PofoliaShared via Pofolia

Journal of Computer Assisted Learning· 2026Q1· Review

Assessing Computational Thinking in Early Childhood: A Systematic Review of Instruments, Constructs and Psychometric Evidence

Chungsoo Na, Jody Clarke‐Midura, Wilhelmina van Dijk, Lingna Xu

Short summary

A systematic review of 30 early childhood computational thinking (CT) assessments (ages 3-8) found most measure algorithms/sequences via paper-based, selected-response formats, with scarce evidence of criterion validity and fairness.

AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.

Key points

  • 30 early childhood CT assessments (ages 3-8) were systematically reviewed.
  • Most assessments focus on algorithms/sequences using paper-based, selected-response formats.
  • Evidence for criterion validity and fairness in these assessments is scarce.
  • Content and construct validity evidence has improved compared to prior reviews.

AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.

Abstract

ABSTRACT Background As computational thinking (CT) becomes an essential component of early childhood education, there is a growing demand for valid and developmentally appropriate assessment tools. Yet, while the availability of assessments has increased, researchers have yet to establish psychometric rigour and fairness in assessment design and implementation. Objectives This systematic review synthesises the landscape of early childhood CT assessments by examining the constructs measured, the implementation formats used, and the reported psychometric properties, including reliability, validity, and fairness. Methods Guided by PRISMA protocols, we analysed 30 studies (from 28 articles) that developed, validated, or adapted CT assessments for children aged 3–8. Results and Conclusions Most assessments focus on algorithms/sequences, often using paper‐based, selected‐response formats. While many studies reported evidence of content and construct validity, an improvement over prior reviews, evidence of criterion validity and fairness is scarce. Our findings underscore the need for developmentally appropriate and psychometrically rigorous assessments to ensure all children are assessed fairly and without bias.

The authors' abstract, as published at the source. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 2026 · DOI ↗

TakeawaysPremium
Ask the paperFree account

Continue with a free account

Ask the paper: 3 free questions a day about this paper; save it, get its citation, new summaries every day for your field. Takeaways are Premium.

Continue free on the web

Sign in with Google or Apple; no card needed. You come back to this paper.

On your phone:

Field: Computer Science Applications

Computer Science ApplicationsComputer Science