coursework

Securing subject-specific knowledge in an unending battle but a vital one

by

Teachers of computer science face a challenge not commonly found in other taught disciplines – the need to continuously ensure that one’s subject-specific knowledge is continuously up-to-date and in line with both current trends in technology and substantial advancements in the field.

Whilst many aspects of taught computing remain the same and are likely to remain the same for generations to come, particularly those heavily rooted in mathematics such as binary arithmetic; a concept dating back even as early as the 1600s, (Lodder, 2009) the dynamic and ever-evolving curriculum poses unique challenges for computing educators as they fight to balance their intense workload characteristic of working in education along with finding time to improve their skills as a practitioner.

The far-reaching need for continuous professional development

Before exploring this topic in more detail it is important to preface with an acknowledgement of the importance of continuous learning and self-improvement and that they are cornerstones of the educator’s profession, with the most talented and dedicated teachers looking to simultaneously improve their subject knowledge and pedagogical toolset linked to the latest research.

Goodall et al (2005) found that 90% of teachers participating in their study found continuous professional development (henceforth CPD) to be felt at least somewhat useful, in particular for those where improvements in knowledge and skills were most impacted. Furthermore, those within the post-compulsory sector for example can look to professional standards 7, 8 and 9 for further reassurance of its importance regardless of what one teaches. (Education & Training Foundation, 2014)

My own experiences

For the teaching of Computer Science at both the GCSE and A Level specifications, much of the curriculum remains the same over the years due to the theoretical nature of the course, where choices of programming language are broad and allow for more traditional choices when teachers might be lacking in more contemporary resources and skill sets (i.e. many examining bodies allow for choosing Visual Basic over more increasingly popular languages such as C# and JavaScript) and that many areas linked into computational theory have little tendency to change.

Nevertheless, large components of these courses consist of coursework projects whereby students are at liberty to design and create complex software projects using the software development lifecycle (SDLC). Students are often free to create whatever they want, provided that they meet the complexity requirements set by the examining body.

I came into my current teaching role with a wealth of prior programming experience developed in academia and in industry, though I naturally have my preferences in languages and frameworks that I am more familiar with. Some of my Year 12 students were developing using the C# language – one that I was mostly unacquainted with aside from basic tutorials and open source projects I worked on in my free time. This meant that not only did I need to rapidly learn a new language, but since students were often including third-party libraries, I had to learn aspects of its ecosystem too. This is a completely ordinary experience for software engineers and computer scientists to do when they take on new projects or move into new areas, but I do not think that it would be an experience most other fields would be well equipped to deal with. Fascinatingly, the only close comparison I can immediately think of are those teaching music and perhaps also dance, which are continuously flooded with new concepts and contemporary ideas, often also caused by technology. (BBC, 2019)

Furthermore, some students expressed interest in using development engines and environments, namely Unity, to develop video games; a prospect both allowed and encouraged by examining bodies due to their inherent complexity. (OCR, 2015) This naturally calls for additional learning, and if you do not have a powerful enough computer at home to run these environments then this can create additional issues at keeping up with your own students just so that you can be in a position to support them wherever necessary.

The additional challenges of vocational courses

Many colleges and post-compulsory centres and schools will offer vocational courses in IT (information technology), such as ‘vendor certifications’ or coursework-oriented Level 2 and Level 3 BTEC certificates and the like. These courses sometimes change frequently, even annually, in order to keep up with ever-changing computer software packages, trends, and even legislation. For example, qualifications issued by Microsoft will eventually retire and are replaced by newer programmes in order to keep the certifications current. (2020)

What the research indicates

According to a study conducted by Sentance & Csizmadia (2016), where British teachers of computing across a range of key stages were questioned on the greatest difficulties that they face, the most common challenge reported was in their own subject knowledge. One such teacher reported: ‘I do self CPD daily and have given easily 100+ hrs of my own time to building my own skill set up’.

For many teachers, teaching computer science is a new prospect in a United Kingdom that has spent 20+ years previously teaching only information technology, and as a result the need to upskill and learn entirely new curricula is a daunting prospect. Sentance et al (2013) found that in a small group of surveyed teachers, 71% of them needed guidance on how to teach the subject.

A study from Brown et al on the resurgence of computer science in British schools concludes that though the steps to reintroduce the subject in the country has been positive, many changes remain in order to further equip teachers – mainly the need for future training, better resources, and for many, formal training to transition to the more theoretical subject in the first place.

Final reflections

It comes as no surprise that numerous teachers throughout the country struggle and must dedicate large quantities of their own time to keeping their own subject knowledge strong. It is disappointing however, that many former teachers of IT / ICT migrate into teaching computing with little to no support or CPD to enable them to teach what is practically a widely different subject altogether.

Having previously worked in software engineering I am aware of the challenges we face as professionals and the constant need to evolve in the face of change. For many teachers without this experience, it might come as a surprise that teaching computing is more in alignment with industry than one might initially expect, and that they too will be expected to make continuous adaptations as the curriculum does, especially for those teaching vocational subjects and vendor qualifications.

The need to enjoy what you do is paramount for success in teaching computing. I am thankful that I am still passionate for programming and still share the same curiosity for computers and technology that I did as a teenager. As a result of these revelations I have taken steps to conduct my own CPD, including sitting Microsoft examinations to fill gaps in my subject knowledge and to provide proof of my ongoing learning. I will continue to learn and play in my own time to provide my students with a suitable model for emulation, a significant part of my teaching and learning philosophy, so that they too can follow a similar approach in whatever career path they choose.

Bibliography

  • British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC). (2019, March 4). Music education ‘risks being outdated by technology’. Retrieved April 29, 2020, from https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-47414952
  • Brown, N. C. C., Sentance, S., Crick, T., & Humphreys, S. (2014). Restart: The Resurgence of Computer Science in UK Schools. ACM Transactions on Computing Education, 14(2), 1–22. doi: 10.1145/2602484
  • Education & Training Foundation (ETF). (2014). Professional Standards for FE Teachers. Retrieved April 27, 2020, from https://www.et-foundation.co.uk/supporting/support-practitioners/professional-standards/
  • Goodall, J., Day, C., Lindsay, G., Muijs, D., & Harris, A. (2005). Evaluating the impact of continuing professional development. Nottingham: Dept. for Education and Skills.
  • Lodder, J. M. (2009). Binary Arithmetic: From Leibniz to von Neumann. Resources for Teaching Discrete Mathematics, 169–178. doi: 10.5948/upo9780883859742.023
  • Microsoft Corporation. (2020). Legacy Certifications. Retrieved April 29, 2020, from https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/learning/retired-certifications.aspx
  • Oxford, Cambridge and RSA Examinations (OCR). (2015, May 10). OCR A Level Computer Science Project Setting Guidance. Retrieved April 29, 2020, from https://www.ocr.org.uk/Images/324587-project-setting-guidance.pdf
  • Sentance, S., Dorling, M., & Mcnicol, A. (2013). Computer Science in Secondary Schools in the UK: Ways to Empower Teachers. Informatics in Schools. Sustainable Informatics Education for Pupils of All Ages Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 15–30. doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-36617-8_2
  • Sentance, S., & Csizmadia, A. (2016). Computing in the curriculum: Challenges and strategies from a teacher’s perspective. Education and Information Technologies, 22(2), 469–495. doi: 10.1007/s10639-016-9482-0

My experiences teaching ‘unplugged’

by

A common misconception is that computer science, or computing, is a school subject that requires a lot of time in front of a monitor and that programming should be the vast majority of what students get up to, but alternative curricula that focus more on teaching computational thinking without the use of technology exist, commonly referred to as Computer Science Unplugged, or merely ‘unplugged’ for short.

What is Unplugged?

CS Unplugged was a term coined in 1999 in a free downloadable ebook written by Tim Bell, Mike Fellows, and Ian Witten known as ‘Computer Science Unplugged: Off-line activities and games for all ages in which there are a wide variety of activities that demonstrate how computer science topics could be taught without the use of a computer, though at the time it did not assume that these would make it into a mainstream classroom curriculum and as such was not fully appropriated for use by teachers; more so for educational researchers. (Bell & Vahrenhold, 2018)

Today, it remains used as enrichment to computer science and IT (information technology) courses taught across key stages, though use of computers and digital technologies remains necessary to meet the requirements set by the English national curriculum. (HM Government, 2013) In my own school, it is a strategy I use with my Year 10 group to teach algorithms – alternating on a weekly basis to include sessions focusing on programming using Python.

My implementation within the classroom

My first inspirations for using this style of teaching came directly from the existing teacher of the class whom I was taking over from. While I am sentient of the fact that continuing to do something because it was always done that way is a danger that many teachers fall into, I knew that in this particular context it would be the correct course of action, and one that should minimise pupil resistance (or any other forms of teething) from having a new teacher leading the class, as class content and activities purposefully emulate what they are already accustomed to.

Becoming familiar with this style of teaching however was a complicated challenge, and involved not only ensuring that I could come up with tasks that not only impacted my students and facilitated necessary learning, but would also be moderately engaging and hopefully inspire some curiosity into the subject further. It was weird for me as a computer scientist to go back to basics, and relearn theoretical topics again to the point where I would feel comfortable teaching them without the aid of code and at the reduced scope necessary for a GCSE student, not for a postgraduate. For example, my first task when taking over my Year 10 group would involve introducing them to the new topic of algorithms and getting them acquainted with the bubble sort algorithm – an inefficient but straightforward means of sorting data. (Cormen et al, 2001)

Before breaking up for Easter, I taught a total of six classes to my Year 10 group, all of which utilised an unplugged teaching style:

  1. Introduction to Algorithms and Bubble Sort
  2. Insertion Sort
  3. Merge Sort
  4. Abstraction and Decomposition
  5. Searching Algorithms (Linear and Binary)
  6. Sorting Recap and Feedback

Assessment for Learning features in all of my lessons in order to evaluate my students’ learning and new acquisition, though following the conclusion of the sorting algorithm trilogy and moving onto other the module, a substantial homework task was set requiring the completion of one of each kind of sort. Students were given a week to complete the work and were also recommended to seek assistance in meanwhile if they required any further help with completing the task. They were additionally reminded of the importance and mandatory nature of completing the work as it would be reviewed in class following the deadline and a brief marking period. The sixth class was an opportunity to provide in-depth and personalised ‘deep’ feedback to individual students and a chance to sharpen up both common areas of difficulty, of which two minor issues were recognised, and to provide one-to-one support where applicable. This provision of deep feedback was a school-mandated requirement.

Potential advantages identified

The feedback provided to the absolute vast majority of the students were very positive and applauded the students’ work and provided recommendations for slight improvements henceforth. At this time, I do not have any data or control groups to use in order to establish whether this is statistically a superior approach, though it is not mandated in the National Curriculum that students be able to implement these algorithms at the code / pseudocode level, but should be able to recognise them if presented with an example until they reach A Level. (Sargent & Hillyard, 2017)

Research undertaken by Rodriguez et al (2016) found that while CS unplugged activities do well to engage and teach students in isolation, however for longer classroom sessions they benefit from additional structure and content. Nevertheless, results were positive with all results in following examinations exceeding 50%, and many attaining results above 80%.

Potential disadvantages identified

Many students in my class expressed that they found the content boring and unengaging, and in the case of performing bubble sorts, tedious, due to being required to write out multiple series of values in a table. When questioned further about how they felt about the content and what they would prefer, all questioned why they were doing computing without using computers themselves and that they would rather be programming. This boredom was actually more prevalent in students requiring Stretch & Challenge, as they rocketed past some of their peers and were frustrated with the slower pace generally set for the remainder of the class. Furthermore, some parents commented that their children felt ‘a little bored’ or somewhat dissatisfied during a parents evening meeting that I was unfortunately not present for.

In order to help mitigate this, I both produced and appropriated stretch tasks, some more entertaining, and others more challenging in order to help prevent them from becoming distracting to other students or becoming unmotivated. Examples of these stretch challenges range from simple tasks such as word searches and crosswords to more complex tasks involving producing or annotating pseudocode. This came about as a recommendation from academic staff at Birmingham City University, who remarked after discussion that having a ‘treasure trove’ of resources for Stretch & Challenge students to use is a good idea. To my delight, I realised that this coincided with strategies already in place by the host teacher in programming sessions.

In a similar vein, Taub et al (2012) found that after exposing students in a United States middle school to unplugged activities that while they became more knowledgeable about what studying computer science might entail, but their desire to do so lessened. From my own personal experience as an educator, this is something that I have seen quite frequently not only in schools but also at universities, where students’ expectations of studying computer science to be derivative of their enjoyment of technology, video games, and/or the Internet are not met and are taken aback by the scientific and mathematical content within the subject at large.

Final reflections

I have thoroughly enjoyed teaching my students using this methodology and believe that it is a fantastic addition to my teaching portfolio, and I believe that it is something that computing teachers and lecturers should look to incorporating within their own curricula either as the predominant or complementary feature of teaching many aspects. On the other hand, I do believe that it cannot exist alone as a sole source of computer science tuition and believe that a healthy inclusion of programming and screen time not only help mitigate some of the dissatisfaction and boredom that might arise from using unplugged activities but also help students apply theory into practice for the benefit of their learning destination. Many students who study computing at GCSE (or other Level 2 standards) will go on to study the subject at A-Level, at university, or embark on apprenticeships within the IT sector and enabling practical use of acquired skills helps lay the necessary constructivist foundations for further learning in these areas.

I will continue learning about unplugged curricula and how they can further benefit my teaching across all key stages, and hope to incorporate it further into my Key Stage 4 teaching, which has a higher ratio of programming-based activities and teaching supported by digital technologies.

Bibliography

  • Bell, T., & Vahrenhold, J. (2018). CS Unplugged—How Is It Used, and Does It Work? Progress in Pattern Recognition, Image Analysis, Computer Vision, and Applications Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 497–521. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-98355-4_29
  • Cormen, T. H., Leiserson, C. E., Rivest, R. L., & Stein, C. (2001). Introduction to algorithms. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  • HM Government. (2013, September 11). National curriculum in England: computing programmes of study. Retrieved April 28, 2020, from https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-curriculum-in-england-computing-programmes-of-study/national-curriculum-in-england-computing-programmes-of-study
  • Rodriguez, B., Rader, C., & Camp, T. (2016). Using Student Performance to Assess CS Unplugged Activities in a Classroom Environment. In Proceedings of the 2016 ACM Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education (pp. 95–100). Arequipa, Peru: Association for Computing Machinery. doi: 2899415.2899465
  • Sargent, C., & Hillyard, D. (2017, June 22). OCR GCSE 2.1 Merge sort – YouTube. Retrieved April 28, 2020, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TcNNPUIRqI8
  • Taub, R., Armoni, M., & Ben-Ari, M. (2012). CS Unplugged and Middle-School Students’ Views, Attitudes, and Intentions Regarding CS. ACM Transactions on Computing Education, 12(2), 1–29. doi: 10.1145/2160547.2160551