pith. sign in

arxiv: 2604.18925 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-21 · 💻 cs.CY

Writing Blog Posts Helps Students Connect Experiential Learning to the Workplace

Utsab Saha , Lola Egherman , Ramiz Rahman , Mohd Toukir Khan , Kevin Wang , Tyler Menezes This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 02:24 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.CY
keywords experiential learningblog postscomputer science educationstudent reflectionwork-based learningopen source contributionsknowledge gainthematic analysis
0
0 comments X

The pith

Guided blog posts help CS students reflect on their work-based contributions and recognize transferable skills.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

This paper tests whether a structured blog-post assignment during open-source projects helps computer science undergraduates turn confusing or small-seeming contributions into clear accounts of what they learned. Students frequently undervalue their work even when supervisors see value, and therefore leave relevant experience off resumes and out of interviews. The study assigned 25 juniors and seniors a five-section outline covering project mission, issue, architecture, challenges, and solution, then analyzed the resulting posts thematically and with the Knowledge Gain instrument. Students surfaced four consistent themes and showed deep reflection on all four constructs. A sympathetic reader would care because the method is low-cost and could be added to capstones, micro-internships, or apprenticeships without changing existing programs.

Core claim

When CS undergraduates write LinkedIn blog posts following a fixed five-section outline while solving an open-source issue with mentor support, thematic analysis reveals four recurring themes: identifying problem-solving techniques, growth mindset, the challenges and benefits of collaborative development, and the impacts of their contribution on users. The same posts also exhibit deep reflection across all four constructs measured by the Mejia and Turns Knowledge Gain instrument.

What carries the argument

The five-section blog-post outline (project mission, assigned issue, technical architecture, challenges faced, submitted solution) together with thematic coding and the Mejia and Turns Knowledge Gain instrument used to score reflection depth.

If this is right

  • Structured blog posts can be added at low cost to capstones, micro-internships, internships, and apprenticeships.
  • Students become better able to articulate their contributions for resumes and job interviews.
  • Four recurring themes—problem-solving techniques, growth mindset, collaborative development, and user impact—emerge reliably from the writing.
  • All participants demonstrated deep reflection on every Knowledge Gain construct.
  • The format works for juniors and seniors at community and affordable colleges working on real open-source issues.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the reflection gains hold in controlled comparisons, the blog format could become a standard bridge between informal experiential work and formal job-market signals.
  • The same outline might be tested in non-CS disciplines where students also undervalue small contributions.
  • Longer-term tracking could check whether blog writing increases actual rates of including experiential work on resumes or LinkedIn profiles.
  • The method offers one concrete way to reduce the gap between what supervisors observe and what students believe they have accomplished.

Load-bearing premise

The thematic analysis of the twenty-five posts and the Knowledge Gain scoring validly capture students' actual reflection depth and transferable workplace skills without significant social-desirability bias or researcher influence.

What would settle it

A randomized trial in which one group writes the guided blog posts and a matched control group does not, followed by measurement of differences in self-reported contribution value, inclusion of the experience on resumes, or performance in mock interviews.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.18925 by Kevin Wang, Lola Egherman, Mohd Toukir Khan, Ramiz Rahman, Tyler Menezes, Utsab Saha.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Blog post template that was provided to students [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Split violin plot of normalized scores for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Undergraduates in work-based learning experiences often produce meaningful contributions as viewed by their supervisors, yet report a negative perception of their contributions because they struggled during the process or produced only a few lines of code change. As a result, many omit these contributions from their resumes and job interviews, losing a meaningful signal of technical ability. This study examines how guided blog posts help CS students in work based learning experiences reflect on what they learned and contextualize their experiences. It also evaluates the depth of reflection produced. The study included twenty-five juniors and seniors studying CS at CTCs and other affordable local colleges. All participated in one cohort during Fall 2024. Each student was assigned a simple open source issue to solve from a popular open source project over the course of several weeks with the help of an industry mentor. While working on the project, students drafted a LinkedIn blog post using a five-section outline covering project mission, assigned issue, technical architecture, challenges faced, and submitted solution. We conducted a thematic analysis of the published posts and measured reflection depth using Mejia and Turns's Knowledge Gain instrument. Four themes emerged from the posts: identifying problem solving techniques, growth mindset, the challenges and benefits of collaborative development, and the impacts of their contribution on users. Additionally, students demonstrated deep reflection across all four Knowledge Gain constructs. Structured blog posts offer a low-cost addition to experiential CS learning such as capstones, micro-internships, internships, and apprenticeships. This study is descriptive; future work should compare outcomes against a control group.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript describes a descriptive study of 25 CS undergraduates in work-based learning who each resolved an assigned open-source issue with an industry mentor and wrote a structured LinkedIn blog post using a five-section outline (project mission, assigned issue, technical architecture, challenges, solution). Thematic analysis of the published posts identified four themes: identifying problem-solving techniques, growth mindset, challenges and benefits of collaborative development, and impacts of contributions on users. Application of the Mejia and Turns Knowledge Gain instrument led to the conclusion that students demonstrated deep reflection across all four constructs. The authors position structured blog posts as a low-cost addition to experiential CS activities (capstones, micro-internships, etc.) to help students contextualize experiences for resumes and interviews, while explicitly noting the study is descriptive and recommending future controlled comparisons.

Significance. If the reported reflection depth and themes hold under more rigorous validation, the work suggests a practical, scalable, and low-cost pedagogical tool that could help CS students overcome negative self-perceptions of their contributions in experiential settings and better articulate transferable skills. The use of public LinkedIn posts and an established external instrument offers a replicable template for educators. The explicitly descriptive framing appropriately limits causal claims, positioning the contribution as a promising practice warranting further investigation rather than a proven intervention.

major comments (2)
  1. [Results / Thematic Analysis and Knowledge Gain Measurement] The central claim that 'students demonstrated deep reflection across all four Knowledge Gain constructs' rests on application of the Mejia and Turns instrument to the 25 posts, yet the manuscript provides no details on inter-rater reliability, blinding, coding process, or adaptation of the instrument to the structured blog-post format. This directly undermines the validity of the depth assessment and the four-theme summary.
  2. [Methods and Discussion] The interpretation that structured blog posts 'help students connect experiential learning to the workplace' is load-bearing for the practical recommendation, but the design (single cohort, n=25, posts written under explicit five-section assignment instructions for public LinkedIn publication) introduces plausible social-desirability and prompting effects with no control condition, pre/post measures, or external validation (e.g., supervisor ratings or resume outcomes). The descriptive framing mitigates but does not eliminate the need for stronger qualification of this claim.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Participants] Clarify the exact recruitment and demographic details of the 25 students (e.g., specific CTCs vs. other colleges, prior experience levels) to allow readers to assess generalizability.
  2. [Methods] Provide the full citation and any adaptation notes for the Mejia and Turns Knowledge Gain instrument in the main text rather than assuming reader familiarity.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their detailed and constructive review, which highlights important areas for improving the transparency and qualification of our findings. We respond to each major comment below and will make revisions to address the concerns while maintaining the descriptive nature of the study.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Results / Thematic Analysis and Knowledge Gain Measurement] The central claim that 'students demonstrated deep reflection across all four Knowledge Gain constructs' rests on application of the Mejia and Turns instrument to the 25 posts, yet the manuscript provides no details on inter-rater reliability, blinding, coding process, or adaptation of the instrument to the structured blog-post format. This directly undermines the validity of the depth assessment and the four-theme summary.

    Authors: We agree that the manuscript lacks sufficient detail on the qualitative analysis process. In the revised version, we will add a dedicated subsection under Methods describing the thematic analysis procedure, including how the Mejia and Turns Knowledge Gain instrument was applied and adapted to the blog post format, the steps taken for consistency (iterative review and author discussion to resolve disagreements), and explicit notes on the absence of formal inter-rater reliability metrics or blinding. This will strengthen the reported themes and depth assessments without overstating rigor. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Methods and Discussion] The interpretation that structured blog posts 'help students connect experiential learning to the workplace' is load-bearing for the practical recommendation, but the design (single cohort, n=25, posts written under explicit five-section assignment instructions for public LinkedIn publication) introduces plausible social-desirability and prompting effects with no control condition, pre/post measures, or external validation (e.g., supervisor ratings or resume outcomes). The descriptive framing mitigates but does not eliminate the need for stronger qualification of this claim.

    Authors: We acknowledge that the Discussion could more explicitly address potential biases such as social-desirability effects from the structured assignment and public posting. In the revision, we will expand the Limitations and Discussion sections to include stronger qualifications, noting the single-cohort design, absence of control conditions, pre/post measures, and external validations, and emphasizing that findings are suggestive of a low-cost practice rather than causal. This reinforces our existing statement that the study is descriptive and recommends future controlled comparisons. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity in qualitative descriptive study

full rationale

The paper is a descriptive qualitative study that performs thematic analysis on 25 student blog posts and applies the externally developed Mejia and Turns Knowledge Gain instrument to measure reflection depth. No mathematical derivations, equations, fitted parameters, predictions, or self-citations appear in the provided text. Central claims rest on standard qualitative methods applied to new data collected under the study protocol, with no load-bearing step that reduces by construction to the inputs themselves. The derivation chain is self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The paper relies on standard qualitative research methods and an existing published instrument rather than introducing new formalisms. No free parameters, axioms beyond domain assumptions of qualitative validity, or invented entities are present.

axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Thematic analysis of student writing can reliably identify reflection themes and depth when performed by researchers familiar with the domain.
    Invoked in the methods section describing the analysis of the 25 posts.
  • domain assumption The Mejia and Turns Knowledge Gain instrument validly measures deep reflection in this educational setting.
    Used to score the posts without additional validation in the study.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5598 in / 1537 out tokens · 33927 ms · 2026-05-10T02:24:36.774545+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

44 extracted references · 44 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Virginia Braun and Victoria Clarke. 2006. Using thematic analysis in psychol- ogy.Qualitative Research in Psychology3, 2 (Jan. 2006), 77–101. doi:10.1191/ 1478088706qp063oa

    work page 2006

  2. [2]

    Virginia Braun and Victoria Clarke. 2021. One size fits all? What counts as quality practice in (reflexive) thematic analysis?Qualitative Research in Psychology18, 3 (July 2021), 328–352. doi:10.1080/14780887.2020.1769238

    work page doi:10.1080/14780887.2020.1769238 2021

  3. [3]

    Carmack and Sarah N

    Heather J. Carmack and Sarah N. Heiss. 2018. Using the Theory of Planned Behavior to Predict College Students’ Intent to Use LinkedIn for Job Searches and Professional Networking.Communication Studies69, 2 (March 2018), 145–160. doi:10.1080/10510974.2018.1424003

    work page doi:10.1080/10510974.2018.1424003 2018

  4. [4]

    Muhammed Ali Chalikandy. 2014. Reflection: A Tool for Professional Develop- ment.Researchers World - International Refereed Social Sciences Journal5, 3 (2014), 117–124. https://www.researchersworld.com/index.php/rworld/article/view/859

    work page 2014

  5. [5]

    David H. Cropley. 2015. Promoting creativity and innovation in engineering education.Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts9, 2 (2015), 161–171. doi:10.1037/aca0000008

    work page doi:10.1037/aca0000008 2015

  6. [6]

    Daniels, Sara D

    Ruby A. Daniels, Sara D. Pemble, Danielle Allen, Gretchen Lain, and Leslie A. Miller. 2023. LinkedIn Blunders: A Mixed Method Study of College Students’ Profiles.Community College Journal of Research and Practice47, 2 (Feb. 2023), 90–105. doi:10.1080/10668926.2021.1944932

    work page doi:10.1080/10668926.2021.1944932 2023

  7. [7]

    Dickson and John Barr

    Paul E. Dickson and John Barr. 2019. Bringing Reflection into Computer Science Education. InProceedings of the 50th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education. ACM, Minneapolis MN USA, 1249–1249. doi:10.1145/3287324. 3293733

    work page doi:10.1145/3287324 2019

  8. [8]

    Stebleton

    Lisa DuRose and Michael J. Stebleton. 2016. Lost in Translation: Preparing Students to Articulate the Meaning of a College Degree.Journal of College and Character17, 4 (Oct. 2016), 271–277. doi:10.1080/2194587X.2016.1230759

    work page doi:10.1080/2194587x.2016.1230759 2016

  9. [9]

    Alyson Eggleston, Robert Rabb, and Ronald Welch. 2022. Employer and Student Mismatch in Early-Career Skill Development. In2022 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings. ASEE Conferences, Minneapolis, MN, 40895. doi:10. 18260/1-2--40895

    work page 2022

  10. [10]

    Zixuan Feng, Igor Steinmacher, Marco Gerosa, Tyler Menezes, Alexander Sere- brenik, Reed Milewicz, and Anita Sarma. 2025. The Multifaceted Nature of Mentoring in OSS: Strategies, Qualities, and Ideal Outcomes. In2025 IEEE/ACM 18th International Conference on Cooperative and Human Aspects of Software Engi- neering (CHASE). IEEE, Ottawa, ON, Canada, 203–214...

    work page doi:10.1109/chase66643 2025

  11. [11]

    Erica French, Janis Bailey, Elizabeth van Acker, and Leigh Wood. 2015. From mountaintop to corporate ladder – what new professionals really really want in a capstone experience!Teaching in Higher Education20, 8 (Nov. 2015), 767–782. doi:10.1080/13562517.2015.1085852 6

    work page doi:10.1080/13562517.2015.1085852 2015

  12. [12]

    Susan E. George. 2002. Learning and the reflective journal in computer science. InProceedings of the twenty-fifth Australasian conference on Computer science - Volume 4 (ACSC ’02, Vol. 4). Australian Computer Society, Inc., AUS, 77–86

    work page 2002

  13. [13]

    Miller, and Brandon J

    Sandra Gorka, Jacob R. Miller, and Brandon J. Howe. 2007. Developing realistic capstone projects in conjunction with industry. InProceedings of the 8th ACM SIGITE conference on Information technology education (SIGITE ’07). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 27–32. doi:10.1145/1324302. 1324309

    work page doi:10.1145/1324302 2007

  14. [14]

    Ostrander, Roseann Berg, Tyler Menezes, and Kevin Wang

    Kendrick Hang, Tyler Schrock, Tina J. Ostrander, Roseann Berg, Tyler Menezes, and Kevin Wang. 2024. Industry Mentoring and Internship Experiences at a Community College Baccalaureate Program in Software Development. InPro- ceedings of the 55th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education V. 1 (SIGCSE 2024). Association for Computing Machinery, Ne...

    work page doi:10.1145/3626252.3630878 2024

  15. [15]

    2024.Talent Disrupted

    Andrew Hanson, Carlo Salerno, Matt Sigelman, Mels de Zeeuw, and Stephen Moret. 2024.Talent Disrupted. Technical Report. Burning Glass Institute and Strada Institute for the Future of Work. 1–56 pages. https://www.strada.org/ reports/talent-disrupted

    work page 2024

  16. [16]

    Open Source Initiative. 2007. The Open Source Definition. https://opensource. org/osd

    work page 2007

  17. [17]

    Kevin John Ions and Norma Sutcliffe. 2019. Barriers to constructing experiential learning claims through reflective narratives: Student’s experiences.Higher Education, Skills and Work-Based Learning10, 1 (Sept. 2019), 126–140. doi:10. 1108/HESWBL-04-2019-0053

    work page 2019

  18. [18]

    Denise A Jackson and Susan Edgar. 2019. Encouraging students to draw on work experiences when articulating achievements and capabilities to enhance employability.Australian Journal of Career Development28, 1 (April 2019), 39–50. doi:10.1177/1038416218790571

    work page doi:10.1177/1038416218790571 2019

  19. [19]

    Victoria Jackson, André van der Hoek, Rafael Prikladnicki, and Christof Ebert

    work page

  20. [20]

    doi:10.1109/MS.2021.3132137

    Collaboration Tools for Developers.IEEE Software39, 2 (March 2022), 7–15. doi:10.1109/MS.2021.3132137

    work page doi:10.1109/ms.2021.3132137 2022

  21. [21]

    Christine Kolar and Shirley V. Dickson. 2002. Preservice General Educators’ Perceptions of Structured Reflective Logs as Viable Learning Tools in a University Course on Inclusionary Practices.Teacher Education and Special Education25, 4 (Oct. 2002), 395–406. doi:10.1177/088840640202500408

    work page doi:10.1177/088840640202500408 2002

  22. [22]

    Carolin Kreber. 2004. An analysis of two models of reflection and their implica- tions for educational development.International Journal for Academic Develop- ment9, 1 (May 2004), 29–49. doi:10.1080/1360144042000296044

    work page doi:10.1080/1360144042000296044 2004

  23. [23]

    Richard Landis and Gary G

    J. Richard Landis and Gary G. Koch. 1977. The Measurement of Observer Agree- ment for Categorical Data.Biometrics33, 1 (1977), 159–174. doi:10.2307/2529310

    work page doi:10.2307/2529310 1977

  24. [24]

    Arthur M. Langer. 2002. Reflecting on Practice: using learning journals in higher and continuing education.Teaching in Higher Education7, 3 (July 2002), 337–351. doi:10.1080/13562510220144824

    work page doi:10.1080/13562510220144824 2002

  25. [25]

    Gondocz, and Robert L

    Jocelyn Lockyer, Tunde S. Gondocz, and Robert L. Thivierge. 2004. Knowledge translation: The role and place of practice reflection.Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions24, 1 (2004), 50. doi:10.1002/chp.1340240108

    work page doi:10.1002/chp.1340240108 2004

  26. [26]

    Catherine Marienau and Morry Fiddler. 2002. Bringing Students’: Experience to the Learning Process.About Campus7, 5 (Nov. 2002), 13–19. doi:10.1177/ 108648220200700504

    work page 2002

  27. [27]

    Kenya Mejia and Jennifer Turns. 2021. Creating Capacity to Explore what Stu- dents Learn from Reflection Activities: Validating the Knowledge-gain Survey. In2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access Proceedings. ASEE Con- ferences, Virtual Conference, 36872. doi:10.18260/1-2--36872

    work page doi:10.18260/1-2--36872 2021

  28. [28]

    Tyler Menezes, Lola Egherman, and Nikhil Garg. 2024. AI-Grading Standup Updates to Improve Project-Based Learning Outcomes. InProceedings of the 2024 on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education V. 1 (ITiCSE 2024). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 17–23. doi:10.1145/ 3649217.3653541

    work page arXiv 2024

  29. [29]

    Tyler Menezes, Alexander Parra, and Mingjie Jiang. 2022. Open-Source In- ternships With Industry Mentors. InProceedings of the 27th ACM Conference on on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education Vol. 1 (ITiCSE ’22). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 365–371. doi:10.1145/3502718.3524763

    work page doi:10.1145/3502718.3524763 2022

  30. [30]

    Sathya Narayanan, Leslie Maxwell, Mariana Anita Garcia, Utsab Saha, and Tyler Menezes. 2023. A scalable approach to support computer science students in their learning and preparation as software engineers. InIEEE Frontiers in Education 2023. IEEE Press, College Station, TX, USA, 1–5. doi:10.1109/FIE58773.2023.10343322

    work page doi:10.1109/fie58773.2023.10343322 2023

  31. [31]

    Cheryl Resch, Patriel Stapleton, Benjamin Rheault, Amy Wu, and Christina GaRdner-Mccune. 2022. Analysis of Effect of Answering Reflection Prompts in a Computer Organization Class. In2022 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings. ASEE Conferences, Minneapolis, MN, 40428. doi:10.18260/1-2--40428

    work page doi:10.18260/1-2--40428 2022

  32. [32]

    Kathryn Robertson. 2005. Reflection in professional practice and education. Australian Family Physician34, 9 (Sept. 2005), 781–783

    work page 2005

  33. [33]

    Russell R. Rogers. 2001. Reflection in Higher Education: A Concept Analysis.In- novative Higher Education26, 1 (Sept. 2001), 37–57. doi:10.1023/A:1010986404527

    work page doi:10.1023/a:1010986404527 2001

  34. [34]

    Utsab Saha, Jeffrey D’Andria, and Tyler Menezes. 2025. The Open Source Resume: How Open Source Contributions Help Students Demonstrate Alignment with Employer Needs. doi:10.48550/ARXIV.2510.25180 Version Number: 1

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2510.25180 2025

  35. [35]

    Mary Samuels and Jan Betts. 2007. Crossing the threshold from description to deconstruction and reconstruction: using self-assessment to deepen reflection. Reflective Practice8, 2 (May 2007), 269–283. doi:10.1080/14623940701289410

    work page doi:10.1080/14623940701289410 2007

  36. [36]

    Gissi Sarig. 2005. Fostering Reflective Writing by Structuring Writing-To-Learn Tasks. InEffective Learning and Teaching of Writing: A Handbook of Writing in Education, Gert Rijlaarsdam, Huub van den Bergh, and Michel Couzijn (Eds.). Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht, 499–517. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020- 2739-0_34

    work page doi:10.1007/978-1-4020- 2005

  37. [37]

    Hasti Robiasih, Isti’anatul Hikmah, Andhi Dwi Nugroho, J

    Anselmus Sudirman, Adria Vitalya Gemilang, Thadius Marhendra Adi Kristanto, Rr. Hasti Robiasih, Isti’anatul Hikmah, Andhi Dwi Nugroho, J. C. Setyo Karjono, Titi Lestari, Theresia Laksmi Widyarini, Afria Dian Prastanti, Moh. Rusnoto Susanto, and Burhanudin Rais. 2024. Reinforcing Reflective Practice through Reflective Writing in Higher Education: A Systema...

    work page doi:10.26803/ijlter.23.5.24 2024

  38. [38]

    Sherry Seale Swain. 1998. Studying Teachers’ Transformations: Reflection as Methodology.The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas72, 1 (Sept. 1998), 28–34. doi:10.1080/00098659809599381

    work page doi:10.1080/00098659809599381 1998

  39. [39]

    Simonovich, and Yevgeniya V

    Emily Towers, Jennifer A. Simonovich, and Yevgeniya V. Zastavker. 2011. Stu- dents’ perceptions of the engineering profession and implications for interest in the field. In2011 Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE). IEEE, F3D–1–F3D–7. doi:10.1109/FIE.2011.6142960

    work page doi:10.1109/fie.2011.6142960 2011

  40. [40]

    Turns, Brook Sattler, Ken Yasuhara, Jim L

    Jennifer A. Turns, Brook Sattler, Ken Yasuhara, Jim L. Borgford-Parnell, and Cynthia J. Atman. 2014. Integrating Reflection into Engineering Education. ASEE Conferences, 24.776.1–24.776.16. doi:10.18260/1-2--20668

    work page doi:10.18260/1-2--20668 2014

  41. [41]

    Nursel Ugur and Ünal Çakiroglu. 2024. Implementing Reflective Thinking in Computer Science Unplugged to Enhance Computational Thinking.International Journal of Technology in Education and Science8, 2 (April 2024), 196–218. doi:10. 46328/ijtes.515

    work page 2024

  42. [42]

    2008.Understanding By Design

    Grant Wiggins and Jay McTighe. 2008.Understanding By Design. Assn. for Supervision & Curriculum Development, Alexandria, Va

    work page 2008

  43. [43]

    Jill Zarestky, Michelle Bigler, Mollie Brazile, Tobin Lopes, and Wolfgang Bangerth

    work page

  44. [44]

    2022), 100085

    Reflective Writing Supports Metacognition and Self-regulation in Graduate Computational Science and Engineering.Computers and Education Open3 (Dec. 2022), 100085. doi:10.1016/j.caeo.2022.100085 7

    work page doi:10.1016/j.caeo.2022.100085 2022