Tích hợp Vibe Coding vào giáo dục STEM: từ cú pháp lập trình đến ngữ nghĩa bài toán
Tóm tắt
The advancement of large language models has given rise to Vibe Coding, a programming approach that lets users generate source code from descriptions of their intent rather than from syntax. In STEM education in Vietnam, the syntax barrier still prevents many students from engaging in simulation and computational activities, raising the question of whether Vibe Coding can lower this barrier without weakening computational thinking. This study proposes a five-phase instructional model integrating Vibe Coding into STEM teaching, in which an algorithm-design step using flowcharts or pseudocode is a mandatory phase before using the language model, aiming to maintain opportunities for students to develop the components of computational thinking. The model is illustrated through three scenarios whose technical feasibility was verified by the research team (not yet pedagogically tested in classrooms): elastic collision simulation (Physics, Grade 10), Monte Carlo area estimation (Mathematics, Grade 12), and automatic text classification (Informatics, Grade 10). The findings indicate that Vibe Coding can support STEM teaching when organized within a rigorous pedagogical process guided by the teacher. The study identifies limitations including the code-verification paradox, the risk of diminished algorithmic thinking, model hallucination, and academic-integrity challenges, and proposes a four-component teacher competency framework and a process-based assessment strategy.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Biermann, A. W. (1983). Natural language programming. In Computer program synthesis methodologies (pp. 335-368). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-7019-9_10
Bộ GD-ĐT (2018). Chương trình giáo dục phổ thông - Chương trình tổng thể (ban hành kèm theo Thông tư số 32/2018/TT-BGDĐT ngày 26/12/2018).
Bộ GD-ĐT (2020). Công văn số 3089/BGDĐT-GDTrH ngày 14/8/2020 về việc triển khai thực hiện giáo dục STEM trong giáo dục trung học.
Bộ GD-ĐT (2023). Công văn số 909/BGDĐT-GDTH ngày 08/3/2023 về việc hướng dẫn tổ chức hoạt động giáo dục STEM trong giáo dục tiểu học.
Cheng, L., Wang, X., & Ritzhaupt, A. D. (2023). The effects of computational thinking integration in STEM on students' learning performance in K-12 education: A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 61(2), 416-443. https://doi.org/10.1177/07356331221114183
Denny, P., Prather, J., Becker, B. A., Finnie-Ansley, J., Hellas, A., Leinonen, J., Luxton-Reilly, A., Reeves, B. N., Santos, E. A., & Sarsa, S. (2024). Computing education in the era of generative AI. Communications of the ACM, 67(2), 56-67. https://doi.org/10.1145/3624720
Dolgopolovas, V., & Dagienė, V. (2024). Competency-based TPACK approaches to computational thinking and integrated STEM: A conceptual exploration. Computer Applications in Engineering Education, 32(5), e22788. https://doi.org/10.1002/cae.22788
Karpathy, A. [@karpathy]. (2025). There's a new kind of coding I call “vibe coding” [Post]. X. https://x.com/karpathy/status/1886192184808149383
Khổng Thị Diễm Hằng (2023). Giáo dục STEM - Góc nhìn và bài học quốc tế. Tạp chí Giáo dục. https://tapchigiaoduc.edu.vn/article/88257/211/giao-duc-stem-goc-nhin-va-bai-hoc-quoc-te/
Li, Y., Schoenfeld, A. H., diSessa, A. A., Graesser, A. C., Benson, L. C., English, L. D., & Duschl, R. A. (2020). Computational thinking is more about thinking than computing. Journal for STEM Education Research, 3(1), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41979-020-00030-2
Liu, P., Yuan, W., Fu, J., Jiang, Z., Hayashi, H., & Neubig, G. (2023). Pre-train, prompt, and predict: A systematic survey of prompting methods in natural language processing. ACM Computing Surveys, 55(9), 1-35. https://doi.org/10.1145/3560815
Rodríguez-Martínez, J. A., González-Calero, J. A., & Sáez-López, J. M. (2020). Computational thinking and mathematics using Scratch. Interactive Learning Environments, 28(3), 316-327. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2019.1612448
Shute, V. J., Sun, C., & Asbell-Clarke, J. (2017). Demystifying computational thinking. Educational Research Review, 22, 142-158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2017.09.003
Wang, C., Shen, J., & Chao, J. (2022). Integrating computational thinking in STEM education: A literature review. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 20(8), 1949-1972. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-021-10227-5
Weintrop, D., Beheshti, E., Horn, M., Orton, K., Jona, K., Trouille, L., & Wilensky, U. (2016). Defining computational thinking for mathematics and science classrooms. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 25(1), 127-147. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-015-9581-5
Wing, J. M. (2006). Computational thinking. Communications of the ACM, 49(3), 33-35. https://doi.org/10.1145/1118178.1118215
Zhang, L., & Nouri, J. (2019). A systematic review of learning computational thinking through Scratch in K-9. Computers & Education, 141, 103607. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103607
Đã Xuất bản
Cách trích dẫn
Số
Chuyên mục
Giấy phép
Bản quyền (c) 2026 Tạp chí Giáo dục
Tác phẩm này được cấp phép theo Ghi nhận tác giả của Creative Commons Giấy phép quốc tế 4.0 .









