An aspect-oriented approach to the undergraduate programming language curriculum

There has been much debate in the past few years about the appropriate mathematics requirements for an undergraduate computer science major. The discussion has focused primarily on two issues: (1) the underlying mathematical content of computer science courses and (2) the content of mathematics courses which would serve as appropriate cognate requirements for computer science major programs. While this discussion has been helpful, it has been too narrowly focused--it has not started from an understanding of the relationship between the disciplines of mathematics and computer science, but rather has sought to identify mathematical prerequisites that computer science majors need in order to take existing computer science courses. This paper is a small step in seeking to apply an understanding of the relationship between the disciplines of mathematics and computer science to the undergraduate computer science curriculum.

While a focus on programming and mathematical skills is second nature to computer science faculty, perhaps equally important should be the recognition of the need for students to master communication skills. This poster presents the measured results of various methods used in the implementation of a communication-intensive core course into a CS curriculum at a small liberal arts university. The communication intensive core course is a CS1 introduction to computer science which is required to implement both oral and written assignments. Five key areas of success were implemented to help support the communication-intensive CS curriculum. They are: (1) communication skills need to be integrated within the CS curriculum, (2) communication skills should begin to be developed early in the student's academic career, (3) communication skills include a broad range of categories, (4) communication skills need to be supported by feedback, and (5) communication skills can be taught in the CS curriculum without sacrificing CS content. The results are provided on a four-point scale and focus on both student success and grading complexity. Scores are provided for each of the methods used since the course was first implemented in 2007. Such a comprehensive evaluation aims to assist in determining which methods are best suited for implementing a core communication that stresses continuous improvement in communication skills.

Traditionally beginning undergraduate computer science students are taught a high level programming language. Since the early 1970's Pascal has become the de facto standard introductory programming language. With the creation of Ada, its standardization, and the availability of validated compilers, there is considerable discussion concerning the introduction of Ada into the computer science curriculum. This paper discusses the approach taken by the Computer Science Department at Harvey Mudd College.

The goals of computer science department and software engineering courses are not always clear as they could be, and exactly how much of a computer science curriculum should be spent on software engineering topics at the expense of topics with more immediate relevance to computer science majors is far from clear. Computer science students are sometimes skeptical about the relevance of software engineering course topics, particularly those who have had some experience in industry. They report that the techniques and procedures covered in standard software engineering texts are seldom used in industry. There is not enough communication between Industry and Academia, and graduates often must be re-trained for their new jobs. This is a proposal for a modification in the approach to software engineering education for computer science majors, and for clarification of the goals of computer science programs, and calls for procedures to increase the relevancy of computer science and software engineering courses to meet the needs of industry.

In today's technological market, job candidates must possess technical and communication skills to acquire a desired position. Computer science programs, for the most part, provide the technological training, but are inconsistent in teaching students all the necessary communication skills. In many computer science curricula faculty members realizing the importance of improving writing ability have incorporated writing intensive courses. However, many computer science curricula neglect oral communication, largely because of the amount of class time needed to make presentations. Several gaps exist between computer science curricula and business world reality. Computer science curricula must teach students to listen and express themselves clearly, since getting the maximum utilization of an information resource requires contact with the user community. This is not to say that educators have ignored industry requests. The emerging trend in computer science curricula is to stress written and oral communication skills. This article discusses the importance of incorporating speaking intensive courses into computer science programs. In addition, this article reviews two courses that have included speeches and presentations. Finally it presents a new way to grade oral communication.

The Computing Curricula 2001 (CC 2001) computer science volume [1] is the first professional society curriculum model for computer science to include elements of discrete mathematics as part of the core of computer science. In the roughly eight years between the release of that curriculum and SIGCSE 2010, computer science education in general has evolved in many ways, and the CC 2001 recommendations have played an influential role in that evolution. This panel reviews developments in integrating discrete mathematics into the computer science curriculum since CC 2001, how those developments have been influenced by the centrality of discrete math in the CC 2001 core, and how the role of math in computer science curricula may continue to develop in the future. The panel will address both the influence CC 2001’s discrete math recommendation has had on curricular changes to computer science courses, and what changes have taken place in the discrete math courses themselves. The panel format will consist of… ˜ A 5 minute introduction by the moderator ˜ 10 minute presentations by each panelist, each describing a specific development with which that panelist has been involved, discussing its relationship to CC 2001, and outlining what it bodes for the future ˜ 30 minutes for discussion between the audience and panel. Suggested topics for discussion include (in addition, of course, to anything that the audience wishes to introduce) the role of mathematics in computer science, whether math’s actual place in computer science curricula has changed since the publication of CC 2001, and if so how. A questionnaire handed out to audience members as they enter the panel session will help them start thinking about these issues.

the University of Amsterdam, May 20-31, 1974.This Tract collects the lecture notes of five of the courses given.The sixth course, given by Dr. R. Kowalski on Predicate Logic as a Programming Language in Artificial Intelligence, is scheduled to appear elsewhere.We are very grateful to the Netherlands Organization for the Advancement of Pure Research (Z.W.O.)

This session will continue efforts by the ACM and Computer Science Teachers Association (CSTA) to create a comprehensive body of resources to support the implementation of a national K-12 computer science curriculum. The ACM K-12 Computer Science Curriculum Committee, with input from the Computer Science educational community, published a Model Curriculum [1] in 2003. The Model suggests a 4-level curriculum. Level-1 topics, primarily for the K-8 years, closely follow the well-defined ISTE Standards. Level-2 topics are suggested for all students in grades 9 or 10 and are comprised of introductory computer science content. Level-3 topics focus on analysis and design with emphasis on the scientific and engineering aspects of computer science. AP Computer Science and special topics courses comprise Level-4. This special session will focus on the learning objectives and activities for Level 2 of the K-12 Computer Science Model curriculum. Attendees will be invited to provide critical feedback that will help move the curriculum project forward.

In today's world, it is critical that our students get exposure to security education as part of their Computer Science (CS) curriculum. The lack of security consciousness in digital workforce is costing businesses, government, and citizens severely every year. A significant reason behind this problem stems from the fact that the majority of higher education institutions do not have adequate resources to educate CS students in information assurance (IA) and security. While security is not required in the current CS curriculum, IA has been designated as a knowledge area in the proposed ACM/IEEE-CS CS Curricula 2013. Also, the absence of security topics in core CS subject matters not only leaves students security oblivious, but also prevents higher education institutions from applying for National Centers of Academic Excellence in Information Assurance Education Programs (CAE/IAE) accreditation, which provides access to government scholarships and grants. In this session, we will discuss challenges CS faculty face in integrating security topics in traditional CS courses and call attention to existing government funded supports that faculty can leverage in doing so. To share ideas and resources, we hope to bring together security educators who are active in this field with a community of CS educators who may not have any background in teaching security but recognize the need for it and are interested in teaching security topics as part of their regular course curriculum.

The course in database principles is an example of a course in the computer science curriculum in which a balance is sought between theory and applications. With some exceptions, most computer science majors at the author's university prefer material which is oriented towards what they view as practical applications. At best, they tolerate the theoretical component of their courses. In particular, many who enroll in the database course hope to acquire expertise in particular software. One of the course projects has managed to finesse this prejudice by hiding some theoretical ideas in the benign cloak of an application.

The course in database principles is an example of a course in the computer science curriculum in which a balance is sought between theory and applications. With some exceptions, most computer science majors at the author's university prefer material which is oriented towards what they view as practical applications. At best, they tolerate the theoretical component of their courses. In particular, many who enroll in the database course hope to acquire expertise in particular software. One of the course projects has managed to finesse this prejudice by hiding some theoretical ideas in the benign cloak of an application.

Computer science (CS) is defined in wikipedia as a branch of human knowledge “relating to computation, ranging from abstract analysis of algorithms and formal grammars, to subjects like programming languages, software, and computer hardware” (Computer Science, 2005). Computer science emerged as a distinct field in the 1940s and 1950s with the development of the first electronic digital computers. To limit computer science to just computer use or its knowledge bodies, however, is reductive; CS is embedded in a complex, unquantifiable cultural context, including socio-economic and gendering practice. Computer hardware and software are designed to complement and supplement human activity and processes such as warfare, industrial applications, information management, including education, the Internet, a knowledge commons, and most recently biotechnology. Although CS is typically considered neutral and scientific, its episteme and practice is androcentric or male centered, often to the exclusion of females (Herbst, 2002). Female attributes have not typically been associated with computer science or computers. Although there is general agreement that women are as intellectually capable as men in CS, the fact remains that women today do not have equal participation in CS majors, CS engineering, programming, software design, Web site construction, or computer repair. (Jepson & Perl, 2002). In the technetronic 21st century, when computers are becoming standard for education and in symbolic analytic jobs, women’s enrollment in CS has declined, and many women do not feel confident using computers for more than e-mail transmissions, e-commerce, and social interaction in forums or newsgroups. Women who do not have knowledge or confidence in their abilities to work in CS not only have unrealized potentials in CS but also are left out of employment activities. Reasons for gendering in CS are complex and debated. Socialization, overt and tacit discrimination, and epistemological plurality are three dominant explanations. CS industries, educators, cognitive scientists, parents, and women professionals in CS are some of the groups currently working to attain gender equity in CS.

The Impact CS project, described in Dianne Martin's current and previous SIGCSE column, addresses Curriculum 91's mandate "to include the social and ethical implications of computing" in the curriculum. I have two concerns with this mandate. The mandate leaves open how to include the material and exactly what material to include to satisfy the mandate. For the past ten years the discussion about how to include the material has repeatedly focused on three methods of inclusion: have a separate course---taught by philosophy or CS, have a capstone project course, or integrate ethics into several of the CS courses. Since the initial mandate, the discussion of what to include has broadened to include the professional responsibilities of the computing practitioner. This broadening of the subject matter has contributed to favoring the integration approach as a method of inclusion. An approach which (ten years ago) has been empirically proven to be the most effective way to teach ethics.It may seem that we now have a clear path and Impact CS Report 3 provides us with the theoretical underpinnings to "integrate" computer ethics into the curriculum. But I think we still have one further issue to clear up. Material can be "integrated" into a course simply by adding another reading. We can attach the material to a course and treat it much the way ethics was treated in Curriculum 91, as an appendage to the real CS curriculum. The material could be "integrated" into the course in another way. We could show the unity of professional, social, and ethical issues with computer science. If professional, social, and ethical concerns are simply treated as an appendage, then teachers will leave these discussion for the last day of class (if there is time left). Teachers will feel that there is no time to include these issues in their classes; students will believe that ethics is included only to minimally meet the requirements of CSAB accreditation and they will not have a clear understanding of their professional responsibilities. On the other hand, we could teach professionalism and ethics as a part of computer science. Good computer science is a combination of the application of technical skill guided by professional responsibility. For example, we could demonstrate that doing good software design involves designing the software in an ethically sensitive way.I am concerned that, because of the use of terms like "units" and "stages" in Impact CS Report 3, some may interpret it as advocating "attaching" ethics units to courses, attaching units that are neatly separable from computer science. The material discussed in the "units" and "stages" of Report 3 can be synthesized with the CS curriculum in some fairly straightforward ways. In what follows I will summarize some of those ways and indicate some of useful resources to help you "demonstrate that ethical computer science is computer science.

One issue which is not often stressed, or even addressed, in Computer Science Curriculums is that of problem solving. Since problem solving is an essential activity in the construction of programs as well as other computer science pursuits, the omission of any formal instruction in this area is a serious matter. An instructional methodology is proposed for enhancing the problem solving abilities of students enrolled in introductory computer science courses. In particular, a paradigm is proposed to guide the student in his problem solving endeavors. Several examples of problems that were used for the purpose of increasing the students' problem-solving abilities are given.

article Free Access Share on Current trends in computer science curriculum: a survey of four-year programs Authors: Sukhen Dey View Profile , Lawrence R. Mand Sukhen Dey and Lawrence R. Mand, Computer Science Department, Indiana University Southeast, New Albany Sukhen Dey and Lawrence R. Mand, Computer Science Department, Indiana University Southeast, New AlbanyView Profile Authors Info & Claims ACM SIGCSE BulletinVolume 24Issue 1March 1992 pp 9–14https://doi.org/10.1145/135250.134513Online:01 March 1992Publication History 6citation529DownloadsMetricsTotal Citations6Total Downloads529Last 12 Months3Last 6 weeks1 Get Citation AlertsNew Citation Alert added!This alert has been successfully added and will be sent to:You will be notified whenever a record that you have chosen has been cited.To manage your alert preferences, click on the button below.Manage my AlertsNew Citation Alert!Please log in to your account Save to BinderSave to BinderCreate a New BinderNameCancelCreateExport CitationPublisher SiteeReaderPDF