ACM Home Page
Please provide us with feedback. Feedback
The impact of providing project choices in CS1
Full text PdfPdf (351 KB)
Source
ACM SIGCSE Bulletin archive
Volume 40 ,  Issue 2  (June 2008) table of contents
REVIEWS: Reviewed papers table of contents
Pages 65-68  
Year of Publication: 2008
ISSN:0097-8418
Authors
Jeffrey A. Stone  Pennsylvania State University, Schuylkill Haven, Pennsylvania
Elinor M. Madigan  Pennsylvania State University, Schuylkill Haven, Pennsylvania
Publisher
ACM  New York, NY, USA
Bibliometrics
Downloads (6 Weeks): 5,   Downloads (12 Months): 32,   Citation Count: 0
Additional Information:

abstract   references   index terms   collaborative colleagues  

Tools and Actions: Review this Article  
Save this Article to a Binder    Display Formats: BibTex  EndNote ACM Ref   
DOI Bookmark: Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1383602.1383637
What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

CS educators are constantly faced with the challenge of engaging students who have neither the interest nor skill level necessary to succeed in an introductory course. One potential solution is to allow students to choose their projects from a set of comparable alternatives, each of which represents a different problem domain. This paper reports on the results of a two-year study designed to measure the impact of project choice on student outcomes in a CS1-style course for non-majors. The results suggest that the gender plays a major role in both the projects chosen and student outcomes.


REFERENCES

Note: OCR errors may be found in this Reference List extracted from the full text article. ACM has opted to expose the complete List rather than only correct and linked references.

 
1
Beaubouef, T. & Mason, J. (2005). "Why the high attrition rate for computer science students: some thoughts and observations." ACM-SIGCSE Inroads, 37(2), 103--106.
 
2
Becker, K. (2006). "First Principles of CS Instruction." Journal of Computing in Small Colleges, 22(2), 77--84.
 
3
Becker, K. (2006). "How Much Choice is Too Much?" ACM-SIGCSE Inroads, 38(4), 78--82.
 
4
Cooper, S, Dann, W, and Pausch, R. (2003). Teaching objects-first in Introductory Computer Science. Proceedings of the 34th SIGCSE Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, 191--195.
 
5
Layman, L., Williams, L., & Slaten, K. (2007). "Note to Self: Make Assignments Meaningful." In P roceedings of the 38th SIGCSE Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (Covington, KY USA, March 07--10, 2007). SIGCSE '07. ACM Press, New York, NY, 459--463.
 
6
Lewandowski, G., Gutschow, A., McCartney, R., Sanders, K., & Shinners-Kennedy, D. (2005). "What novice programmers don't know." In Proceedings of the 2005 international Workshop on Computing Education Research (Seattle, WA, USA, October 01 -- 02, 2005). ICER '05. ACM Press, New York, NY, 1--12.
 
7
Rountree, N. Rountree, J., & Robins, A. (2002). "Predictors of Success and Failure in a CS1 Course." ACM-SIGCSE Inroads, 34(4), 121--124.
 
8
Stevenson, D. E. & Wagner, P. J. (2006). "Developing Real-World Programming Assignments for CS1." In Proceedings of the 11th SIGCSE Annual Conference on Innovation and technology in Computer Science Education (Bologna, Italy, June 26--28, 2006). ITiCSE '06. ACM Press, New York, NY, 158--162.
 
9
Wiedenbeck, S. (2005). "Factors Affecting the Success of Non-Majors in Learning to Program." In Proceedings of the 2005 international Workshop on Computing Education Research (Seattle, WA, USA, October 01 -- 02, 2005). ICER '05. ACM Press, New York, NY, 13--24.

Collaborative Colleagues:
Jeffrey A. Stone: colleagues
Elinor M. Madigan: colleagues