Each year, the ITiCSE conference Call for Participation (CFP) includes a call for working group proposals, which are a unique opportunity for computing educators, from different countries, to come together and collaborate on a topic of common interest. For ITiCSE 2014, the CFP invited any intending group leader(s) to submit a two-page proposal. Those proposals are evaluated by the working group coordinators, on the basis of likely interest in the suggested topic and the qualifications of the intending leaders. This year, seven applications were received, and four of those proposals were accepted.
Approximately one month after the conference, three of the working groups submitted reports for refereeing. Each of three working group reports were evaluated by at least two referees, and also the two working group coordinators. On the basis of this refereeing process, all three working group reports that follow were accepted (with revisions) for publication.
As ITiCSE 2014 approached, we had some working group members indicate that they would not be attending the conference, but they wanted to remain members of their group. As per the philosophy of the ITiCSE conferences and the direction of SIGCSE we did not agree to those people remaining members. For the ITiCSE conference when people propose a working group, or apply to join a group, it must be with the intention of coming to the conference -- especially people who propose to lead a group. Intrinsic to any conference is the concept of meeting face to face.
The concept of an ITiCSE working group has evolved, and there is now a great deal of tacit knowledge on how these groups are run, managed, and coordinated. We would like to recommend for future ITiCSE Working Groups that people who propose to lead working groups should have at least one of the leaders with prior experience as a working group member.
Proceeding Downloads
Computational Thinking in K-9 Education
- Linda Mannila,
- Valentina Dagiene,
- Barbara Demo,
- Natasa Grgurina,
- Claudio Mirolo,
- Lennart Rolandsson,
- Amber Settle
In this report we consider the current status of the coverage of computer science in education at the lowest levels of education in multiple countries. Our focus is on computational thinking (CT), a term meant to encompass a set of concepts and thought ...
Increasing Adoption of Smart Learning Content for Computer Science Education
- Peter Brusilovsky,
- Stephen Edwards,
- Amruth Kumar,
- Lauri Malmi,
- Luciana Benotti,
- Duane Buck,
- Petri Ihantola,
- Rikki Prince,
- Teemu Sirkiä,
- Sergey Sosnovsky,
- Jaime Urquiza,
- Arto Vihavainen,
- Michael Wollowski
Computer science educators are increasingly using interactive learning content to enrich and enhance the pedagogy of their courses. A plethora of such learning content, specifically designed for computer science education, such as visualization, ...
In-Flow Peer Review
- Dave Clarke,
- Tony Clear,
- Kathi Fisler,
- Matthias Hauswirth,
- Shriram Krishnamurthi,
- Joe Gibbs Politz,
- Ville Tirronen,
- Tobias Wrigstad
Peer-review is a valuable tool that helps both the reviewee, who receives feedback about his work, and the reviewer, who sees different potential solutions and improves her ability to critique work. In-flow peer-review (IFPR) is peer-review done while ...
- Proceedings of the Working Group Reports of the 2014 on Innovation & Technology in Computer Science Education Conference
Recommendations
Acceptance Rates
Year | Submitted | Accepted | Rate |
---|---|---|---|
ITiCSE-WGR '17 | 16 | 8 | 50% |
ITiCSE '17 | 175 | 56 | 32% |
ITiCSE '16 | 147 | 56 | 38% |
ITiCSE '16 | 11 | 7 | 64% |
ITICSE-WGR '15 | 7 | 7 | 100% |
ITiCSE '15 | 124 | 54 | 44% |
ITiCSE '14 | 164 | 36 | 22% |
ITiCSE '13 | 161 | 51 | 32% |
ITiCSE -WGR '13 | 4 | 4 | 100% |
ITiCSE '09 | 205 | 66 | 32% |
ITiCSE '08 | 150 | 60 | 40% |
ITiCSE '07 | 210 | 62 | 30% |
ITiCSE '02 | 100 | 42 | 42% |
ITiCSE '01 | 139 | 43 | 31% |
Overall | 1,613 | 552 | 34% |