计算机教学伦理:美国计算机学会计算机科学教育出版物的系统文献综述

IF 3.2 3区 工程技术 Q1 EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES
Noelle Brown, Benjamin Xie, Ella Sarder, Casey Fiesler, Eliane S. Wiese
{"title":"计算机教学伦理:美国计算机学会计算机科学教育出版物的系统文献综述","authors":"Noelle Brown, Benjamin Xie, Ella Sarder, Casey Fiesler, Eliane S. Wiese","doi":"10.1145/3634685","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The computing education research community now has at least 40 years of published research on teaching ethics in higher education. To examine the state of our field, we present a systematic literature review of papers in the Association for Computing Machinery (ACM) computing education venues that describe teaching ethics in higher-education computing courses. Our review spans all papers published to SIGCSE, ICER, ITiCSE, CompEd, Koli Calling, and TOCE venues through 2022, with 100 papers fulfilling our inclusion criteria. Overall, we found a wide variety in content, teaching strategies, challenges, and recommendations. The majority of the papers did not articulate a conception of “ethics,” and those that did used many different conceptions, from broadly-applicable ethical theories, to social impact, to specific computing application areas (e.g., data privacy, hacking). Instructors used many different pedagogical strategies (e.g., discussions, lectures, assignments) and formats (e.g., standalone courses, incorporated within a technical course). Many papers identified measuring student knowledge as a particular challenge, and 59% of papers included mention of assessments or grading. Of the 69% of papers that evaluated their ethics instruction, most used student self-report surveys, course evaluations, and instructor reflections. While many papers included calls for more ethics content in computing, specific recommendations were rarely broadly applicable, preventing a synthesis of guidelines. To continue building on the last 40 years of research and move toward a set of best practices for teaching ethics in computing, our community should delineate our varied conceptions of ethics, examine which teaching strategies are best suited for each, and explore how to measure student learning.</p>","PeriodicalId":48764,"journal":{"name":"ACM Transactions on Computing Education","volume":"54 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Teaching Ethics in Computing: A Systematic Literature Review of ACM Computer Science Education Publications\",\"authors\":\"Noelle Brown, Benjamin Xie, Ella Sarder, Casey Fiesler, Eliane S. Wiese\",\"doi\":\"10.1145/3634685\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>The computing education research community now has at least 40 years of published research on teaching ethics in higher education. To examine the state of our field, we present a systematic literature review of papers in the Association for Computing Machinery (ACM) computing education venues that describe teaching ethics in higher-education computing courses. Our review spans all papers published to SIGCSE, ICER, ITiCSE, CompEd, Koli Calling, and TOCE venues through 2022, with 100 papers fulfilling our inclusion criteria. Overall, we found a wide variety in content, teaching strategies, challenges, and recommendations. The majority of the papers did not articulate a conception of “ethics,” and those that did used many different conceptions, from broadly-applicable ethical theories, to social impact, to specific computing application areas (e.g., data privacy, hacking). Instructors used many different pedagogical strategies (e.g., discussions, lectures, assignments) and formats (e.g., standalone courses, incorporated within a technical course). Many papers identified measuring student knowledge as a particular challenge, and 59% of papers included mention of assessments or grading. Of the 69% of papers that evaluated their ethics instruction, most used student self-report surveys, course evaluations, and instructor reflections. While many papers included calls for more ethics content in computing, specific recommendations were rarely broadly applicable, preventing a synthesis of guidelines. To continue building on the last 40 years of research and move toward a set of best practices for teaching ethics in computing, our community should delineate our varied conceptions of ethics, examine which teaching strategies are best suited for each, and explore how to measure student learning.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48764,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ACM Transactions on Computing Education\",\"volume\":\"54 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ACM Transactions on Computing Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1145/3634685\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"工程技术\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACM Transactions on Computing Education","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3634685","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

计算机教育研究界目前已经发表了至少40年的关于高等教育教学伦理的研究。为了检查我们领域的状况,我们对计算机协会(ACM)计算教育场所的论文进行了系统的文献综述,这些论文描述了高等教育计算课程中的教学伦理。我们的综述涵盖了截至2022年在SIGCSE、ICER、icticse、CompEd、Koli Calling和TOCE等平台发表的所有论文,其中100篇论文符合我们的纳入标准。总的来说,我们发现了内容、教学策略、挑战和建议的多样性。大多数论文没有清晰地表达“伦理”的概念,而那些使用了许多不同概念的论文,从广泛适用的伦理理论,到社会影响,再到特定的计算应用领域(例如,数据隐私,黑客攻击)。教师使用了许多不同的教学策略(例如,讨论,讲座,作业)和形式(例如,独立课程,纳入技术课程)。许多论文认为衡量学生的知识是一项特别的挑战,59%的论文提到了评估或评分。在评估其道德指导的69%的论文中,大多数使用了学生自我报告调查、课程评估和教师反思。虽然许多论文呼吁在计算机领域增加伦理内容,但具体的建议很少能广泛适用,这阻碍了指导方针的综合。为了在过去40年的研究基础上继续发展,并朝着一套计算机伦理教学的最佳实践迈进,我们的社区应该描绘出我们对伦理的不同概念,研究哪种教学策略最适合每种概念,并探索如何衡量学生的学习。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Teaching Ethics in Computing: A Systematic Literature Review of ACM Computer Science Education Publications

The computing education research community now has at least 40 years of published research on teaching ethics in higher education. To examine the state of our field, we present a systematic literature review of papers in the Association for Computing Machinery (ACM) computing education venues that describe teaching ethics in higher-education computing courses. Our review spans all papers published to SIGCSE, ICER, ITiCSE, CompEd, Koli Calling, and TOCE venues through 2022, with 100 papers fulfilling our inclusion criteria. Overall, we found a wide variety in content, teaching strategies, challenges, and recommendations. The majority of the papers did not articulate a conception of “ethics,” and those that did used many different conceptions, from broadly-applicable ethical theories, to social impact, to specific computing application areas (e.g., data privacy, hacking). Instructors used many different pedagogical strategies (e.g., discussions, lectures, assignments) and formats (e.g., standalone courses, incorporated within a technical course). Many papers identified measuring student knowledge as a particular challenge, and 59% of papers included mention of assessments or grading. Of the 69% of papers that evaluated their ethics instruction, most used student self-report surveys, course evaluations, and instructor reflections. While many papers included calls for more ethics content in computing, specific recommendations were rarely broadly applicable, preventing a synthesis of guidelines. To continue building on the last 40 years of research and move toward a set of best practices for teaching ethics in computing, our community should delineate our varied conceptions of ethics, examine which teaching strategies are best suited for each, and explore how to measure student learning.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
ACM Transactions on Computing Education
ACM Transactions on Computing Education EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES-
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
16.70%
发文量
66
期刊介绍: ACM Transactions on Computing Education (TOCE) (formerly named JERIC, Journal on Educational Resources in Computing) covers diverse aspects of computing education: traditional computer science, computer engineering, information technology, and informatics; emerging aspects of computing; and applications of computing to other disciplines. The common characteristics shared by these papers are a scholarly approach to teaching and learning, a broad appeal to educational practitioners, and a clear connection to student learning.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信