Developing a computer science-specific learning taxonomy

ITiCSE-WGR 2007 - Working Group Reports on ITiCSE on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education

Volumn , Issue , 2007, Pages 152-170

  Fuller, Ursula ^a   Johnson, Colin G ^a   Ahoniemi, Tuukka ^b   Cukierman, Diana ^c   Hernán Losada, Isidoro ^d   Jackova, Jana ^e   Lahtinen, Essi ^b   Lewis, Tracy L ^f   Thompson, Donna McGee ^c   Riedesel, Charles ^g   Thompson, Errol ^h  

^a UNIVERSITY OF KENT   (United Kingdom)

^b TAMPERE UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Finland)

^c SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^d UNIVERSIDAD REY JUAN CARLOS   (Spain)

^e UNIVERSITY OF ILINA   (Slovakia)

^f RADFORD UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^g UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA LINCOLN   (United States)

^h MASSEY UNIVERSITY   (New Zealand)

Author keywords

Assessment; Benchmarking; Computer science education; Credit transfer; Curricula; Taxonomies of learning

Indexed keywords

BENCHMARKING; COMPUTER PROGRAMMING; CURRICULA; EDUCATION; EDUCATION COMPUTING; ENGINEERING RESEARCH; TAXONOMIES;

APPLICATION-ORIENTED; ASSESSMENT; BLOOM'S TAXONOMY; COGNITIVE DOMAIN; COMPUTER SCIENCE EDUCATION; CREDIT TRANSFER; SPECIFIC LEARNING;

ENGINEERING EDUCATION;

EID: 85027564431     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1145/1345443.1345438     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (73)

1. Agencia Nacional de Evaluación de la Calidad y Acreditación. 2005. Título de Grado en Ingeniería Informática.
2. Ala-Mutka, K.M. A survey of automated assessment approaches for programming assignments. Computer Science Education 15, 83-102, 2005.
3. Anderson, L.W., Krathwohl, D.R., Airasian, P.W., Cruikshank, K.A., Mayer, R.E., Pintrich, P.R., Raths, J. and Wittrock, M.C., Eds. 2001. A taxonomy for learning and teaching and assessing: A revision of Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives. Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.
4. Azuma, M., Coallier, F. and Garbajosa, J. How to apply the Bloom taxonomy to software engineering. Software Technology and Engineering Practice: Eleventh Annual International Workshop on, 19-21 Sept. 2003, 117-122.
5. Biggs, J.B. and Collis, K.F. 1982. Evaluating the quality of learning: The SOLO taxonomy (Structure of the Observed Learning Outcome). Academic Press, New York.
6. Biggs, J.B. Teaching for quality learning at university. Open University Press, Buckingham, 1999.
7. Bloom, B.S., Engelhart, M.D., Furst, E.J., Hill, W.H. and Krathwohl, D.R. 1956. Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: Handbook 1 Cognitive Domain. Longmans, Green and Co Ltd, London.
8. Bologna Secretariat. Framework of qualifications for the European Higher Education Area, 2005.
9. Box, I. Assessing the assessment: An empirical study of an information systems development subject. Proceedings of the fifth Australasian conference on Computing education - Volume 20, Adelaide, Australia, Australian Computer Society, Inc., 2003.
10. Buck, D. and Stucki, D. J. Design Early Considered Harmful: Graduated Exposure to Complexity and Structure Based on Levels of Cognitive Development. 31st SIGCSE Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, 2000, 75-79.
11. Buck, D. and Stucki, D.J. JKarelRobot: A case study in supporting levels of cognitive development in the computer science curriculum. Proceedings of the 32nd SIGCSE Symposium on Computer Science Education, ACM Press, New York, NY, 2001, 16-20.
12. Buckley, J. and Exton, C. A framework for assessing programmers' knowledge of software systems. Proc. 11th IEEE International Workshop on Program Comprehension, IWPC, 2003.
13. Burgess, G.A. Introduction to programming: blooming in America. J. Comput. Small Coll. 21, 19-28. 2005.
14. Computing Accreditation Commission. Criteria for Accrediting Computing Programs: Effective for Evaluations During the 2006-2007 Accreditation Cycle. ABET Inc, Baltimore, MD, 2005.
15. Cooper, S., Cassel, L., Moskal, B., and Cunningham, S. Outcomes-based computer science education Proceedings of the 36th SIGCSE technical symposium on Computer science education, ACM Press, St. Louis, Missouri, USA, 2005.
16. Cukierman, D. and McGee Thompson, D. Learning Strategies Sessions within the Classroom in Computing Science University Courses Proceedings of WCCCE 2007, 12th Western Canadian Conference on Computing Education, May 2007.
17. Doran, Michael V. and Langan, David D. A cognitivebased approach to introductory computer science courses: lesson learned. Proceedings of the twenty-sixth SIGCSE technical symposium on Computer science education, Nashville, Tennessee, United States, ACM Press, 1995.
18. Facione, P. A. Critical thinking; A statement of expert consensus for purposes of educational assessment and instruction, research findings and recommendations, 1990, Fullerton ERIC Reports, ED315.423.
19. Farthing, D. W., Jones, D. M. and McPhee, D. Permutational multiple-choice questions: An objective and efficient alternative to essay-type examination questions. Proceedings of the 3rd Conference on Innovation and Technology for Computer Science Education, ITiCSE, 1998, ACM Press, New York, NY, 1998, 81-85.
20. Gronlund, N.F. Measurement and evaluation in teaching. MacMillan, New York, 1981.
21. Hernán-Losada, I., Lázaro-Carrascosa, C. and Velázquez- Iturbide, J. Á. On the use of Bloom's taxonomy as a basis to design educational software on programming. Proceedings of World Conference on Engineering and Technology Education, WCETE 2004, COPEC, Brazil, 2004, 351-355.
22. Hernán-Losada, I., Velázquez-Iturbide, J. Á and Lázaro-Carrascosa, C. A. Programming learning tools based on Bloom's taxonomy: proposal and accomplishments. Proc. VIII International Symposium of Computers in Education (SIIE 2006), León, España, Octubre 2006, 2006, 325-334.
23. Howard, Richard A., Carver, Curtis A. and Lane, William D. Felder's learning styles, Bloom's taxonomy, and the Kolb learning cycle: tying it all together in the CS2 course. Proceedings of the twenty-seventh SIGCSE technical symposium on Computer science education, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States, ACM Press, 1996.
24. Huitt, W. and Hummel, J. 2003. Piaget's theory of cognitive development. Educational Psychology Interactive.
25. Ihantola, P., Karavirta, V., Korhonen, A. and Nikander, J. Taxonomy of effortless creation of algorithm visualizations. Proceedings of the 2005 International Workshop on Computing Education Research, ICER '05, Seattle, WA, October 01-02, 2005, ACM Press, New York, NY, 2005, 123-133.
26. Illinois Online Network: Educational Resources, http://www.ion.illinois.edu/resources/tutorials/assessment/bloomtest.asp, Accessed on 19/07/2007, 2007.
27. Johnson, C. G. and Fuller, U. D. Is Bloom's taxonomy appropriate for computer science? 6th Baltic Sea Conference on Computing Education Koli Calling 2006, Koli Calling, November 2006, Berglund, A. and Wiggberg, M., Eds. Department of Information Technology, University of Uppsala, Stockholm, 2007, 120-123.
28. Joint IEEE Computer Society/ACM Task Force on Computing Curricula. 2005. The Overview Report. http://www.computer.org/portal/cms-docs-ieeecs/ieeecs/education/cc2001/CC2005-March06Final.pdf, 2005, visited September 2007.
29. King, O.M. and Kitchener, K.S. 1994. Developing reflective judgement: understanding and promoting intellectual growth and critical thinking in adolescents and adults. Jossy-Bass Inc, San Francisco.
30. Kolb, D. Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development. Prentice-Hall, New York, NY, 1984.
31. Kramer, J. Is abstraction the key to computing? Communications of the ACM 50, 37-42, 2007.
32. Krathwohl, D.R., Bloom, B.S. and Masia, B.B. 1964. Taxonomy of educational objectives: the classification of educational goals. Handbook Volume 2: Affective domain. McKay, New York.
33. Krathwohl, D.R. A revision of Bloom's taxonomy: An overview. Theory into Practice 41, 212-218, 2002.
34. Kumar, A.N. Learning programming by solving problems. In Informatics Curricula and Teaching Methods, L. Cassel and R.A. REIS, Eds. Kluwer Academic, 29-39, 2003.
35. Kundratova, M., Turek, I. Chapters from engineering pedagogy. Educational Objectives (in Slovak). STU Bratislava, 2001.
36. Lahtinen, E. and Ahoniemi, T. Visualizations to Support Programming on Different Levels of Cognitive Development. Proceedings of The Fifth Koli Calling Conference on Computer Science Education, 2005, 87-94.
37. Lahtinen, E. A Categorization of Novice Programmers: A Cluster Analysis Study. Proceedings of the 19th annual Workshop of the Psychology of Programming Interest Group, Joensuu, Finland, July 2-6, 2007, Sajaniemi, J. and Tukiainen, M., Eds. University of Joensuu Department of Computer Science and Statistics, Joensuu, Finland, 2007, 32-41.
38. Lister, R. On Blooming First Year Programming, and its Blooming Assessment. Proceedings of the Australasian Conference on Computing Education ACM Press, New York, NY, 2000, 158-162.
39. Lister, R., and Leaney, J. Introductory programming, criterion-referencing, and Bloom. Proceedings of the 34th SIGCSE technical symposium on Computer science education, Reno, Nevada, USA, ACM Press, 2003.
40. Lister, R., and Leaney, J. First year programming: Let all the flowers bloom. 5th Australasian Computer Education Conference, Adelaide, SA, Australia, 2003.
41. Lister, R., Adams, E.S., Fitzgerald, S., Fone, W., Hamer, J, Lindholm, M., McCartney, R., Moström, J.E., Sanders, K., Seppälä, O., Simon, B., and Thomas, L. A multi-national study of reading and tracing skills in novice programmers. Working group reports from ITiCSE on Innovation and technology in computer science education, Leeds, United Kingdom, ACM Press, 2004, 119-150.
42. Lister, R., Simon, B., Thompson, E., and Whalley, J.L. Not seeing the forest for the trees: novice programmers and the SOLO taxonomy. Proceedings of the 11th annual SIGCSE conference on Innovation and technology in computer science education, Bologna, Italy, ACM Press, New York, NY, 2006, 118-122.
43. Machanick, P. Experience of applying Bloom's Taxonomy in three courses. Proc. Southern African Computer Lecturers' Association Conference, Strand, South Africa, June 2000, 2000, 135-144.
44. Manaris, B. and McCauley, R. Incorporating HCI into the undergraduate curriculum: Bloom's taxonomy meets the CC'01 curricular guidelines. Frontiers in Education, 2004. FIE 34th Annual Meeting, 2004, T2H/10-T2H/15.
45. Merrill, M.D. Lesson segments based on component display theory. In Instructional design theory, M.D. Merrill, Ed. Educational Technology Publications, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 177-212, 1994.
46. Merrill, M.D. The prescriptive component display theory. In Instructional design theory, M.D. Merrill, Ed. Educational Technology Publications, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 159-176, 1994.
47. Merrill, M.D. The descriptive component display theory. In Instructional design theory, M.D. Merrill, Ed. Educational Technology Publications, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 111-157, 1004.
48. Moon, J. How to use level descriptors. Southern England Consortium for Credit Accumulation and Transfer, 2002.
49. Naps, T., Cooper, S., Koldehofe, B., Roessling, G., Dann, W., Korhonen, A., Malmi, L., Rantakokko, J., Ross, R.J., Anderson, J., Fleischer, R., Kuittinen, M. and McNally, M. 2003. Evaluating the educational impact of visualization. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin 35, 124-136.
50. Niemierko, B. Pomiar sprawdzajacy w dydaktyce. Teoria i zastosowania (in Polish).Panstwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe, Warszawa, 1990.
51. Oliver, D., Dobele, T., Greber, M., and Roberts, T. This course has a Bloom Rating of 3.9. Proceedings of the sixth conference on Australasian computing education - Volume 30, Dunedin, New Zealand, Australian Computer Society, Inc., 2004.
52. Perry, W.G.J. Forms of intellectual and ethical development in the college years: A scheme. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College Publishers, Forth Worth, 1968.
53. Perry, W.G.J. Different worlds in the same classroom. In Improving learning: new perspectives, P. Ramsden, Ed. Kogan Page; Nichols Pub. Co, London, New York NY, 145-161, 1988.
54. Piaget, J. and Inhelder, B. The Psychology of the Child. Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1969.
55. Polanyi, M. 1958. Personal knowledge: towards a postcritical philosophy. Routledge and Kegan Paul, Chicago.
56. Rademacher, R. Applying Bloom's taxonomy of cognition to knowledge management systems. 1999 ACM SIGCPR conference on Computer Personnel Research, New Orleans, LA, April 8-10, 1999, ACM Press, New York, NY, 1999, 276-278.
57. Rapaport, W.J. William Perry's scheme of intellectual and ethical development, http://www.cse.buffalo.edu/rapaport/perry.positions.html.
58. Reeves, M.F. An Application of Bloom's Taxonomy to the Teaching of Business Ethics. Journal of Business Ethics 9, 609-616, 1990.
59. Reigeluth, C.M. and Stein, F.S. 1983. The elaboration theory of instruction. In Instructional-design theories and models: An overview of their current status, C.M. Reigeluth, Ed. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ, 338-381.
60. Reigeluth, C.M., Merrill, M.D. and Bunderson, C.V. 1994. The structure of subject matter content and its instructional design implications. In Instructional design theory, M.D. Merrill, Ed. Educational Technology Publications, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 59-77.
61. Reigeluth, C.M., Merrill, M.D., Wilson, B.G. and Spiller, R.T. 1994. The elaboration theory and instruction: A model for sequencing and synthesizing instruction. In Instructional design theory, M.D. Merrill, Ed. Educational Technology Publications, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 79-102.
62. Reynolds, C. and Fox, C. 1996. Requirements for a computer science curriculum emphasizing information technology: subject area curriculum issues. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin 28, 247-251.
63. Robins, A., Rountree, J. and Rountree, N. 2003. Learning and Teaching Programming: A Review and Discussion. Computer Science Education 13, 137-172.
64. Sanders, I. and Mueller, C. A fundamentals-Based Curriculum for First Year Computer Science. 31st SIGCSE Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, ACM Press, 2000, 227-231.
65. Scott, T. Bloom's taxonomy applied to testing in computer science classes. J. Comput. Small Coll. 19, 267-274, 2003.
66. Simpson, B.J. The classification of educational objectives: psychomotor domain. Illinois Journal of Home Economics 10, 110-114, 1966.
67. Svec, S. Taxonomy for Teaching: A System for Teaching Objectives, Learning Activities and Assessment Tasks (Revision of Bloom's Taxonomy of the Cognitive Domain). In Pedagogicka revue (in Slovak) 57, 453-476, 2005.
68. Swedish Ministry of Higher Education and Research, Higher Education Ordinance, http://www.sweden.gov.se/sb/d/574/a/21541, Accessed on 19/07/2007, 2007.
69. Thompson, E. Does the sum of the parts equal the whole? Proceedings of the seventeenth annual conference of the National Advisory Committee on Computing Qualifications, Mann, S. and Clear, T., Eds. National Advisory Committee on Computing Qualifications, 2004, 440-445.
70. Thompson, E. Holistic assessment criteria - Applying SOLO to programming projects. Proceedings of the Ninth Australasian Computing Education Conference (ACE 2007), Ballarat, Victoria, Australia, Mann, S. and Simon, Eds. Australian Computer Society Inc, 2007, 155-162.
71. University of Victoria. Learning Skills Program - Bloom's Taxonomy, http://www.coun.uvic.ca/learn/program/hndouts/bloom.html, Accessed on 19/07/2007, 2007.
72. Whalley, J.L., Lister, R., Thompson, E., Clear, T., Robbins, P., Kumar, P. K.A., and Prasad, C. An Australasian study of reading and comprehension skills in novice programmers, using the bloom and SOLO taxonomies. Proceedings of the 8th Australasian Conference on Computing Education - Volume 52, Hobart, Australia, Australian Computer Society, Inc, 2006, 243-252.
73. Winslow, L.E. 1996. Programming Pedagogy - A Psychological Overview. SIGCSE Bull. 28, 17-22.