UW CSE 590E 19au Reading List
Week | Date | Topic | Readings |
1 | 9/26 | Intros & 18au-19sp Summary | |
2 | 10/03 | Programming Languages vs. Natural Languages | Scott R. Portnoff. 2018. The introductory computer programming course is first and foremost a language course. ACM Inroads 9, 2 (April 2018), 34-52. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/3152433 |
3 | 10/10 | Grading & Assessment I | Brandon Rodriguez, Stephen Kennicutt, Cyndi Rader, and Tracy Camp. 2017. Assessing Computational Thinking in CS Unplugged Activities. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM SIGCSE Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (SIGCSE '17). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 501-506. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/3017680.3017779 |
4 | 10/17 | Grading & Assessment II | lharfialbluwi, I. S. M. (2018). A Closer Look at the Differences between Graders in Introductory Computer Science Exams. IEEE Transactions on Education, 61(3), 253-260. [8319499]. https://doi.org/10.1109/TE.2018.2805706 |
5 | 10/24 | Education and Learning Theory | Kapur, Manu. “Productive Failure in Learning Math.” Cognitive Science, vol. 38, no. 5, 2014, pp. 1008–1022. https://onlinelibrary-wiley-com.offcampus.lib.washington.edu/doi/full/10.1111/cogs.12107 |
6 | 10/31 | Computational Thinking/Fluency/Literacy | J. Wing, “Computational Thinking,” Communications of the ACM, vol. 49, no. 3, pp. 33-35, Mar. 2006, doi: 10.1145/1118178.1118215. S. Grover and R. Pea, “Computational Thinking in K–12: A Review of the State of the Field,” Educational Researcher, vol. 42, no. 1, pp. 38-43, Jan. 2013, doi: 10.3102/0013189X12463051. E. Wiebe, J. London, O. Aksit, B.W. Mott, K.E. Boyer, and J.C. Lester, “Development of a Lean Computational Thinking Abilities Assessment for Middle Grades Students,” In Proceedings of the 50th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (SIGCSE '19). New York, NY, USA: ACM, 2019, pp. 456-461. doi: 10.1145/3287324.3287390. M. Roman-Gonzalez, J. Perez-Gonzalez, and C. Jimenez-Fernandez, “Which cognitive abilities underlie computational thinking? Criterion validity of the Computational Thinking Test,” Computers in Human Behavior, vol. 72, pp. 678-691, Jul. 2017, doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2016.08.047. |
7 | 11/07 | Active Learning / Peer Instruction I | Measuring actual learning versus feeling of learning in response to being actively engaged in the classroom. Louis Deslauriers, Logan S. McCarty, Kelly Miller, Kristina Callaghan, and Greg Kestin. PNAS September 24, 2019 116 (39) 19251-19257; first published September 4, 2019 https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1821936116 |
8 | 11/14 | Active Learning / Peer Instruction II | PORTAAL: a classroom observation tool assessing evidence-based teaching practices for active learning in large science, technology, engineering, and mathematics classes. Sarah L. Eddy, Mercedes Converse, and Mary Pat Wenderoth; CBE-Life Sciences Education 14, no. 2 (2015): ar23. |
9 | 11/21 | Teaching Strategies for Advanced CS (things other than CS1 & 2) | Adrian Lara and Luis Quesada. 2019. A Project-based Learning Experience in a Compilers Course. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Global Computing Education (CompEd '19). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 136-142. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/3300115.3309502 Sean Kross and Philip J. Guo. 2019. Practitioners Teaching Data Science in Industry and Academia: Expectations, Workflows, and Challenges. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '19). ACM, New York, NY, USA, Paper 263, 14 pages. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/3290605.3300493 Dinesh P. Mehta and Jack Rosenthal. 2019. AlgoBOWL: A Competition-Based Group Project for Algorithms Courses. In Proceedings of the 2019 ACM Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education (ITiCSE '19). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 471-477. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/3304221.3319761 |
10 | 11/28 | NO CLASS THANKSGIVING | |
11 | 12/05 | Practitioner reflections, share a tip/technique/problem & Wrapup |
Questions? Ruth Anderson (rea@cs.washington.edu)