How student centered is the computer science classroom? A survey of college faculty

ACM Transactions on Computing Education

Volumn 18, Issue 1, 2017, Pages

  Grissom, Scott ^a   McCauley, Renée ^b   Murphy, Laurie ^c  

^a GRAND VALLEY STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b School of Business   (United States)

^c PACIFIC LUTHERAN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Active learning; Evidence based instructional practices; Instructional practice; Instructor centered; Studentcentered

Indexed keywords

EDUCATION; STEM (SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY, ENGINEERING AND MATHEMATICS); SURVEYS; TEACHING;

ACTIVE LEARNING; EVIDENCE-BASED PRACTICES; FORMATIVE FEEDBACKS; INSTRUCTIONAL PRACTICES; INSTRUCTOR-CENTERED; SCIENCE CLASSROOM; STUDENT-STUDENT INTERACTION; STUDENTCENTERED;

STUDENTS;

EID: 85041471415     PISSN: None     EISSN: 19466226     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1145/3143200     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Susan A. Ambrose, MichaelW. Bridges,MicheleDiPietro, Marsha C. Lovett, andMarie K. Norman. 2010. How Learning Works: Seven Research-Based Principles for Smart Teaching, Wiley: San Francisco, CA.
2. American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). 2013. Measuring STEM teaching practices: A report from a national meeting on the measurement of undergraduate Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) teaching. Washington, DC.
3. Leland L. Beck and Alexander W. Chizhik. 2013. Cooperative learning instructional methods for CS1: Design, implementation, and evaluation. ACM Transactions on Computing Education 13, 3, Article 10.
4. Paul Black and Dylan William. 1998. Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice 5, 1, 7-74.
5. Maura Borrego, Jeffrey E. Froyd, and T. Simin Hall. 2010. Diffusion of engineering education innovations: A survey of awareness and adoption rates in U.S. engineering departments. Journal of Engineering Education 99, 3, 185-207.
6. Maura Borrego and Charles Henderson. 2014. Increasing the use of evidence-based teaching in STEM higher education: A comparison of eight change strategies. Journal of Engineering Education 103, 2, 220-252.
7. Michele T. H. Chi and Ruth Wylie. 2014. The ICAP Framework: Linking cognitive engagement to active learning outcomes. Educational Psychologist 49, 4, 219-243.
8. Georgianne L. Connell, Deborah A. Donovan, and Timothy G. Chambers. 2016. Increasing the use of student-centered pedagogies from moderate to high improves student learning and attitudes about biology. CBE Life Sciences Education 15, 1, article 3.
9. Catherine H. Crouch and Eric Mazur. 2001. Peer instruction: Ten years of experience and results. American Journal of Physics 69, 9, 970-977.
10. Terry L. Derting and Diane Ebert-May. 2010. Learner-centered inquiry in undergraduate biology: Positive relationships with long-term student achievement. CBE Life Sciences Education 9, 4, 462-472.
11. Kevin Eagan, Ellen Bara Stolzenberg, Jennifer Berdan Lozano, Melissa C. Aragon, Maria Ramirez Suchard, and Sylvia Hurtado. 2014. Undergraduate Teaching Faculty: The 2013-2014 HERI Faculty Survey. Higher Education Research Institute, University of California, Los Angeles.
12. Richard M. Felder and Rebecca Brent. 2009. Active learning: An introduction. American Society for Quality Higher Education Brief, 2, 4, August.
13. Scott Freeman, Sarah L. Eddy, Miles McDonough, Michelle K. Smith, Nnadozie Okoroafor, Hannah Jordt, and Mary Pat Wenderoth. 2014. Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA 111, 23, 8410-8415.
14. Graham Gibbs and Claire Simpson. 2004. Conditions under which assessment supports students' learning. Learning and Teaching in Higher Education 1, 3-31.
15. Scott Grissom. 2013. Introduction to special issue on alternatives to lecture in the computer science classroom. ACM Transactions on Computing Education 13, 3.
16. Scott Grissom, Sue Fitzgerald, Renée McCauley, and Laurie Murphy. 2017. Exposed! CS faculty caught lecturing in public: A survey of instructional practices. SIGCSE '17: Proceedings of the 2017 ACM SIGCSE Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education ACM, 261-266.
17. David Haak, Janneke HilleRisLambers, Emile Pitre, and Scott Freeman. 2011. Increased structure and active learning reduce the achievement gap in introductory biology. Science 332, 6034, 1213-1216.
18. Brian Hanks, Sue Fitzgerald, Renée McCauley, Laurie Murphy, and Carol Zander. 2011. Pair programming in education: A literature review. Computer Science Education 21, 2, 135-173.
19. John Hattie and Helen Timperley. 2007. The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research 77, 1, 81-112.
20. Charles Henderson andMelissa H. Dancy. 2009. Impact of physics education research on the teaching of introductory quantitative physics in the United States. Physical Review Special Topics-Physics Education Research 5, 2, 1-9.
21. Charles Henderson, Andrea Beach, and Noah Finkelstein. 2011. Facilitating change in undergraduate STEM instructional practices: An analytic review of the literature. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 48, 952-984.
22. Matthew T. Hora, Amanda Oleson, and Joseph J. Ferrare. 2013. Teaching dimensions observation protocol (TDOP) user's manual, Madison: Wisconsin Center for Education Research, University of Wisconsin-Madison. Retrieved March 22, 2017 from http://tdop.wceruw.org/Document/TDOP-Users-Guide.pdf.
23. Susan Horwitz, Susan Rodger, Maureen Biggers, David Binkley, C. Kolin Frantz, Dawn Gundermann, Susanne Hambrusch, Steven Huss-Lederman, Ethan Munson, Barbara Ryder, and Monica Sweat. 2009. Using peer-led team learning to increase participation and success of under-represented groups in introductory computer science. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin 41, 1, 163-167.
24. Jennifer K. Knight and William B. Wood. 2005. Teaching more by lecturing less. Cell Biology Education 4, 4, 298-310.
25. Nancy Kober. 2015. Reaching students: What research says about effective instruction in undergraduate science and engineering. National Academies Press, Washington, DC.
26. Clif Kussmaul. 2012. Process oriented guided inquiry learning (POGIL) for computer science. In Proceedings of the 43rd ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, Raleigh, NC, Februart 29-March 3, 2012. ACM, New York, NY, 373-378.
27. Scott E. Lewis. 2011. Retention and reform: An evaluation of peer-led team learning. Journal of Chemical Education 88, 6, 703-707.
28. Mercedes Lorenzo, Catherine H. Crouch, and Eric Mazur. 2006. Reducing the gender gap in the physics classroom. American Journal of Physics 74, 2, 118-122.
29. R. Heather Macdonald, Cathryn A. Manduca, David W. Mogk, and Barbara J. Tewksbury. 2005. Teaching methods in undergraduate geoscience courses: Results of the 2004 on the cutting edge survey of US faculty. Journal of Geoscience Education 53, 3, 237.
30. Joel Michael. 2006. Where's the evidence that active learning works? Advances in Physiology Education 30, 4, 159-167.
31. PCAST-President's Council of Advisors for Science and Technology. 2012. Engage to excel: Producing one million additional college graduates with degrees in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. The White House, Washington, DC.
32. Leo Porter, Cynthia Bailey Lee, and Beth Simon. 2013. Halving fail rates using peer instruction: A study of four computer science courses. In Proceedings of the Special Interest Group on Computer Science Education (SIGCSE) Technical Symposium, March, 2013.
33. Leo Porter, Dennis Bouvier, Quintin Cutts, Scott Grissom, Cynthia Lee, Robert McCartney, Daniel Zingaro, and Beth Simon. 2016. A multi-institutional study of peer instruction in introductory computing. ACM Inroads 7, 2, 76-81.
34. Elaine Puleo, Jane Zapka, Mary Jo White, Judy Mouchawar, Carol Somkin, and Stephen Taplin. 2002. Caffeine, cajoling, and other strategies to maximize clinician survey response rates. Evaluation and the Health Professions 25, 2, 169-184.
35. Chris Rasmussen and Oh Nam Kwon. 2007. An inquiry-oriented approach to undergraduate mathematics. Journal of Mathematical Behavior 26, 189-194.
36. Daiyo Sawada, Michael D. Piburn, Eugene Judson, Kathleen Falconer, Russell Benford, and Irene Bloom. 2002. Measuring reform practices in science and mathematics classrooms: the Reformed Teaching Observation Protocol. School Science and Mathematics 102, 6, 245-253.
37. Susan R. Singer, Natalie R. Nielsen, and Heidi A. Schweingruber (eds). 2012. Discipline-based education research: Understanding and improving learning in undergraduate science and engineering. National Academies Press,Washington, DC.
38. Michelle K. Smith, Francis H. M. Jones, Sarah L. Gilbert, and Carl E. Wieman. 2013. The classroom observation protocol for undergraduate STEM (COPUS): A new instrument to characterize university STEM classroom practices. CBE Life Sciences Education 102, 6, 618-627.
39. Jodi Tims, Stuart Sweben, and Jane Chu Prey. 2015. ACM NDC Study: The 2015 Survey of Non-Doctoral Granting Departments in Computing. Retrieved October 20, 2017 from http://www.acm.org/education/ndc2014-15.pdf.
40. D. T. Vernon and Robert L. Blake. 1993. Does problem-based learning work? A meta-Analysis of evaluative research. Academic Medicine 68, 7, 550-63.
41. M. MitchellWaldrop. 2015. Why we are teaching science wrong, and how to make it right. Nature 523, 7560, 272-274.
42. Emily M. Walter, Charles R. Henderson, Andrea Beach, and Cody T. Williams. 2016. Introducing the postsecondary instructional practices survey (PIPS): A concise, interdisciplinary, and easy-to-score survey. CBE-Life Sciences Education, 15.
43. Jessica Watkins and Eric Mazur. 2013. Retaining students in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) majors. Journal of College Science Teaching 42, 5, 36-41.
44. Carl E. Wieman. 2014. Large-scale comparison of science teaching methods sends clear message. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 111, 23, 8319-8320.
45. Carl E. Wieman and Sarah Gilbert. 2014. The teaching practices inventory: A new tool for characterizing college and university teaching in mathematics and science. CBE-Life Sciences Education 13, 552-569.
46. Stuart Zweben and Betsy Bizot. 2015. Taulbee survey continued booming undergraduate CS enrollment; Doctoral degree production dips slightly. Retrieved October 20, 2017 from http://cra.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/2015-Taulbee-Survey.pdf.