Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]

skip to main content
10.1145/2157136.2157318acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagessigcseConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Effective closed labs in early CS courses: lessons from eight terms of action research

Published: 29 February 2012 Publication History

Abstract

We report on best practices we have established to teach first-year computer science students in closed laboratories, founded on over three years of action research in a large introductory discrete mathematics and digital logic course. Our practices have resulted in statistically significant improvements in student and teaching assistant perception of the labs. Specifically, we discuss our practices of streamlining labs to reduce load on students that is extraneous to the lab's learning goals; establishing a positive first impression for students and TAs in the early weeks of the term; and effectively managing the teaching staff, including weekly preparation meetings for TAs using and a gradual, iterative curriculum development cycle that engages all stakeholders in the course.

References

[1]
Logisim. http://ozark.hendrix.edu/~burch/logisim/.
[2]
TKGate. http://www.tkgate.org.
[3]
D. E. Comer, D. Gries, M. C. Mulder, A. Tucker, A. J. Turner, and P. R. Young. Computing as a discipline. Commun. ACM, 32:9--23, January 1989.
[4]
T. de~Jong. Cognitive load theory, educational research, and instructional design: some food for thought. Instructional Science, 38:105--134, 2010. 10.1007/s11251-009--9110-0.
[5]
C. Deacon and A. Hajek. Student perceptions of the value of physics laboratories. International Journal of Science Education, 33(7):943--977, 2011.
[6]
D. Dunning, K. Johnson, J. Ehrlinger, and J. Kruger. Why people fail to recognize their own incompetence. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 12(3):83--87, 2003.
[7]
A. Fekete and A. Greening. Designing closed laboratories for a computer science course. SIGCSE Bull., 28:295--299, March 1996.
[8]
S. Fincher and J. Tenenberg. Warren's question. In Proceedings of the third international workshop on Computing education research, ICER '07, pages 51--60, New York, NY, USA, 2007. ACM.
[9]
E. A. Jones. Special issue: Transforming the curriculum: Preparing students for a changing world. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report, 29(3):1--101, 2002.
[10]
R. E. Mayer, E. Griffith, I. T. N. Jurkowitz, and D. Rothman. Increased interestingness of extraneous details in a multimedia science presentation leads to decreased learning. Journal of experimental psychology Applied, 14(4):329--339, 2008.
[11]
R. O'Brien. An overview of the methodological approach of action research. Theory and Practice of Action Research, 1998. English version.
[12]
C. O'Neal, M. Wright, C. Cook, T. Perorazio, and J. Purkiss. The impact of teaching assistants on student retention in the sciences: Lessons for TA training. Journal of College Science Teaching, 36(5):24--29, 2007.
[13]
B. C. Parker and J. D. McGregor. A goal-oriented approach to laboratory development and implementation. In Proceedings of the twenty-sixth SIGCSE technical symposium on Computer science education, SIGCSE '95, pages 92--96, New York, NY, USA, 1995. ACM.
[14]
E. Patitsas, K. Voll, M. Crowley, and S. Wolfman. Circuits and logic in the lab: toward a coherent picture of computation. In WCCCE '10: Proceedings of the 15th Western Canadian Conference on Computing Education, pages 1--5, New York, NY, USA, 2010. ACM.
[15]
B. E. Walvoord, V. J. Anderson, T. A. Angelo, and V. J. Anderson. Effective Grading: A Tool for Learning and Assessment. Jossey-Bass, 1998.

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Logic Circuits Unveiled: Bridging the Gap between Discrete Mathematics and Computer Science EducationProceedings of the 26th Western Canadian Conference on Computing Education10.1145/3660650.3660653(1-7)Online publication date: 2-May-2024
  • (2019)Undergraduate Teaching Assistants in Computer ScienceProceedings of the 2019 ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research10.1145/3291279.3339422(31-40)Online publication date: 30-Jul-2019
  • (2017)Nailing the TA InterviewProceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education10.1145/3059009.3059057(128-133)Online publication date: 28-Jun-2017
  • Show More Cited By

Index Terms

  1. Effective closed labs in early CS courses: lessons from eight terms of action research

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

    Information & Contributors

    Information

    Published In

    cover image ACM Conferences
    SIGCSE '12: Proceedings of the 43rd ACM technical symposium on Computer Science Education
    February 2012
    734 pages
    ISBN:9781450310987
    DOI:10.1145/2157136
    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]

    Sponsors

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    Published: 29 February 2012

    Permissions

    Request permissions for this article.

    Check for updates

    Author Tags

    1. computer science education
    2. curriculum development
    3. curriculum evaluation
    4. labs
    5. survey
    6. teaching assistants

    Qualifiers

    • Research-article

    Conference

    SIGCSE '12
    Sponsor:
    SIGCSE '12: The 43rd ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education
    February 29 - March 3, 2012
    North Carolina, Raleigh, USA

    Acceptance Rates

    SIGCSE '12 Paper Acceptance Rate 100 of 289 submissions, 35%;
    Overall Acceptance Rate 1,595 of 4,542 submissions, 35%

    Upcoming Conference

    SIGCSE Virtual 2024
    1st ACM Virtual Global Computing Education Conference
    December 5 - 8, 2024
    Virtual Event , NC , USA

    Contributors

    Other Metrics

    Bibliometrics & Citations

    Bibliometrics

    Article Metrics

    • Downloads (Last 12 months)10
    • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)1
    Reflects downloads up to 19 Nov 2024

    Other Metrics

    Citations

    Cited By

    View all
    • (2024)Logic Circuits Unveiled: Bridging the Gap between Discrete Mathematics and Computer Science EducationProceedings of the 26th Western Canadian Conference on Computing Education10.1145/3660650.3660653(1-7)Online publication date: 2-May-2024
    • (2019)Undergraduate Teaching Assistants in Computer ScienceProceedings of the 2019 ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research10.1145/3291279.3339422(31-40)Online publication date: 30-Jul-2019
    • (2017)Nailing the TA InterviewProceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education10.1145/3059009.3059057(128-133)Online publication date: 28-Jun-2017
    • (2012)A case study of environmental factors influencing teaching assistant job satisfactionProceedings of the ninth annual international conference on International computing education research10.1145/2361276.2361280(11-16)Online publication date: 9-Sep-2012

    View Options

    Login options

    View options

    PDF

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    Media

    Figures

    Other

    Tables

    Share

    Share

    Share this Publication link

    Share on social media