Race and gender are crucial concepts in the computer science (CS) education research community's broadening participation efforts and scholarship. They help to critique the ways that white supremacy, anti-Blackness, and patriarchy structure and discipline CS classrooms and workplaces. In addition, attention to race and gender has helped to reimagine and redesign CS education to be more culturally responsive and sustaining for marginalized students. This panel builds on these foundational efforts by starting a conversation about what a more intentional focus on the concept of class and its connections to political economy can offer researchers and educators who are committed to more race and gender inclusivity, diversity, and equity in CS education across primary, secondary, and post-secondary levels. What might the concept introduce into intersectional analyses of the exclusionary structures of the education-to-workforce CS ''pipeline''? How might class be defined to help redesign CS education to affirm the identities of racially marginalized students from working class communities? How might the language of class provide new insights into the ways that racism, sexism, and ableism shape CS education? What might the operationalization of the concept help to reveal about the economic interests that underpin mainstream CS curricula and education policies? And how might class help CS professionals and educators understand their own social positions? Through a discussion with researchers and practitioners from different disciplinary backgrounds and theoretical orientations, this panel seeks to provide a foundation for more intentional and rigorous engagements with the concept of class within the CS education research community.

In this poster, we will present approaches and associated design principles for integrating computational thinking (CT) into middle school Social Studies, Arts, and Language Arts instruction to enhance disciplinary learning. We used four steps to identify these approaches and design principles: (1) co-design with teachers and experts in computer science and CT education to ideate CT-integrated lessons; (2) identifying initial design principles based on the ideated lessons; (3) consultation with subject matter experts; and (4) conducting a Delphi study with pedagogical experts (e.g., teachers, curriculum writers, teacher educators) to examine the clarity, feasibility and potential impact of the design principles. The process led to three broad approaches to integrate CT into Social Studies instruction that included 14 design principles, three for Arts with 16 design principles, and four for Language Arts with 12 design principles.

This introduction welcomes readers to the second volume of an ACM TOCE special issue on justice-centered computing education. Here we reflect on the ways both the first volume and this current volume expand our notions of justice. More specifically, the first volume explored topics such as intersectionality, transformational justice, intercultural computing, ethnocomputing, translanguaging, socially responsible computing, and institutional theory. This volume continues the conversation with its focus on decolonization, racial literacy with white computing educators, youth agency and voice in computing and media production, learning pathways focused on justice issues for a rural Mexican American youth, and Universal Design for Learning in CS education. We end with discussing the important issues, topics, and voices that are missing from these two volumes, and potential future directions for dialogue in our community.

In this poster, we will present the initial results of a meta-aggregation study that synthesizes qualitative evidence to identify the charac- teristics of effective in-service teacher professional development programs (TPD) around computational thinking (CT) integration in K-12. In addition, we will discuss the importance of these char- acteristics in supporting teachers. We identified four synthesized findings representing the key characteristics of effective TPDs for CT integration in K-12 (e.g., improving teacher capacity in CT in- tegration, creating meaningful learning experiences, establishing research-practice partnership, and providing continuous and sus- tainable support).

The ideas we offer below for considering justice-centered computing education point to a broad array of problem-spaces, contexts, and communities that scholars, educators, technologists, and activists might engage with. In exploring and deepening the conversation around this project, the seven articles included in the first volume of this special issue employ diverse theoretical perspectives, methodologies, and frameworks, including but not limited to intersectionality, transformational justice, intercultural computing, ethnocomputing, translanguaging, socially responsible computing, and institutional theory. Across them, rather than consensus on a narrow set of issues, we see the possibilities of a pluralistic and wide-ranging conversation about how we might constitute the meanings of “justice-centered” within computing education, the tools that might be used to produce such meanings, and the actions that might address them.

Computer Science education (CSed) often aims to position youth as designers, creators, and those with a voice in their world. But do youth have opportunities to design, create, and have voice around the shape of their CSed learning experiences? In this study, we explore ways that school districts engage youth to contribute to the shaping and enactment of their CS instructional systems, efforts districts make to have these leadership roles create impact within these systems, and the tensions associated with these processes. Through in depth analysis of five district case studies, our findings highlight variance around the nature of leadership roles , how access to leadership roles is structured, student autonomy within and ownership over leadership roles, how roles reach into and index differential power over instructional systems , and how district processes of scaffolding and infrastructuring mediate the ultimate impact that students in these roles are able to have on CS instructional systems. Findings also surfaced ways that district actors dealt with a number of tensions associated with student leadership within CS instructional systems. This study provides educators, administrators, and researchers with an expansive view of the potential for students to play legitimate roles within the context of system-wide instructional efforts around CS, and aims to expand conceptions of ‘equitable computer science’—up to this point largely conceived of through the lenses of access to, participation in, and experiences of CS learning—to focus on equity as also being about who has ‘a seat at the table’ when it comes to CS.

Who makes decisions about what K-12 computer science education(CSed) should look like? While equitable participation is a central focus of K-12 CSed, the field has largely thought about equity through the lens of providing access to inclusive and robust CS learning. But issues of who has a "seat at the table" in determining the shape of those experiences, and the larger field that structures them, have been largely under-explored. This panel session argues that equitable CSed must take into account questions of participation in decision-making about CSed, with such issues of power themselves a key dimension of equity in any education effort. We highlight efforts engaging stakeholders from across the education landscape-parents, educators, community members, administrators, and students-exploring how decision-making is structured, how voices that are usually marginalized might be elevated, the tensions involved in these processes, and the relationships between participation and equity.

This lightning talk shares emerging lessons on helping K12 school districts plan around CSforAll. The CSed community rightly spends a lot time thinking about what CS to teach and how to teach it. And as efforts to bring CSed to K12 schools grow, we're starting to think more about how to support teachers through effective professional development. But we don't really know a lot about how the institutional contexts in which CSforAll efforts will succeed, or, potentially, fail - K12 districts - can approach CSed holistically. If we want to reach all kids, then districts are going to be a key leverage point to ensure that CSed efforts are equitable, rigorous and sustainable. We also know that they're incredibly complex systems that are difficult to change. In this talk we share lessons emerging from a research-practice partnership with sixteen K12 school districts. Based on studying how these districts have engaged in strategic planning and decision making, we share five emerging lessons for supporting K12 districts on their journey to make CSforAll to their schools. We focus on (1) the importance answering the question of "why CS for all students?", (2) developing a local definition of what "counts' as CS learning goals, (3) mapping existing activities and expertise related to CS, (4) integrating CSed efforts not just with existing curricula but also broader, existing institutional infrastructures, and (5) establishing coherence across learning goals, professional development, curricula and a guiding vision for CS education in a district.

The rapid expansion of the Computer Science for All (CSforAll) movement in the United States has catalyzed promising policies, tools, and pedagogies for K-12 universal CS education. It has also created significant challenges for schools and districts, namely, decision-making around the programs, curricula, and professional development that will best align to their communities' broader visions and goals around equitable computing education for all.

Do different people hold different reasons for promoting universal computer science education (CS4All)? Do different rationale for CS education imply different learning designs? Is it possible to design educational activities that meaningfully integrate multiple purposes and visions? As CS4All initiatives kick off in localities across the United States, we believe that these questions are key to developing policies, pedagogies and technologies that actually are 'for all'. In this session, participants will engage in a facilitated conversation supported by an informal collaborative tabletop card game. The game, meant to promote reflection, debate, discussion and ideation around CS education, will engage participants as designers tasked with integrating multiple commonly-held values and visions of Computer Science education into a concrete learning activities. The goal of this informal activity and brainstorm is not to become a master designer in 45 minutes. Rather, this design challenge acts as a launching pad to have meaningful discussions around the various visions of Computer Science education and what it looks like to translate these visions into practice. We will also invite participants to give feedback on their experience using the game as a conversation starter, with the hope that it might be used by others engaged in deliberations around how to design CS educational experiences. The game will be supplementing an ongoing research project, "CSed Visions" (http://wp.me/P3GrOX-ek) that investigates the role that visions and values play in Computer Science education.

As momentum grows to expand K12 Computer Science (CS) education, associated public narratives often assume core questions about why CS should be taught to all students have been sufficiently answered. Having clarity around the core purposes that varied stakeholders are envisioning is critical to ensuring the coherence of CS4All initiatives. This study presents a framework examining the range of arguments for and projected impacts of CS education programs. Based on data drawn from a researcher- facilitated participatory knowledge building process involving 26 CS education stakeholders who articulated 161 arguments, we identify seven areas of impact present in arguments for universal CS education: (1) economic and workforce development, (2) equity and social justice, (3) competencies and literacies, (4) citizenship and civic life, (5) scientific, technological and social innovation, (6) school improvement and reform and (7) fun, fulfillment and personal agency. Findings show that individual arguments and visions for CS education often reference multiple impact areas. We intend for this framework to support reflection by CS education stakeholders to consider how their current initiatives index different ideologies about what CS4All projects are meant to achieve.