skip to main content
review-article

(Re)defining computing curricula by (re)defining computing

Published:18 January 2010Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

What is the core of Computing? This paper defines the discipline of computing as centered around the notion of modeling, especially those models that are automatable and automatically manipulable. We argue that this central idea crucially connects models with languages and machines rather than focusing on and around computational artifacts, and that it admits a very broad set of fields while still distinguishing the discipline from mathematics, engineering and science. The resulting computational curriculum focuses on modeling, scales and limits, simulation, abstraction, and automation as key components of a computationalist mindset.

References

  1. Abelson, H., and Sussman, G. J. 1985. Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs. MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Adelman, L. 1994. Molecular computation of solutions to combinatorial problems. Science 266, 1021--1024. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Adrion, R., Aiken, B., Bernat, A., Brown, J., Cooper, S., Dunn, M., Finlay, M., Giles, R., Gries,R., Kelemen, C., Krishnamurthy, S., Kumar, D., Kurose, J., Lawrence, A., Masi, L., McCracken, D., Merritt, S., Murtaugh, T., Plotkin, J., Prey, J., Ryder, B., Siraj, R., Stein, L., Tao, L., Teller, V., Thomas, J., Topi, H., Sutner, K., Shaw, M., and Wolz, U. 2006. Report of the NSF Workshop on Integrative Computing Education and Research (Northeast Workshop). Cambridge, Massachusetts, November 2005/January 2006Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Bareiss, C., Powers, K., Thede, S., Meredith, M., Shannon, C., and Williams, J. 2004. The Computer Science Small Department Initiative (CS_SDI) Report. SIGCSE Bull. 36(1), 332--333. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Bentley, J. 1986. Little Languages. Communications of the ACM, 29(8), 711--21. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Brady, A., Bruce, K., Noonan, R., Tucker, A., and Walker, H. 2004. The 2003 model curriculum for a liberal arts degree in computer science: preliminary report. In Proceedings of the 35th SIGCSE Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, 282--283. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. ACM/IEEE-CS Joint Curriculum Task Force. Computing Curricula 2001: Computer Science Volume. 2001. Journal on Educational Resources in Computing 1(3).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Denning, P. 2003. Great principles of Computing. Communications of the ACM, 46(11), 15--20. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Downey, A., and Stein, L. 2006. A Small Footprint Curriculum for Computing. Frontiers in Education, San Diego, California, October 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Felleisen, M., and Krishnamurthi, S. 2009. Why Computer Science Doesn't Matter. Communications of the ACM 52(7), 37--39. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Foley, J. 2002. Computing > Computer Science. Computing Research News 14(4).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Furst, M., Isbell, C., and Guzdial, M. 2007. Threads: How to Restructure a Computer Science Curriculum for a Flat World. In Proceedings of the Thirty-Eighth Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Guzdial, M. 2003. A Media Computation Course for Non-Majors. In Proceedings of the 6th Annual Conference on Innovation, and Technology in Computer Science, 104--108. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. NRC. 2004. Computer Science: Reflections on the Field, Reflections from the Field. Committee on the Fundamentals of Computer Science: Challenges and Opportunities, Computer Science and Telecommunications Board, National Research Council, National Academies Press 2004.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Shackelford, R., McGettrick, A., Sloan, R., Topi, H., Davies, G., Kamali, R., Cross, J., Impagliazzo, J., LeBlanc, R., and Lunt, B. 2006. Computing Curricula 2005: The Overview Report. SIGCSE Bull. 38(1), 456--457. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Stein, L. A. 1999. Challenging the Computational Metaphor: Implications for How We Think. Cybernetics and Systems 30(6), 473--507.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. Stein, L. A. 1999. What We Swept Under the Rug: Radically Rethinking CS1. Computer Science Education, 8(2), 118--129.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. Tucker, A. Deek, F., Jones, J., McCowan, D., Stephenson, C., and Verno. A. 2003. A Model Curriculum for K-12 Computer Science: Final Report of the ACM K-12 Task Force Curriculum Committee.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Wing, Jeannette. 2006. Computational Thinking. Communications of the ACM 49(3), 33--35. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Wolz, U., Domen, D., and McAuliffe, M. 1997. Multi-Media Integrated into CS 2: an Interactive Children's Story as a Unifying Class Project. SIGCSE Bull. 29(3), 103--110. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Xu, Y, editor. 2009. Transform Science: Computational Education for Scientists. Microsoft Research 2009. DOI=http://research.microsoft.com/transformscience/CEfS.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. (Re)defining computing curricula by (re)defining computing

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in

      Full Access

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader