation for disciplinary learning (Jeet & Pant, 2023; Lee & Hannafin, 2016). In this study, joy functioned not only as an outcome but as a condition that supported persistence and collaboration, as well as an equity-related signal that challenged deficit narratives about students’ willingness and capacity to engage deeply. Emerging K-12 CS research notes connections between supporting confidence and self-efficacy in CS when joy is foundational to the learning experience. (e.g., Goldenberg et al., 2020; Scharber et al., 2021). Additionally, research suggests that when STEM work builds joy into students’ learning experience, these experiences can lead to improved connection and community building, thereby providing a stronger sense of belonging within the field (Joseph et al., 2023). When students, particularly those who have been historically marginalized, feel a stronger sense of belonging within the field, they are more likely to persevere within that STEM discipline. Throughout the results described above, all four inservice teachers universally noted not only that joy was present, but also the important role that joyful engagement played in supporting students with CS learning experiences. Future research can continue to explore best practices for cultivating joyful experiences in ways that are aligned with required content (e.g., state standards, policy, etc.), while still providing the benefits described above.

4.4. CS Integration Can Transform Teacher Perceptions

Decades of research have shown that teacher perceptions impact student performance and achievement (Jussim & Harber, 2005; Rosenthal & Jacobson, 1968). Within STEM and CS, emerging evidence has also demonstrated similar trends (S. W. Lee et al., 2015; Reinhold et al., 2018). Importantly, the results from this study suggest that student engagement with the types of CS activities conducted at Market Street Elementary over a four-year period have the potential to positively shift teacher perceptions of students, laying the foundation for new understandings of what students are capable of achieving. As Catalina noted while reflecting on the abilities of a student she had previously disregarded: “I’m going to be honest, I was like, ‘[This student] doesn’t do anything.’ But he was able to solve that [CS] puzzle…So he is capable of learning, but we need to give kids more time to learn in that way.” These moments matter because they can interrupt the self-fulfilling cycle of lowered expectations. Designing CS experiences that make thinking visible may therefore be a practical strategy for supporting more equitable shifts in teacher perception.

These changes to core beliefs about what students are capable of achieving are critically important for expanding student opportunities and participation within CS. However, significantly more research is needed within CS education specifically to better understand and explore both the impact that teacher perceptions have on students, as well as how transforming those perceptions can lead to new, more equitable possibilities for students, teachers, and the field of CS as a whole.

When teachers expand their views to see that all students are capable problem-solvers and creators, they are more likely to design inclusive, affirming learning environments that broaden participation and help dismantle systemic barriers in CS education. In this way, transforming teacher perceptions becomes not just a pedagogical outcome, but critical from an equity standpoint as well. When teachers can shift who is seen as belonging in CS, learning spaces can be transformed to reshape who has access to opportunities. By centering equity in teacher learning and classroom practice, CS education can move toward a more just and representative future where every student’s potential is recognized and valued.

In addition to shifting teacher perceptions, the co-design process likely led to professional growth and shifts in teachers’ knowledge and skills as well, although measuring those changes was outside the scope of this study. The fourth-grade teachers who were involved in the co-design and implementation of these activities could have potentially developed CS competencies, 21st-century skills competencies, and other competencies aligned with ISTE’s standards for teachers. As a result, future research could explore teacher professional growth and skill development, including pedagogical transformation and evolving perceptions and knowledge related to CS integration.

Taken together, these findings suggest integrated, real-world, joyful CS activities can create new forms of participation that make students’ problem-solving visible, which can then support shifts in teacher beliefs about who is capable. In turn, these perception shifts can open access to future opportunities, pathways, and more inclusive instructional decisions. From this perspective, this type of elementary CS integration is not only about early exposure to computing ideas, but about reshaping recognition, belonging, and opportunity structures in classrooms.

5. Conclusions

This study contributes to the growing body of scholarship demonstrating how CS education can transform student learning experiences. Importantly, findings from this case study suggest that elementary CS can be about both access to learning experiences and access to recognition. Who teachers see as a capable problem-solver or creator can have significant, equity-related impacts on student experiences and sense of belonging in the field. On the student learning side, our findings reveal how CS integration supports crucial 21st-century skills, like collaboration, problem-solving, and creativity. By embedding CS in meaningful, real-world contexts, teachers saw how these experiences enhanced student engagement and confidence, emphasizing the potential of CS to be a powerful vehicle for joyful, student-centered learning.

Equally important, this study highlights how engagement with CS can shift teachers’ perceptions of their students’ abilities, a finding that is particularly significant for those historically marginalized in STEM fields. When teachers witnessed students’ creativity, persistence, and problem-solving in CS activities, their assumptions about capability and potential began to change, promoting more equitable and inclusive classroom practices. These shifts in perspective not only reshape individual classrooms but also have the potential to influence broader school cultures, challenging longstanding assumptions about who can succeed in computing. By centering joy, relevance, and equity, this work frames CS education as not merely preparation for the future workforce but as a humanizing practice that fosters curiosity, belonging, and transformative educational possibilities for both teachers and learners. Future work should examine whether and how these shifts in teacher perception translate into sustained changes in everyday classroom practice and longer-term student trajectories, particularly in elementary settings that have historically been excluded from computing opportunities.