Co-Leaders:
Mihaela Sabin (University of New Hampshire, USA) mihaela.sabin@unh.edu
Barbara Viola (Viotech Solutions, Inc., USA) bviola@viotechsolutions.com
John Impagliazzo (Hofstra University, USA) john.impagliazzo@hofstra.edu

Abstract:
The goal of this working group is to assist in the development of curricular guidelines for relevant, high quality, four-year degree programs in information technology (IT) that prepare successful graduates for a global technological society in the next decade. The working group seeks direct involvement and participation from Latin American academic and professional IT communities in South America and beyond. The working group effort’s objectives will focus on determining:Commonalities and differences between the current draft version of the IT2017 curricularframework and existing IT curricula in Latino American universities;
IT proficiencies of graduates from four-year IT programs in Latino American universities with an emphasis on industry technological needs and expectations of graduates’ qualifications; and
Ways in which to make modifications to the IT2017 report or to existing IT curricula in Latin America to prepare highly competent and globally competitive IT graduates for the 2020s.
Those wishing to participate in this dynamic working group should have a keen interest in developing innovative curricular guidelines in IT that reflect Latin American IT perspectives from academia and industry. Participants, preferably from South and Central America, must be ready, willing, and able to start work in early April in an effort to prepare for the face-to-face working group sessions in July.

---

 

Working Group 2: Game Development for Computer Science Education

Co-Leaders:
Chris Johnson (University of Wisconsin, USA) johnch@uwec.edu
Monica McGill (Bradley University, USA) mmcgill@bradley.edu

Abstract:
Every computer science educator has dealt with the student who struggles and gives up at the first read of a homework assignment --- but who regularly spends hours engaging in nonstop trial, error, and learning in digital games without even once looking at the manual. What accounts for these two very different attitudes present in the same person? More importantly, how can we help our students be just as eager to learn computer science concepts as they are to learn the complex systems of games? This working group believes that games themselves are the answer. Sadly, few computer science education games exist. We will have to make them.

Because game development is time-intensive and is almost always a collaboration between many disciplines, this working group follows a two-year schedule. At ITiCSE 2016, the group will summarize existing research on game development for computer science education and share plans for games that we expect will help players learn and practice computer science concepts. In the following year, group members will implement these games, collaborating with students and other group members. At ITiCSE 2017, the games and initial analyses of their use will be shared with the computer science education community.

---

 

Working Group 3: Teaching Model-Driven Software Development

Co-Leaders:
Ludwik Kuzniarz (Blekinge Institute of Technology, Sweden) lku@bth.se
Luiz Eduardo G. Martins (Federal University of São Paulo, Brazil) legmartins@unifesp.br
Plínio R. S. Vilela (D2S, Brazil) plinio@d2s.com.br

Abstract:
Software development is a process starting with specification of requirements, then providing design of the required software and implementing the design. Introducing understanding of the process and teaching the skills required for conducting the process is an important learning objective in any CS/SE curriculum. Recently a new paradigm – Model-Driven Software Development (MDSD) - is been introduced and extensively used in order to manage increasing complexity in the development of software. In the working group we are going to start the work with investigating and discussing current approaches to teaching MDSD - what is taught and how. Later, based on the identified evidence we want to provide suggestions and guidelines on how to introduce MDSD in the software engineering education, in particular what elements of MDSD can and should be included in the curriculum and how they can be properly taught.
These goals are going to be reached by the following means:

Providing a systematic mapping of the state-of-the-art in MDSD teaching.
Reporting the educators experience in teaching MDSD.
Providing guidelines for proper introduction of MDSD into software engineering curricula.

---

Working Group 4: Ground Rules for Academic Integrity in Computing

Co-Leaders:
Simon (University of Newcastle, Australia) simon@newcastle.edu.au
Judy Sheard (Monash University, Australia) judy.sheard@monash.edu

Abstract:
Although there has been a great deal of recent work on academic integrity in computing assessment, there remains no clear notion of academic standards within the field of computing education.
The Australian-based Prianit project recently posed a number of questions about academic integrity in computing assessment, questions about the re-use of one’s own and others’ code, the need to reference such code, the manner of referencing such code, the legitimacy of seeking debugging assistance in individual assessment tasks, and more. The project members argued that they do not have the authority to answer the questions; that the answers must be provided by the computing education academic community. But what is the computing education community, and how does it speak?

An ITiCSE working group, combining diverse perspectives from around the world, might be well placed to propose answers on behalf on the computing education community – even if those answers are merely a starting point, to be further debated and refined. This working group will set out to lay the ground rules for academic integrity in computing assessment, clearly distinguishing them where appropriate from the rules of academic integrity in essay-type assessment.

---