What Do CS1 Syllabi Reveal About Our Expectations of Introductory Programming Students?

Abstract

PublisherACM PressLink to online version https://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=3287485Item record/more information http://hdl.handle. ABSTRACTA well-received ITiCSE 2016 paper challenged the orthodox view that programming is hard to learn. It contended that CS1 educators' expectations are too high, which can result in poor teaching and learning, and could impact negatively on diversity and equity. The author posed a challenge to the community to collect researchbased evidence of what novice programmers can achieve, and use evidence to derive realistic expectations for achievement. We argue that before rising to this challenge we must determine: What exactly do educators expect of introductory programming students? This paper presents our efforts toward answering this question. We manually curated hundreds of CS1 syllabi, providing a fresh perspective of expectation in CS1 courses. We analyzed learning outcomes and their concepts, in addition to languages utilized and other useful CS1 design and delivery information.This work contributes to a current picture of what is expected of introductory programming students, and provides an interactive online tool linked to all collected syllabi and containing all learning outcomes and other associated information. We hope this will aid the community in deciding whether or not we have unrealistic expectations of our CS1 students and if so, our contributions provide a starting point for the community to adjust them.

The First Programming Language and Freshman Year in Computer Science: Characterization and Tips for Better Decision Making

“…A document [10] for 152 CS1 units from a number of different countries concludes that Java is by far the most common CS1 language, used in 74 (49%) of the 152 programs. The second most frequent is Python, with 36 (24%).…”

Programming is Fun! A Survey of the STEAM Digital Distribution Platform

“…During evaluation process, a classification criteria was considered following the research questions, categorizing games mainly by a) main genre, b) type of command enter interface, and c) the set of learning outcome concepts covered. As for the the latter, the list was selected following the 2019 study by Becker and Fitzpatrick [13], which identifies the 15 most frequent learning outcome concepts included among 237 CS curricula by 207 different institutions around the world. Only concepts directly represented within the core gameplay were considered (i.e.…”

An Analysis of Distributed Systems Syllabi With a Focus on Performance-Related Topics

“…Our analysis seeks to find trends and patterns within good syllabi, as indicated by their inclusion in ranked programs. This is a common approach in syllabi studies, e.g., see [3,10]. However, any biases in the rankings may bias the results (e.g., by biasing towards research universities [3]).…”

“…This is a common approach in syllabi studies, e.g., see [3,10]. However, any biases in the rankings may bias the results (e.g., by biasing towards research universities [3]). Our data likely over-samples from anglophone countries (searches were in English), and from instructors who are comfortable sharing their syllabi.…”

“…The manual collection and curation approach has its limitations and we could have missed some courses, specially if they do not contain "distributed" in their name. There may be reinforcement bias among the selected syllabi, as many syllabi are designed by consulting model curricula or are inspired from more established syllabi at other universities [3].…”