Visual and Textual Programming Languages: A Systematic Review of the Literature

It is well documented, and has been the topic of much research, that Computer Science courses tend to have higher than average drop out rates at third level. This is a problem that needs to be addressed with urgency but also caution. The required number of Computer Science graduates is growing every year but the number of graduates is not meeting this demand and one way that this problem can be alleviated is to encourage students at an early age towards studying Computer Science courses. This paper presents a systematic literature review on the role of visual and textual programming languages when learning to program, particularly as a first programming language. The approach is systematic, in that a structured search of electronic resources has been conducted, and the results are presented and quantitatively analysed. This study will give insight into whether or not the current approaches to teaching young learners programming are viable, and examines what we can do to increase the interest and retention of these students as they progress through their education.Comment: 18 pages (including 2 bibliography pages), 3 figure

Pathways to Higher Education

Presents case studies from Ford's initiative to support efforts to transform universities abroad to enable poor, minority, and otherwise underrepresented students to obtain a university degree. Outlines selected best practices from grantees

The Road Ahead for State Assessments

The adoption of the Common Core State Standards offers an opportunity to make significant improvements to the large-scale statewide student assessments that exist today, and the two US DOE-funded assessment consortia -- the Partnership for the Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC) and the SMARTER Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC) -- are making big strides forward. But to take full advantage of this opportunity the states must focus squarely on making assessments both fair and accurate.A new report commissioned by the Rennie Center for Education Research & Policy and Policy Analysis for California Education (PACE), The Road Ahead for State Assessments, offers a blueprint for strengthening assessment policy, pointing out how new technologies are opening up new possibilities for fairer, more accurate evaluations of what students know and are able to do. Not all of the promises can yet be delivered, but the report provides a clear set of assessment-policy recommendations. The Road Ahead for State Assessments includes three papers on assessment policy.The first, by Mark Reckase of Michigan State University, provides an overview of computer adaptive assessment. Computer adaptive assessment is an established technology that offers detailed information on where students are on a learning continuum rather than a summary judgment about whether or not they have reached an arbitrary standard of "proficiency" or "readiness." Computer adaptivity will support the fair and accurate assessment of English learners (ELs) and lead to a serious engagement with the multiple dimensions of "readiness" for college and careers.The second and third papers give specific attention to two areas in which we know that current assessments are inadequate: assessments in science and assessments for English learners.In science, paper-and-pencil, multiple choice tests provide only weak and superficial information about students' knowledge and skills -- most specifically about their abilities to think scientifically and actually do science. In their paper, Chris Dede and Jody Clarke-Midura of Harvard University illustrate the potential for richer, more authentic assessments of students' scientific understanding with a case study of a virtual performance assessment now under development at Harvard. With regard to English learners, administering tests in English to students who are learning the language, or to speakers of non-standard dialects, inevitably confounds students' content knowledge with their fluency in Standard English, to the detriment of many students. In his paper, Robert Linquanti of WestEd reviews key problems in the assessment of ELs, and identifies the essential features of an assessment system equipped to provide fair and accurate measures of their academic performance.The report's contributors offer deeply informed recommendations for assessment policy, but three are especially urgent.Build a system that ensures continued development and increased reliance on computer adaptive testing. Computer adaptive assessment provides the essential foundation for a system that can produce fair and accurate measurement of English learners' knowledge and of all students' knowledge and skills in science and other subjects. Developing computer adaptive assessments is a necessary intermediate step toward a system that makes assessment more authentic by tightly linking its tasks and instructional activities and ultimately embedding assessment in instruction. It is vital for both consortia to keep these goals in mind, even in light of current technological and resource constraints.Integrate the development of new assessments with assessments of English language proficiency (ELP). The next generation of ELP assessments should take into consideration an English learners' specific level of proficiency in English. They will need to be based on ELP standards that sufficiently specify the target academic language competencies that English learners need to progress in and gain mastery of the Common Core Standards. One of the report's authors, Robert Linquanti, states: "Acknowledging and overcoming the challenges involved in fairly and accurately assessing ELs is integral and not peripheral to the task of developing an assessment system that serves all students well. Treating the assessment of ELs as a separate problem -- or, worse yet, as one that can be left for later -- calls into question the basic legitimacy of assessment systems that drive high-stakes decisions about students, teachers, and schools." Include virtual performance assessments as part of comprehensive state assessment systems. Virtual performance assessments have considerable promise for measuring students' inquiry and problem-solving skills in science and in other subject areas, because authentic assessment can be closely tied to or even embedded in instruction. The simulation of authentic practices in settings similar to the real world opens the way to assessment of students' deeper learning and their mastery of 21st century skills across the curriculum. We are just setting out on the road toward assessments that ensure fair and accurate measurement of performance for all students, and support for sustained improvements in teaching and learning. Developing assessments that realize these goals will take time, resources and long-term policy commitment. PARCC and SBAC are taking the essential first steps down a long road, and new technologies have begun to illuminate what's possible. This report seeks to keep policymakers' attention focused on the road ahead, to ensure that the choices they make now move us further toward the goal of college and career success for all students. This publication was released at an event on May 16, 2011

Links between the personalities, styles and performance in computer programming

There are repetitive patterns in strategies of manipulating source code. For example, modifying source code before acquiring knowledge of how a code works is a depth-first style and reading and understanding before modifying source code is a breadth-first style. To the extent we know there is no study on the influence of personality on them. The objective of this study is to understand the influence of personality on programming styles. We did a correlational study with 65 programmers at the University of Stuttgart. Academic achievement, programming experience, attitude towards programming and five personality factors were measured via self-assessed survey. The programming styles were asked in the survey or mined from the software repositories. Performance in programming was composed of bug-proneness of programmers which was mined from software repositories, the grades they got in a software project course and their estimate of their own programming ability. We did statistical analysis and found that Openness to Experience has a positive association with breadth-first style and Conscientiousness has a positive association with depth-first style. We also found that in addition to having more programming experience and better academic achievement, the styles of working depth-first and saving coarse-grained revisions improve performance in programming.Comment: 27 pages, 6 figure

Cleveland Schools That Are Making a Difference

Profiles thirteen Cleveland schools -- a cross section of traditional public, private, parochial, and charter schools, where the majority of students are economically disadvantaged -- that have demonstrated progress in student achievement gains

Cracking the Code on Stem: A People Strategy for Nevada\u27s Economy

Nevada has in place a plausible economic diversification strategy—and it’s beginning to work. Now, the state and its regions need to craft a people strategy. Specifically, the state needs to boost the number of Nevadans who possess at least some postsecondary training in the fields of science, technology, engineering, or math—the so-called “STEM” disciplines (to which some leaders add arts and design to make it “STEAM”). The moment is urgent—and only heightened by the projected worker needs of Tesla Motors’ planned “gigafactory” for lithium-ion batteries in Storey County. Even before the recent Tesla commitment, a number of the more high-tech industry sectors targeted by the state’s new economic diversification strategy had begun to deliver significant growth. Most notable in fast-growing sectors like Business IT Ecosystems (as defined by the Governor’s Office for Economic Development) and large sectors like Health and Medical Services, this growth has begun to increase the demand in Nevada for workers with at least a modicum of postsecondary training in one or more STE M discipline. However, there is a problem. Even though many available opportunities require no more than the right community college certificate, insufficient numbers of Nevadans have pursued even a little STEM training. As a result, too few Nevadans are ready to participate in the state’s emerging STEM economy. The upshot: Without concerted action to prepare more Nevadans for jobs in STEM-intensive fields, skills shortages could limit growth in the state’s most promising target industries and Nevadans could miss out on employment that offers superior paths to opportunity and advancement. Which is the challenge this report addresses: Aimed at focusing the state at a critical moment, this analysis speaks to Nevada’s STEM challenge by providing a new assessment of Nevada’s STEM economy and labor market as well as a review of actions that leaders throughout the state—whether in the public, private, civic, or philanthropic sectors—can take to develop a workforce capable of supporting continued growth through economic diversification

Charting the Course: Four Years of the Thomas W. Payzant School on the Move Prize

Every spring since 2006, EdVestors (www.edvestors.org) invites Boston Public schools with 4-year rates of improvement on the Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System (MCAS) tests that are significantly (50% or more) greater than the district average to apply for a $100,000 School on the Move Prize (SOM). Since the creation of the Prize, the Rennie Center for Education Research & Policy has served as EdVestors' research partner, identifying and documenting lessons from the winning schools. This report draws upon the previous SOM case studies produced by the Rennie Center, along with interviews with school leaders, staff and students. The study identifies common themes across all four winning schools that describe the structures and strategies put in place to better serve students, as well as some of the opportunities and barriers the schools have faced in sustaining their success since winning the award. Finally, the study highlights some key lessons the leaders of these four schools view as critical to implementing the strategies and practices outlined to support students and improve outcomes.Over the past four years, a diverse group of schools have emerged as winners, including two pilot schools -- one a high school and the other an elementary school -- a traditional K-8 school and a small high school occupying one floor of the South Boston Education Complex. These schools also represent the diverse neighborhoods in Boston, including Dorchester, Roxbury, Brighton, and South Boston. Despite differences in structure, governance and grades served, all four winning schools do share some similar characteristics. First, they all experienced significant structural changes in the immediate years prior to winning the SOM Prize that provided an opportunity for reflection and strategic planning. Second, they are all relatively small schools with lower enrollments than most comparable schools with the same grade configurations in the district. Third, they are all led by experienced educators who are strong leaders with deep knowledge of the Boston Public School system. Finally, they all share common practices that have been critical to their success in improving student achievement, including: Shared Leadership -- Shared Learning: Distributed leadership grounded in shared accountability between administrators and teachers toward a goal of instructional excellence and increased student achievement; Data-driven Instruction: Intentional systems to use data to drive decisions about curriculum, instruction and student supports; andAcademic Rigor and Student Support: A student-centered approach that balances high academic expectations with integrated academic and developmental supports targeted to student needs

Opportunity to Learn Audit: Elementary School Science

Despite widespread media and public attention to the need for U.S. students to be globally competitive in science-related fields, remarkably little emphasis is placed on improving elementary science in U.S. public schools. Yet, it is effective elementary science programs that provide the foundation for a sound K-12 education in science. In a new report, Opportunity to Learn: Elementary Science, the Rennie Center analyzes whether students in high- and low-performing schools receive equitable opportunities to learn in science and, importantly, profiles the promising practices of schools that are beating the odds and succeeding at educating students to high levels in science. This report is the first in a two-part study that the Rennie Center is producing on Massachusetts students' opportunity to learn science. The second report, to be released in late Fall 2008, is being developed in partnership with the Education Development Center and will highlight opportunities to learn science at the high school level (9-12). The federal No Child Left Behind (NCLB) legislation and state accountability systems have created external incentives to improve student achievement in science in addition to English language arts (ELA) and math. In 2010, Massachusetts will require all 10th graders to pass one of the science MCAS tests (in biology, physics, chemistry or technology/engineering) in order to receive a diploma. Yet, to date, schools have increasingly placed their emphasis on math and ELA, to the detriment of science. There also exists a substantial racial/ethnic achievement gap in the sciences, just as there is in math and ELA. English language learners, those who are African American or Hispanic, and students from low-income homes are all falling well below the standards for proficiency set by the state. Given that the state holds all students accountable for their performance in science, it is necessary to examine whether all students are receiving equitable opportunities to learn and succeed at science. This report seeks to identify concretely what top-performing schools do to support science instruction and to draw out considerations for policymakers at the district and state levels.Themes across the SchoolsThe following is a description of greater opportunities to learn science that are present in top-performing schools, compared to low-performing schools:More time on science.Teachers who specialize in science.Regularly scheduled support from district science coordinators.Science materials housed at the schools (rather than at the district).Professional development in scienceSchool budgets for science.High levels of parent involvement in and advocacy for science.Accessibility to natural resources.School leadership focused on science.RecommendationsFor school and district leaders:Make science a high priority in schools and across the district. Promote the integration of science with math and literacy. Set and monitor guidelines for time on science. Develop and monitor adherence to science curriculum that is mapped to state frameworks. Support, document, and -- if necessary -- mandate science-related professional development for elementary school teachers. Identify teachers with high levels of interest in science. Solicit engagement of local business and community leaders in science. For state policymakers:Providing more resources and ensuring that all elementary students in Massachusetts have opportunities to learn science and to achieve at high levels will require coordinated efforts by both state legislators and the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education.The following are recommendations for consideration by both state legislators and the Department. Support expanded school day initiatives and encourage more time for subjects like science, especially for low-income and minority students. Provide mentoring and support for elementary teachers to become school-based science resource specialists. Provide broad, fundamental professional development that is aligned with state frameworks in science for elementary teachers, giving preference to low-performing schools that agree to send a critical number of teachers. Provide technical assistance and training on integrating science, literacy and mathematics instruction. Support enrichment opportunities for low-performing schools that lack active parent and community engagement in science. Provide a supplementary materials budget to under-resourced schools