In these proceedings, we present reports from the Working Groups that worked in the context of the 25th Annual Conference on Innovation & Technology in Computer Science Education (ITiCSE), held virtually at the Norwegian University of Science & Technology, Trondheim, Norway from June 17-18, 2020.
The concept of Working Groups has been a unique feature since the start of the ITiCSE conference series, with CompEd adopting the Working Group practice in 2019. A Working Group comprises of typically 5 to 10 researchers who work together on a project related to computing education. Working Groups provide a wonderful opportunity to work intensively on a topic of interest with an international group of computing education researchers. Working groups begin work electronically before the ITiCSE conference. They convene for face-to-face work three days before the conference (usually on the Friday evening), work together during the two days before the conference starts, and continue working throughout the three days of the conference. At the end of the conference, each group submits a draft report and a few weeks after the conference they submit a final report for review. If the report is accepted, the groups revise it based on the reviewers' comments and suggestions for the camera-ready version that is going to be published as a dedicated Working Group proceedings volume in the ACM Digital Library. This unique experience is one that, in our opinion, each Computer Science Educator should strive to participate in at least once.
In 2020, 17 proposals for Working Groups were received and ten Working Groups were selected by the Working Group chairs to recruit members and proceed for ITiCSE 2020. Shortly after this decision, the Corona Pandemic reached Europe, and it was determined that ITiCSE 2020 would have to be held virtually. Apart from all other complications that this caused for everybody, it also made the Working Group process much more challenging, as the five days spent together in a room to perform further analysis, finalise the work and draft the report, had to be replaced by other approaches such as video conferencing, which were further hampered by other work obligations and the wide spread of different timezones within each Working Group. This scenario caused one Working Group to withdraw, as the work they had planned did not seem achievable in this way.
The final reports were double blind reviewed by at least two - mostly three - selected expert reviewers, and we are glad that eight reports were selected for publication in these proceedings for the ACM Digital Library.
Proceeding Downloads
Choosing Code Segments to Exclude from Code Similarity Detection
When student programs are compared for similarity as a step in the detection of academic misconduct, certain segments of code are always sure to be similar but are no cause for suspicion. Some of these segments are boilerplate code (e.g. public static ...
Notional Machines in Computing Education: The Education of Attention
- Sally Fincher,
- Johan Jeuring,
- Craig S. Miller,
- Peter Donaldson,
- Benedict du Boulay,
- Matthias Hauswirth,
- Arto Hellas,
- Felienne Hermans,
- Colleen Lewis,
- Andreas Mühling,
- Janice L. Pearce,
- Andrew Petersen
This report defines notional machines (NMs), and provides a series of definitional characteristics by which they may be identified. Over several sections, it includes a first-hand report of the origin of NMs, reports a systematic literature review to ...
High Performance Computing Education: Current Challenges and Future Directions
- Rajendra K. Raj,
- Carol J. Romanowski,
- John Impagliazzo,
- Sherif G. Aly,
- Brett A. Becker,
- Juan Chen,
- Sheikh Ghafoor,
- Nasser Giacaman,
- Steven I. Gordon,
- Cruz Izu,
- Shahram Rahimi,
- Michael P. Robson,
- Neena Thota
High Performance Computing (HPC) is the ability to process data and perform complex calculations at extremely high speeds. Current HPC platforms can achieve calculations on the order of quadrillions of calculations per second, with quintillions on the ...
Differentiated Assessments for Advanced Courses that Reveal Issues with Prerequisite Skills: A Design Investigation
- Greg L. Nelson,
- Filip Strömbäck,
- Ari Korhonen,
- Marjahan Begum,
- Ben Blamey,
- Karen H. Jin,
- Violetta Lonati,
- Bonnie MacKellar,
- Mattia Monga
Computing learners may not master basic concepts, or forget them between courses or from infrequent use. Learners also often struggle with advanced computing courses, perhaps from weakness with prerequisite concepts. One underlying challenge for ...
Model Augmented Reality Curriculum
- Mikhail Fominykh,
- Fridolin Wild,
- Ralf Klamma,
- Mark Billinghurst,
- Lisandra S. Costiner,
- Andrey Karsakov,
- Eleni Mangina,
- Judith Molka-Danielsen,
- Ian Pollock,
- Marius Preda,
- Aljosa Smolic
Augmented Reality (AR) is a rapidly growing field in information and communication technologies, drawing increasing numbers of professionals. Higher education institutions, however, are struggling to keep abreast of its development and to train ...
Cloud Computing Curriculum: Developing Exemplar Modules for General Course Inclusion
- Joshua Adams,
- Brian Hainey,
- Laurie White,
- Derek Foster,
- Narine Hall,
- Mark Hills,
- Sara Hooshangi,
- Karthik Kuber,
- Sajid Nazir,
- Majd Sakr,
- Lee Stott,
- Carmen Taglienti
The accelerating evolution and adoption of cloud computing services is generating increased demand for job skills in this domain. To address this growth, higher education has identified the importance of cloud computing courses that deliver practical ...
Mapping the Landscape of Peer Review in Computing Education Research
- Marian Petre,
- Kate Sanders,
- Robert McCartney,
- Marzieh Ahmadzadeh,
- Cornelia Connolly,
- Sally Hamouda,
- Brian Harrington,
- Jérémie Lumbroso,
- Joseph Maguire,
- Lauri Malmi,
- Monica M. McGill,
- Jan Vahrenhold
Peer review is a mainstay of academic publication -- indeed, it is the peer-review process that provides much of the publications' credibility. As the number of computing education conferences and the number of submissions increase, the need for ...
Designing Computer Science Competency Statements: A Process and Curriculum Model for the 21st Century
- Alison Clear,
- Tony Clear,
- Abhijat Vichare,
- Thea Charles,
- Stephen Frezza,
- Mirela Gutica,
- Barry Lunt,
- Francesco Maiorana,
- Arnold Pears,
- Francois Pitt,
- Charles Riedesel,
- Justyna Szynkiewicz
The broadly influential document Computing Curricula 2005 (CC2005) is in the process of being updated through a project called Computing Curricula 2020 (CC2020). CC2020 provides a vision for the future of computing education, including a comprehensive ...
- Proceedings of the Working Group Reports on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education
Recommendations
Acceptance Rates
Year | Submitted | Accepted | Rate |
---|---|---|---|
ITiCSE-WGR '17 | 16 | 8 | 50% |
ITiCSE '17 | 175 | 56 | 32% |
ITiCSE '16 | 147 | 56 | 38% |
ITiCSE '16 | 11 | 7 | 64% |
ITICSE-WGR '15 | 7 | 7 | 100% |
ITiCSE '15 | 124 | 54 | 44% |
ITiCSE '14 | 164 | 36 | 22% |
ITiCSE '13 | 161 | 51 | 32% |
ITiCSE -WGR '13 | 4 | 4 | 100% |
ITiCSE '09 | 205 | 66 | 32% |
ITiCSE '08 | 150 | 60 | 40% |
ITiCSE '07 | 210 | 62 | 30% |
ITiCSE '02 | 100 | 42 | 42% |
ITiCSE '01 | 139 | 43 | 31% |
Overall | 1,613 | 552 | 34% |