MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3115466430 · doi:10.1145/3437800.3439208

Designing Computer Science Competency Statements

2020· article· en· W3115466430 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicTeaching and Learning Programming
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoBritish Columbia Institute of Technology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurriculumProcess (computing)Computer scienceKnowledge managementEngineering ethicsMathematics educationPedagogyEngineeringPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The broadly influential document Computing Curricula 2005 (CC2005) is in the process of being updated through a project called Computing Curricula 2020 (CC2020). CC2020 provides a vision for the future of computing education, including a comprehensive report that contrasts curricular guidelines, and contextualizing those guidelines within the broader landscape of computing education. In the process, a framework of competency-based educational principles has been developed which is closely aligned with other skills and qualifications frameworks. This working group report demonstrates one way in which the transition from current learning-outcomes-based practices to the competency-based practices can be approached. Further, the paper discusses the challenges and insights that have emerged as the learning outcomes for various Knowledge Areas in the CS2013 report were re-expressed in terms of competencies.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.937
Threshold uncertainty score0.484

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.041
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.267 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Quick stats

Citations45
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTeaching and Learning ProgrammingFrench-language works237,207