| 1. |
- Lister, Raymond, et al.
(författare)
-
Differing Ways that Computing Academics Understand Teaching.
- 2007
-
Ingår i: Australian Computer Science Communications. - 0157-3055. ; 29:5, s. 97-106
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- This paper presents first results from a wide-ranging phenomenographic study of computing academics' understanding of teaching. These first results focus upon four areas: the role of lab practical sessions, the experience of teaching success, conceptions of motivating and engaging students, and the granularity of the teacher's focus. The findings are comparable with prior work on the understandings of academics in other disciplines. This study was started as part of a workshop on phenomenography. Most participants at the workshop received their first training in phenomenography. This paper summarises the structure of the workshop.
|
|
| 3. |
- Fuller, Ursula, et al.
(författare)
-
A Computing Perspective on the Bologna Process
- 2006
-
Ingår i: SIGCSE Bulletin: inroads. - : Association for Computing Machinery (ACM). - 0097-8418. ; 38:4, s. 115-131
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The Bologna process is intended to culminate in the formation of the European Higher Education Area (EHEA) by 2010. Its aim is to facilitate the mobility of people, the transparency and recognition of qualifications, quality and development of a European dimension to higher education, and the attractiveness of European institutions for third country students.This paper provides an overview of progress towards implementation in EHEA member states using official documents and interview data from faculty teaching computing in countries represented at the ITiCSE 2006 meeting. The key areas where the structures established by the Bologna process are problematic for computing education arise from the rapidly changing nature of the curriculum. It seems that the maturity and capability criteria, as well as the manner in which learning outcomes are specified, being developed within the Bologna process are too general. This endangers the properties of transparency and mobility that the process intends to promote.Progression and prerequisite knowledge in computing degrees can be very specific. For instance, generic learning outcomes for an introductory programming course quite rightly will not specify the programming language, or languages, used to implement algorithms. However, suppose a student intends to study an advanced algorithms and data structures course in which Java is the language of implementation which has an introductory course in programming as a prerequisite. If the introductory course language was Standard ML it is not clear that the prerequisite course actually provides the student with a suitable background. These types of complexities are typical of computing, where early subject curricula are not standardised nationally or internationally, and create significant hurdles for realising the Bologna objectives.
|
|
