The following four Working Groups will be running at CompEd 2019. Working Groups provide a wonderful opportunity to work collaboratively on a project with international colleagues.
Working Group 2: An International Investigation into Online Judge Systems for Programming Education.
Working Group 3: A Multi-National Investigation of the Barriers to Adopting the Peer Instruction Pedagogical Approach in Computing Courses.
Working Group 4: Teaching of computing ethics: an international review prompted by the new ACM code of ethics and professional conduct.
Please scroll down for full descriptions and contact details.
Please note the following:
- Each Working Group has a minimum of five members (including leaders) and a maximum of ten members.
- Working Groups will commence work officially in mid-January and convene for face-to-face work at CompEd in May.
- Working Group meetings at CompEd will commence on Monday evening on 13 May and will conclude at midday on Thursday 16 May 2019.
- Each Working Group will be required to submit a rough draft of their report by midday on Thursday 16 May 2019. Subsequently a full draft will be expected for review.
- Working Group members must register for and be present at the CompEd conference (17-19 May, 2019) in order to be considered a contributor to the final report.
- Please see the Working Group FAQ at www.acmcomped.org/faq/.
- For all other enquiries please contact the Working Group Chair, Judy Sheard: judy.sheard@monash.edu.
Working Group 2: An International Investigation into Online Judge Systems for Programming Education.
Leaders:
Wenxin Li, Peking University, China: lwx@pku.edu.cn
Guojie Luo, Peking University, China: gluo@pku.edu.cn
Additional members:
Yue Chen, Zhejiang University, China
Yingjie Wu, Fuzhou University, China
Qinjian Zhang, Peking University, China
Zhongxuan Du, hihoCoder, China
Chunying Liu, Hangzhou Dianzi University, China
Juan Chen, National University of Defense Technology, China
Nasser Giacaman, University of Auckland, New Zealand
Amey Karkare, Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur, India
Abstract: Online Judge (OJ) Systems were initially designed for competitive programming contests. An OJ provides web services to evaluate the correctness of programming problems. It becomes popular for general programming education in colleges, secondary schools, and even primary schools, due to its capability to compose programming exercises and exams.
The working group will gather OJ developers, operators, and users to consolidate a big picture and trends of OJ systems. Specifically, we will organize discussions in the following aspects.
- System design, where we define the feature sets, the architecture, and the operation of desired OJ systems.
- Teaching, where we compile the experiences and suggestions on how to use OJ systems for course design, problem set design, and assessment.
- Self-education, where we discuss the challenges and potential solutions for the generation of personalized learning guides and interactive instructions (by automation or by crowdsourcing).
- Advanced features, where we survey the status and trends in the features like user clustering and analysis, learning pattern mining, and problem classification, etc.
Much of the survey, reading, and analysis will be conducted in the months between the formation of the working group and the start of CompEd 2019, so that the face-to-face meeting of the group can focus on discussion, synthesis, and writing. As a result of this working group, we will generate a report on the big picture of the next-generation OJ systems. The new OJs are promising to scale and make programming a common skill for the masses.
Potential participants, please also include in your application information about the OJ that you have developed or operated, e.g., a brief introduction, the website, and the number of users/problems/submissions.
Working Group 3: A Multi-National Investigation of the Barriers to Adopting the Peer Instruction Pedagogical Approach in Computing Courses.
Leaders:
Dennis Bouvier, Southern Illinois University Edwardsville, USA: dbouvie@siue.edu
John Matta, Southern Illinois University Edwardsville, USA: jmatta@siue.edu
Ellie Lovellette, Southern Illinois University Edwardsville, USA : elovell@siue.edu
Additional members:
Jia Wan, Randolph College, USA
Stan Kurkovsky, Central Connecticut State University, USA
Jacqui Chetty, University of Kent, UK
Annappa, National Institute of Technology Karnataka, India
Jing Bai, Washtenaw Community College, USA
Abstract: The use of Peer Instruction (PI) in computing courses has grown in recent years. Studies have shown the effectiveness of PI in these courses. However, few studies have been published regarding the barriers to adoption or reasons for abandonment. This working group proposes to study issues of adoption and abandonment of Peer Instruction in computing courses.
The Working Group leaders have defined three possible mechanisms to study PI adoption and abandonment. First, the Working Group members will design and distribute a survey that solicits the experiences of instructors who adopted, tried to adopt, or adopted and abandoned the use of PI in computing courses. Second, we hope to recruit Working Group members who have not used Peer Instruction, assist them in learning about it, and help them use peer instruction in a computing course in the January to May 2019 timeframe. Third, we hope to recruit Working Group members who have used Peer Instruction, especially those who have abandoned it. These Working Group participants would be able to contribute an experience report highlighting the reason(s) for the abandonment.
Selection criteria for participants are either (a) instructors scheduled to teach an introduction to programming course in the January to May 2019 timeframe who have not used peer instruction before and are committed to trying Peer Instruction in the course, (b) experienced Peer Instruction instructors who have used and abandoned PI, or (c) experienced Peer Instruction instructors.
Working Group 4: Teaching of computing ethics: an international review prompted by the new ACM code of ethics and professional conduct.
Leader:
Janet Hughes, The Open University, UK: janet.hughes@open.ac.uk
Additional members:
Cheryl Brown, University of North Carolina at Charlotte, USA
Ethan Plaut, University of Auckland, New Zealand
Gerry Cross, Mount Royal University, Calgary, Canada
Viraj Kumar, Institute of Science, Bangalore, India
Paul Myers, Trinity University, Texas, USA
Feng Wang, Smart Agriculture College of Suzhou Polytechnic Institute of Agriculture, Suzhou, China
Elizabeth van Briesen, University of North Carolina at Charlotte, USA
Abstract: Revision in 2018 of the 1992 ACM code of ethics and professional conduct provides an excellent opportunity to review the various influences upon ethics teaching, internationally. Have industrial bodies become more important than professional bodies? Is there a lack of transparency about instances of unprofessional conduct and its consequences? Do government plans or business culture transcend existing national culture? The aim of this working group is to derive a set of international comparisons about the teaching of ethics and professional conduct, to:
- extend understanding international approaches and spread best practice
- appraise the relevance of professional bodies and promote the ACM code
- recognise the significance of industrial bodies
Prior to the conference, the working group will:
- Review published literature to establish current approaches to teaching ethics
- Perform desktop/survey research to explore these questions
The two goals of this working group are to: (i) identify current international practice integrating national, professional, industrial and ACM influences on the evolution of curricula and (ii) recommend appropriate pedagogies for teaching of computing ethics in this ‘global age’.
We seek a diversity of international input: ethics teaching, professional bodies and/or industry involvement.