Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
10.1145/3428029.3428560acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication Pageskoli-callingConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Aligning Theory and Practice in Teacher Professional Development for Computer Science

Published: 22 November 2020 Publication History

Abstract

Since the Advanced Placement Computer Science Principles (AP CSP) course has been released, it has vastly increased the need for highly trained CSP teachers who are prepared to bring CS to a diverse group of students. We have designed professional development (PD) workshops for high school teachers learning to teach this new CSP course, basing our design and iterative refinements on effective practices from other STEM disciplines. In summers 2012-2019, we have prepared over 600 teachers to teach CSP. Our PD provides teachers with time to learn CS content and pedagogical content knowledge. A key component of our PD design focuses on professionally-relevant activities– specifically, teachers develop and lead CSP lessons and provide feedback to each other through practice-focused discussions with experienced teachers and their peers. Another key component of our PD is including opportunities for continued professional growth, where we provide opportunities for teachers to engage as leaders who mentor others, curate materials, or facilitate future PDs. Our data has shown an increase in teachers’ confidence to lead in the classroom and also shown equal accessibility and growth for participants regardless of prior programming experience. In this paper, we examine and articulate the foundational theories for our CSP PD and how we have adapted these methodologies to cultivate an inclusive and productive learning environment for teachers. We also perform a retrospective analysis to determine which PD and program activities our teachers found most meaningful and relevant to their daily teaching.

References

[1]
Owen Astrachan, Jan Cuny, Chris Stephenson, and Cameron Wilson. 2011. The CS10K project: mobilizing the community to transform high school computing. In Proceedings of the 42nd ACM technical symposium on Computer science education. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 85–86.
[2]
James A Beane and Michael W Apple. 1995. The case for democratic schools., 25 pages.
[3]
Frances S Bolin. 1989. Empowering Leadership.Teachers College Record 91, 1 (1989), 81–96.
[4]
David Boud, Rosemary Keogh, and David Walker. 2013. Reflection: Turning experience into learning. Routledge, New York, NY.
[5]
Code.org Advocacy Coalition. 2018. State of Computer Science Education Policy and Implementation.
[6]
Code.org. 2020. Curriculum Values. https://code.org/educate/curriculum/values
[7]
David K Cohen and Heather C Hill. 2008. Learning policy: When state education reform works. Yale University Press, Binghamton, NY.
[8]
Jim Cohoon. 2019. Tapestry Workshop 2019. http://www.cs.virginia.edu/tapestry/
[9]
College Board. 2017. AP Computer Science Principles Curriculum Framework., 134 pages.
[10]
College Board. 2019. Computer Science Recruitment Strategies: AP Central – The College Board. https://apcentral.collegeboard.org/resources/ap-computer-science/recruitment-strategies
[11]
Linda Darling-Hammond, Maria E Hyler, Madelyn Gardner, 2017. Effective teacher professional development.
[12]
Laura M Desimone and Michael S Garet. 2015. Best practices in teacher’s professional development in the United States. Psychology, Society, & Education 7, 3 (2015), 252–263.
[13]
Carol S Dweck. 2014. Mindsets and math/science achievement., 17 pages.
[14]
Katrina Falkner, Rebecca Vivian, Nickolas Falkner, and Sally-Ann Williams. 2017. Reflecting on Three Offerings of a Community-Centric MOOC for K-6 Computer Science Teachers. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM SIGCSE Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (Seattle, Washington, USA) (SIGCSE ’17). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 195–200.
[15]
Katrina Falkner, Rebecca Vivian, and Sally-Ann Williams. 2018. An ecosystem approach to teacher professional development within computer science. Computer Science Education 28, 4 (Oct. 2018), 303–344.
[16]
N. Foote. 2000. Linking communities of practice and performance.
[17]
Kathleen Fulton and Ted Britton. 2011. STEM Teachers in Professional Learning Communities: From Good Teachers to Great Teaching., 62 pages.
[18]
Dan Garcia, Brian Harvey, and Tiffany Barnes. 2015. The beauty and joy of computing. ACM Inroads 6, 4 (2015), 71–79.
[19]
Joanna Goode, Jane Margolis, and Gail Chapman. 2014. Curriculum is Not Enough: The Educational Theory and Research Foundation of the Exploring Computer Science Professional Development Model. In Proceedings of the 45th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (Atlanta, Georgia, USA) (SIGCSE ’14). ACM, New York, NY, 493–498. https://doi.org/10.1145/2538862.2538948
[20]
Pam Grossman, Sam Wineburg, and Stephen Woolworth. 2001. Toward a theory of teacher community. The teachers college record 103 (2001), 942–1012.
[21]
Jessica Ivy and Dana Franz. 2017. Exploring Pathways to Developing Self-Efficacy in New Computer Science Teachers. In 2017 ASEE Zone 2 Conference Proceedings. American Society for Engineering Education, Portland, OR, 8.
[22]
Robin Jocius, Deepti Joshi, Yihuan Dong, Richard Robinson, Veronica Cateté, Tiffany Barnes, Jennifer Albert, Ashley Andrews, and Nicholas Lytle. 2020. Code, Connect, Create: The 3C Professional Development Model to Support Computational Thinking Infusion. In Proceedings of the 51st ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 971–977.
[23]
Michael S Knapp. 2003. Chapter 4: Professional development as a policy pathway. Review of research in education 27, 1 (2003), 109–157.
[24]
Annika Lantz-Andersson, Mona Lundin, and Neil Selwyn. 2018. Twenty years of online teacher communities: A systematic review of formally-organized and informally-developed professional learning groups. Teaching and Teacher Education 75 (Oct. 2018), 302–315.
[25]
Jean Lave, Etienne Wenger, 1991. Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge university press, Cambridge, MA.
[26]
Ann Lieberman. 1995. Practices that support teacher development: Transforming conceptions of professional learning., 67–78 pages.
[27]
Jane Margolis, Joanna Goode, and Gail Chapman. 2015. An equity lens for scaling: a critical juncture for exploring computer science. ACM Inroads 6, 3 (2015), 58–66.
[28]
Steven McGee, Ronald I Greenberg, Randi McGee-Tekula, Jennifer Duck, Andrew M Rasmussen, Lucia Dettori, and Dale F Reed. 2019. An examination of the correlation of Exploring Computer Science course performance and the development of programming expertise. In Proceedings of the 50th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1067–1073.
[29]
James P McGraw. 1992. The road to empowerment. Nursing administration quarterly 16, 3 (1992), 16–19.
[30]
Alexandra Milliken, Veronica Cateté, Amy Isvik, and Tiffany Barnes. 2020. Poster: Designing GradeSnap for Block-Based Code. In 2020 IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages and Human-Centric Computing (VL/HCC). IEEE, 1–2.
[31]
Alexandra Milliken, Christa Cody, Veronica Catete, and Tiffany Barnes. 2019. Effective Computer Science Teacher Professional Development: Beauty and Joy of Computing 2018. In Proceedings of the 2019 ACM Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 271–277.
[32]
NCWIT. 2020. National Center for Women & Information Technology Resouces. National Coalition of Women in Technology. https://www.ncwit.org/resources
[33]
Austin Lee Nichols and Jon K Maner. 2008. The good-subject effect: Investigating participant demand characteristics. The Journal of general psychology 135, 2 (2008), 151–166.
[34]
William R Penuel, Barry J Fishman, Britte Haugan Cheng, and Nora Sabelli. 2011. Organizing research and development at the intersection of learning, implementation, and design. Educational researcher 40, 7 (2011), 331–337.
[35]
William R Penuel, Barry J Fishman, Ryoko Yamaguchi, and Lawrence P Gallagher. 2007. What makes professional development effective? Strategies that foster curriculum implementation. American educational research journal 44, 4 (2007), 921–958.
[36]
Thomas W Price, Veronica Cateté, Jennifer Albert, Tiffany Barnes, and Daniel D Garcia. 2016. Lessons learned from” BJC” CS Principles professional development. In Proceedings of the 47th ACM Technical Symposium on Computing Science Education. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 467–472.
[37]
Project GUTS. 2020. Project GUTS - TLO diagram. Teachers with GUTS. https://teacherswithguts.org/resources/facilitator-resources-from-2019
[38]
Julie D Rainer and Mona W Matthews. 2002. Ownership of learning in teacher education. Action in Teacher Education 24, 1 (2002), 22–30.
[39]
Raja Ridgway. 2018. Project guts. Science Scope 42, 3 (2018), 28–33.
[40]
Jennifer Rosato, Chery Lucarelli, Cassandra Beckworth, and Ralph Morelli. 2017. A comparison of online and hybrid professional development for cs principles teachers. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 140–145.
[41]
Judith Haymore Sandholtz. 2002. Inservice training or professional development: Contrasting opportunities in a school/university partnership. Teaching and teacher education 18, 7 (2002), 815–830.
[42]
Emmanuel Schanzer, Kathi Fisler, and Shriram Krishnamurthi. 2013. Bootstrap: Going beyond programming in after-school computer science. In SPLASH Education Symposium. Indianapolis Academic Press, Indianapolis, IN, 7.
[43]
Roger I Simon. 1987. Empowerment as a pedagogy of possibility. Language Arts 64, 4 (1987), 370–382.
[44]
Michelle Stacy. 2013. Teacher-led professional development: Empowering teachers as self-advocates. The Georgia Social Studies Journal 3, 1 (2013), 40–49.
[45]
Kathleen Taylor and Catherine Marienau. 2016. Facilitating learning with the adult brain in mind: A conceptual and practical guide. John Wiley & Sons, San Fransico, CA.
[46]
Mike Taylor, Anne Yates, Luanna H Meyer, and Penny Kinsella. 2011. Teacher professional leadership in support of teacher professional development. Teaching and teacher education 27, 1 (2011), 85–94.
[47]
Megan Tschannen-Moran and Peggy McMaster. 2009. Sources of self-efficacy: Four professional development formats and their relationship to self-efficacy and implementation of a new teaching strategy. The elementary school journal 110, 2 (2009), 228–245.
[48]
Rebecca Vivian, Katrina Falkner, and Nickolas Falkner. 2014. Addressing the challenges of a new digital technologies curriculum: MOOCs as a scalable solution for teacher professional development. Research in Learning Technology 22, 24691 (2014). https://doi.org/10.3402/rlt.v22.24691
[49]
Laurie Williams and Robert Kessler. 2002. Pair programming illuminated. Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc., Boston, MA.
[50]
Kwang Suk Yoon, Teresa Duncan, Silvia Wen-Yu Lee, Beth Scarloss, and Kathy L Shapley. 2007. Reviewing the evidence on how teacher professional development affects student achievement. Issues & answers. REL 1, 033 (2007), 62.

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Building a National Center for K-12 Computing EducationACM Inroads10.1145/367902315:3(29-41)Online publication date: 21-Aug-2024
  • (2024)Assessing the Impact of Professional Development on K-12 CS Education: A One-Year Follow-Up Survey Analysis2024 IEEE Integrated STEM Education Conference (ISEC)10.1109/ISEC61299.2024.10665196(1-8)Online publication date: 9-Mar-2024
  • (2024)Exploring Transformative Professional Development Within K-12 Computing EducationInformatics in Schools. Innovative Approaches to Computer Science Teaching and Learning10.1007/978-3-031-73474-8_11(139-151)Online publication date: 13-Oct-2024
  • Show More Cited By

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Other conferences
Koli Calling '20: Proceedings of the 20th Koli Calling International Conference on Computing Education Research
November 2020
295 pages
ISBN:9781450389211
DOI:10.1145/3428029
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 22 November 2020

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. cs principles
  2. professional development
  3. theoretical foundations

Qualifiers

  • Research-article
  • Research
  • Refereed limited

Funding Sources

  • National Science Foundation

Conference

Koli Calling '20

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 80 of 182 submissions, 44%

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)49
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)6
Reflects downloads up to 24 Dec 2024

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Building a National Center for K-12 Computing EducationACM Inroads10.1145/367902315:3(29-41)Online publication date: 21-Aug-2024
  • (2024)Assessing the Impact of Professional Development on K-12 CS Education: A One-Year Follow-Up Survey Analysis2024 IEEE Integrated STEM Education Conference (ISEC)10.1109/ISEC61299.2024.10665196(1-8)Online publication date: 9-Mar-2024
  • (2024)Exploring Transformative Professional Development Within K-12 Computing EducationInformatics in Schools. Innovative Approaches to Computer Science Teaching and Learning10.1007/978-3-031-73474-8_11(139-151)Online publication date: 13-Oct-2024
  • (2023)The Role of Feedback in Teacher Professional DevelopmentEIKI Journal of Effective Teaching Methods10.59652/jetm.v1i4.771:4Online publication date: 23-Nov-2023
  • (2023)The TACS Model: Understanding Primary School Teachers’ Adoption of Computer Science Pedagogical ContentACM Transactions on Computing Education10.1145/356958723:2(1-31)Online publication date: 14-Mar-2023
  • (2022)A Review of International Models of Computer Science Teacher EducationProceedings of the 2022 Working Group Reports on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education10.1145/3571785.3574123(65-93)Online publication date: 27-Dec-2022
  • (2022)Building CS Teacher Capacity Through Comprehensive College/High School PartnershipsProceedings of the 53rd ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education - Volume 110.1145/3478431.3499364(606-612)Online publication date: 22-Feb-2022

View Options

Login options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

HTML Format

View this article in HTML Format.

HTML Format

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media