Elizabeth Patitsas
Jesse Berlin
ABSTRACT
It is commonly thought that CS grades are bimodal. We statistically analyzed 778 distributions of final course grades from a large research university, and found only 5.8% of the distributions passed tests of multimodality. We then devised a psychology experiment to understand why CS educators believe their grades to be bimodal. We showed 53 CS professors a series of histograms displaying ambiguous distributions and asked them to categorize the distributions. A random half of participants were primed to think about the fact that CS grades are commonly thought to be bimodal; these participants were more likely to label ambiguous distributions as "bimodal". Participants were also more likely to label distributions as bimodal if they believed that some students are innately predisposed to do better at CS. These results suggest that bimodal grades are instructional folklore in CS, caused by confirmation bias and instructor beliefs about their students.
- A. Ahadi and R. Lister. Geek genes, prior knowledge, stumbling points and learning edge momentum: parts of the one elephant? In Proceedings of the ninth annual international ACM conference on International computing education research, pages 123--128. ACM, 2013. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- A. Ahadi and R. Lister. Geek genes, prior knowledge, stumbling points and learning edge momentum: parts of the one elephant? In Proceedings of the ninth annual international ACM conference on International computing education research, pages 123--128. ACM, 2013. Google ScholarDigital Library
- C. Ashcraft, E. Eger, and M. Friend. Girls in IT: The Facts. National Center for Women & Information Technology, 2012.Google Scholar
- M. W. Eysenck, K. Mogg, J. May, A. Richards, and A. Mathews. Bias in interpretation of ambiguous sentences related to threat in anxiety. Journal of abnormal psychology, 100(2):144, 1991.Google Scholar
- S. J. Gould. The mismeasure of man. WW Norton & Company, 1996.Google Scholar
- M. Guzdial. Anyone can learn programming: Teaching > genetics, 2014.Google Scholar
- M. Guzdial. Teaching computer science better to get better results, 2014.Google Scholar
- M. Guzdial. Learner-centered design of computing education: Research on computing for everyone. Synthesis Lectures on Human-Centered Informatics, 8(6):1--165, 2015.Google ScholarCross Ref
- M. Guzdial. Source of the "geek gene" teacher beliefs: Reading on lijun ni, learning from helenrose fives on teacher self-efficacy, 2015.Google Scholar
- M. E. Heilman, C. J. Block, and P. Stathatos. The affirmative action stigma of incompetence: Effects of performance information ambiguity. Acad. of Mgmnt. J., 40(3):603--625, 1997.Google Scholar
- J. T. Jost, M. R. Banaji, and B. A. Nosek. A decade of system justification theory: Accumulated evidence of conscious and unconscious bolstering of the status quo. Political psychology, 25(6):881--919, 2004.Google ScholarCross Ref
- D. M. Kahan, E. Peters, E. C. Dawson, and P. Slovic. Motivated numeracy and enlightened self-government. Yale Law School, Public Law Working Paper, (307), 2013.Google Scholar
- J. Lave and E. Wenger. Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge university press, 1991.Google ScholarCross Ref
- S.-J. Leslie, A. Cimpian, M. Meyer, and E. Freeland. Expectations of brilliance underlie gender distributions across academic disciplines. Science, 347(6219):262--265, 2015.Google ScholarCross Ref
- C. Lewis. Attitudes and beliefs about computer science among students and faculty. SIGCSE Bull., 39(2):37--41, June 2007. Google ScholarDigital Library
- C. Lewis. Attitudes and beliefs about computer science among students and faculty. SIGCSE Bull., 39(2):37--41, June 2007. Google ScholarDigital Library
- R. Lister. Computing education research geek genes and bimodal grades. ACM Inroads, 1(3):16--17, 2010. Google ScholarDigital Library
- J. H. McDonald. Handbook of biological statistics, volume 2. Sparky House Publishing Baltimore, MD, 2009.Google Scholar
- D. H. Meadows. Thinking in systems: A primer. Chelsea Green Publishing, 2008.Google Scholar
- I. Padavic and R. J. Ely. The work-family narrative as a social defense, 2013.Google Scholar
- T. H. Park, A. Saxena, S. Jagannath, S. Wiedenbeck, and A. Forte. Towards a taxonomy of errors in HTML and CSS. In Proceedings of the ninth annual international ACM conference on International computing education research, pages 75--82. ACM, 2013. Google ScholarDigital Library
- B. K. Payne, Y. Shimizu, and L. L. Jacoby. Mental control and visual illusions: Toward explaining race-biased weapon misidentifications. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 41(1):36--47, 2005.Google ScholarCross Ref
- A. Petersen, M. Craig, and D. Zingaro. Reviewing CS1 exam question content. In Proceedings of the 42Nd ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, SIGCSE '11, pages 631--636, New York, NY, USA, 2011. ACM. Google ScholarDigital Library
- L. Porter, D. Zingaro, and R. Lister. Predicting student success using fine grain clicker data. In Proceedings of the Tenth Annual Conference on International Computing Education Research, ICER '14, pages 51--58, New York, NY, USA, 2014. ACM. Google ScholarDigital Library
- N. M. Razali and Y. B. Wah. Power comparisons of Shapiro-Wilk, Kolmogorov-Smirnov, Lilliefors and Anderson-Darling tests. Journal of Statistical Modeling and Analytics, 2(1):21--33, 2011.Google Scholar
- M. W. Rossiter. Women scientists in America: Struggles and strategies to 1940, volume 1. JHU Press, 1982.Google Scholar
- M. Sahami and C. Piech. As CS enrollments grow, are we attracting weaker students? In Proceedings of the 47th ACM Technical Symposium on Computing Science Education, SIGCSE '16, pages 54--59, New York, NY, USA, 2016. ACM. Google ScholarDigital Library
- M. F. Schilling, A. E. Watkins, and W. Watkins. Is human height bimodal? The American Statistician, 56(3):223--229, 2002.Google ScholarCross Ref
- J. G. Stout, N. Dasgupta, M. Hunsinger, and M. A. McManus. Steming the tide: using ingroup experts to inoculate women's self-concept in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (stem). Journal of personality and social psychology, 100(2):255, 2011.Google Scholar
- Wikipedia. Multimodal distribution -- wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, 2016. {Online; accessed 6-April-2016}.Google Scholar
- Wikipedia. Normal distribution -- wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, 2016. {Online; accessed 6-April-2016}.Google Scholar
- Wikipedia. Skewness -- wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, 2016. {Online; accessed 6-April-2016}.Google Scholar
- D. Zingaro, A. Petersen, and M. Craig. Stepping up to integrative questions on cs1 exams. In Proceedings of the 43rd ACM technical symposium on Computer Science Education, pages 253--258. ACM, 2012. Google ScholarDigital Library
Index Terms
- Evidence That Computer Science Grades Are Not Bimodal
Recommendations
Evidence that computer science grades are not bimodal
Although it has never been rigorously demonstrated, there is a common belief that grades in computer science courses are bimodal. We statistically analyzed 778 distributions of final course grades from a large research university and found that only 5.8%...
Bringing Grades K-5 to the Mainstream of Computer Science Education
SIGCSE '15: Proceedings of the 46th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science EducationAs awareness of computer science education grows in the general public, it is important to showcase computer science education as accessible for all grades K-12 and beyond. As panelists present the projects and research they've been conducting, we will ...
Examining Interest and Grades in Computer Science 1: A Study of Pedagogy and Achievement Goals
Computer Science 1 (CS1), the first course taken by college-level computer science (CS) majors, has traditionally suffered from high failure rates. Efforts to understand this phenomenon have considered a wide range of predictors of CS success, such as ...
Comments