skip to main content
10.1145/1953163.1953352acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagessigcseConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

The use of evidence in the change making process of computer science educators

Published:09 March 2011Publication History

ABSTRACT

This paper explores the issue of what kind of evidence triggers changes in the teaching practice of Computer Science educators, and how educators evaluate the effectiveness of those changes. We interviewed 14 Computer Science instructors from three different institutions. Our study indicates that changes are mostly initiated from instructors' intuition, informal discussion with students, and anecdotal evidence.

References

  1. ABET: Leadership and quality assurance in applied science, computing, engineering, and technology education. http://www.abet.org/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. R. Baker and K. Yacef. The state of educational data mining in 2009: A review and future visions. Journal of Educational Data Mining, 1(1):3--17, October 2009.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. D. Blank, L. Meeden, and D. Kumar. Python robotics: an environment for exploring robotics beyond legos. In SIGCSE '03: Proceedings of the 34th SIGCSE technical symposium on Computer science education, pages 317--321, New York, NY, USA, 2003. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. L. Cassel, H. Gregory, and B. Nadella. Ensemble: Enriching communities and collections to support education in computing. In ITiCSE 2009, 14th Annual Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education, page 355, Paris, 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. A. Cooper, B. Levin, and C. Campbell. The growing (but still limited) importance of evidence in education policy and practice. Journal of Educational Change, 10(2--3):159--171, May 2009.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. W. P. Dann, S. Cooper, and R. Pausch. Learning to Program with Alice. Prentice Hall, 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. A. Disessa, M. Gardner, J. G. Greeno, F. Reif, A. H. Schoenfeld, and E. Stage. Toward a Scientific Practice of Science Education. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ, 1990.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. R. Donnelly. Exploring lecturers' self-perception of change in teaching practice. Teaching in Higher Education, 11(2):203--217, 2006.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. M. Felleisen, R. B. Findler, M. Flatt, and S. Krishnamurthi. How to Design Programs: An Introduction to Computing and Programming. The MIT Press, 2001. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. S. Fincher, R. Lister, T. Clear, A. Robins, J. Tenenberg, and M. Petre. Multi-institutional, multi-national studies in CSEd research: some design considerations and trade-offs. In ICER 2005, First International Workshop on Computing Education Research, pages 111--121, Seattle, WA, 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. S. Fincher and J. Tenenberg. Warren's question. In ICER 2007, Third International Computing Education Research Workshop, pages 51--60, September 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. D. Fossati, B. Di Eugenio, C. Brown, S. Ohlsson, D. Cosejo, and L. Chen. Supporting computer science curriculum: Exploring and learning linked lists with iList. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, Special Issue on Real-World Applications of Intelligent Tutoring Systems, 2(2):107--120, May 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. R. M. Gagné, L. J. Briggs, W. W. Wagner, K. Golas, and J. M. Keller. Principles of Instructional Design. Wadsworth, 5th edition, 2004.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. M. Guzdial and B. Ericson. Introduction to Computing and Programming with Java: A Multimedia Approach. Prentice Hall, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. D. Knox. Citidel: Making resources available. In ITiCSE 2002, 7th Annual Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education, page 225, Aarhus, Denmark, 2002. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. R. B.-B. Levy and M. Ben-Ari. We work so hard and they don't use it: Acceptance of software tools by teachers. In ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, volume 39, pages 246--250, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. R. Lister, E. S. Adams, S. Fitzgerald, W. Fone, J. Hamer, M. Lindholm, R. McCartney, J. E. Moström, K. Sanders, O. Seppala, B. Simon, and L. Thomas. A multi-national study of reading and tracing skills in novice programmers. In ITiCSE-WGR '04: Working group reports from ITiCSE on Innovation and technology in computer science education, pages 119--150, 2004. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. M. McCracken, V. Almstrum, D. Diaz, M. Guzdial, D. Hagan, Y. B.-D. Kolikant, C. Laxer, L. Thomas, I. Utting, and T. Wilusz. A multi-national, multi-institutional study of assessment of programming skills of first-year CS students. SIGCSE Bulletin, 33(4):125--180, 2001. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. C. McDowell, L. Werner, H. E. Bullock, and J. Fernald. Pair programming improves student retention, confidence, and program quality. Communications of the ACM, 49(8):90--95, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. A. Mitrović, P. Suraweera, B. Martin, and A. Weerasinghe. DB-suite: Experiences with three intelligent, web-based database tutors. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 15(4):409--432, 2004.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. L. Ni. What makes CS teachers change? factors influencing CS teachers' adoption of curriculum innovations. In SIGCSE 09, The 40th ACM technical symposium on Computer science education, pages 544--548, Chattanooga, TN, 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. L. Ni, T. McKlin, and M. Guzdial. How do computing faculty adopt curriculum innovations? the story from instructors. In SIGCSE 10, the 41st ACM technical symposium on Computer science education, pages 544--548, Milwaukee, WI, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. M. Resnick, J. Maloney, A. Monroy-Hernández, N. Rusk, E. Eastmond, K. Brennan, A. Millner, E. Rosenbaum, J. Silver, B. Silverman, and Y. Kafai. Scratch: Programming for all. Communications of the ACM, 52(11):60--67, 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. H. A. Simon. Sciences of the Artificial. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1996. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. J. T. Stasko and C. D. Hundhausen. Algorithm visualization. In S. Fincher and M. Petre, editors, Computer Science Education Research, chapter 6, pages 199--228. Routledge, London, 2004.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. J. Tenenberg and S. Fincher. Opening the door of the computer science classroom: The disciplinary commons. In SIGCSE 2007, 38th SIGCSE technical symposium on Computer Science Education, pages 514--518, Covington, KY, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. The use of evidence in the change making process of computer science educators

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      SIGCSE '11: Proceedings of the 42nd ACM technical symposium on Computer science education
      March 2011
      754 pages
      ISBN:9781450305006
      DOI:10.1145/1953163

      Copyright © 2011 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 9 March 2011

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      SIGCSE '11 Paper Acceptance Rate107of315submissions,34%Overall Acceptance Rate1,595of4,542submissions,35%

      Upcoming Conference

      SIGCSE Virtual 2024
      SIGCSE Virtual 2024: ACM Virtual Global Computing Education Conference
      November 30 - December 1, 2024
      Virtual Event , USA

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader