When do group projects widen the student experience gap?

Proceedings of the 10th Annual SIGCSE Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education

Volumn , Issue , 2005, Pages 276-280

  Barker, Lecia J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO   (United States)

Author keywords

Collaboration; Group learning; Project courses; Women in computing

Indexed keywords

GROUP LEARNING; PROJECT COURSES; WOMEN IN LEARNING;

COMPUTER SCIENCE; CURRICULA; SOCIAL ASPECTS; STUDENTS; TEACHING;

EDUCATION;

EID: 29844439416     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1145/1067445.1067521     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (28)

1. Cooper, C.R., Ayers-Lopez, S., & Marquis, A. (1982). Children's discourse during peer learning in experimental and naturalistic situations. Discourse Processes, 5, 177-191.
2. Agogino, A.M. & Linn, M. (1992), Retaining female engineering students: Will design experiences Help? NSF Directions, 5 (2), 8-9.
3. Borgo, S. L. (1992). Ideology and science: An interpretive analysis of research on gender, computers, and education. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Virginia.
4. Brown, A., Bransford, J., & Cocking, R. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience and School. Washington D.C.: National Academy Press.
5. Busch, T. (1995). Gender differences in self-efficacy and attitudes toward computers. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 12, 147-158.
6. Cohoon, J. M. (2002). Recruiting and retaining women in undergraduate computing majors. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin. 34(2).
7. Computer Society of the Institute for Electrical and Electronic Engineers and the Association for Computing Machinery Joint Task Force. Computing Curricula 2001. URL: http://www.computer.org/education/cc2001/final/index.htm.
8. Felder, R.M., Felder, G.N., Mauney, M., Hamrin Jr.,C.E., & Dietz, E.J. (1995). A longitudinal study of engineering student performance and retention. III. Gender differences in student performance and attitudes. Journal of Engineering Education, 84, 151-174.
9. Fisher, A. J., Margolis, J., & Miller, F. (1997).Undergraduate women in computer science: experience, motivation and culture. Proceedings of the 28th SIGCSE Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, San Jose, CA,
10. Forman, E. A., & Cazden, C. B. (1985). Exploring Vygotskian perspectives in education: the cognitive value of peer interaction. In J. V. Wertsch (Ed.), Culture, communication, and cognition: Vygotskian perspectives. New York: Cambridge University Press.
11. Forsyth, D. R. An introduction to group dynamics. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole, 1983.
12. Goodness, J. M. (1990). Factors which influence women's decision to major in computer science in college. Unpublished Ed.d. Thesis, Nashville, TN, Peabody College for Teachers of Vanderbilt University.
13. Graesser, A. C., Person, N. K., & Magliano, J. P. (1995). Collaborative dialogue patterns in naturalistic one-to-one tutoring. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 9, 495-522.
14. Hake, R. (1998). Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: A six thousand student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics students. American Journal of Physics, 66 (1), 64-73.
15. Haller, C.R., Gallagher, V.J. Weldon, T. L. & Felder, R. M. (2000).Dynamics of peer education in cooperative learning workgroups. Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 89, pp. 285-293.
16. Johnson D. W. & Johnson, R.T. (1994). Learning together and alone: Cooperative, competitive and individualistic learning. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
17. Margolis, J. & Fisher, A. (2002). Unlocking the clubhouse: Women in computing, MIT Press.
18. McDowell, C., Werner, L., Bullock, H., & Fernald, J. (2002). The effects of pair-programming on performance in an introductory programming class, Proceedings of the 33rd SIGCSE Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, Northern Kentucky, KY.
19. Mead, G. H. (1934), Mind, self, and society. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
20. Poulis, J., & Massen, C. (1997). Physics lecturing with audience feedback. American Journal of Physics, 66, 75-81.
21. Roberts, E. (2000). Strategies for encouraging individual achievement in introductory computer science classes, Proceedings of the 31st SIGCSE Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, Austin, TX,
22. Slavin, R. E. (1989). Cooperative learning and student achievement: Six theoretical perspectives. In M. L. Maehr and C. Ames (Eds.) Advances in motivation and achievement: Motivation enhancing environments, 6, 161-177. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, Inc.
23. Strenta, A. C., Rogers, E., Russell, A., Matier, M., & Scott. J. (1994). Choosing and leaving science in highly selective institutions, Research in Higher Education, 35(5), 513-547.
24. Tinzmann, M. B., Jones, B. F., Fennimore, T. F., Bakker, J., Fine, C., & Pierce J. (1990). What is the collaborative classroom? North Central Regional Educational Laboratory, URL: http://www.ncrel.org/sdrs/areas/rpl_esys/ collab.htm
25. Tracy, K. (2002). Everyday talk: Building and reflecting identities. New York: The Guilford Press.
26. Webb, N. M., & Palincsar, A. S. (1996). Group processes in the classroom. In D. C. Berliner and R. C. Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of Educational Psychology (841-873).
27. Weston, T. J. & L. J. Barker, (2002). Student computing in higher education: A profile of student use, training, and proficiency. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 14(1), 107-127.
28. Williams, L. A. (2000). Strengthening the case for pair programming, IEEE Software, 17(4), 17-25.