SIGCS Future Survey Report
Joe Kmoch, SIGCS Chairperson
Philip East, Past Chairperson
1 Introduction
As you probably know, we recently conducted and then re-conducted a survey of SIGCS members. The impetus for the survey was the question as to whether SIGCS should continue existing in view of the fact that CSTA (the Computer Science Teachers Association) was being formed with substantial backing from ACM (the Association for Computing Machinery), a group of computing practitioners and academics. Some folks (including some SIGCS leaders) were suggesting that CSTA would relegate SIGCS to inconsequentiality. Others differed. We needed to ask the membership.
With the assistance of ISTE staff (particularly SIG Liaison Susan Hair) a questionnaire was developed and members asked to complete it. A very good number of members (about 230) responded to the survey. Unfortunately, the file containing the responses was lost and a second request to complete the survey was distributed to the membership. A reasonable response rate of 7% (140) was achieved the second time.
After the survey results were compiled a number of members volunteered to study and interpret them. (Their names are included in the acknowledgements at the end of the article.) Joe Kmoch received input, drafted and distributed a report, and revised it. Joe and Philip then worked together to turn the draft into an article for JCSE Online. Those interested in examining the survey and results directly are referred to the accompanying PDF file (PDF, 111 KB, 17 seconds, PDF instructions). Additionally, comments for free response items are available from either Joe or Philip.
The information below provides a report of the responses to each item and some discussion and explanation of item results. There is also some discussion as to possible implications for SIGCS’s future of portions of the survey results. Note that the results reported relate to percentages or fractions of those responding to the survey. Those figures may or may not be generalizable to all SIGCS members.
2 Survey Results
2.1 Who are our SIGCS Members?
- A bit over 2/3 (69%) indicate that teaching computing is a major part of their job
- A bit under 1/3 (31%) of SIGCS members are secondary, a little less than 1/2 (43 %) indicated their interest was in pre-secondary education.
- Half of the respondents are new to ISTE and nearly 3/4 (73%) are new to SIGCS (new meaning joined within the last two years)
- 59% are not all-inclusive members (meaning they chose to be involved with SIGCS—all-inclusive members join all SIGs for an overall discounted price)
- A little less than half (46%) of those have SIGCS as their only SIG
- About 1 in 6 (16%) joined ISTE because of SIGCS, the rest to extend their ISTE benefits
Of the 43 for whom teaching computing is not a major part of their job, 23 are all-inclusive members and 20 are not. Fifteen of those 20 chose SIGCS as their only SIG. Our membership is spread over the entire spectrum of K-20 with a significant number of those whose interest is pre-secondary. There is also a significant number with post-secondary interests. A significant number of members have SIGCS as their only SIG. Half of our current membership has been with ISTE for two years or less.
2.1 What activities/benefits do SIGCS members participate in and value?
- With respect to participation
- Reading JCSE Online was noted by 48%
- The next highest was reading the SIGCS discussion list
- There is no activity that draws a majority of the respondents
- With respect to perceived value
- A K-12 CS publication, online teaching resources, and sessions at a national conference all were mentioned by over half the respondents (66%, 64%, and 54 % respectively)
- Substantial numbers of respondents are also interested in regional workshops, on-line discussion, and a national meeting for computing (34%, 24%, and 19 percent respectively)
There is much interest in obtaining information in a variety of ways, both online and face-to-face. Clearly, past efforts in providing such information need to be maintained and enhanced. Other activities are almost incidental to the members.
2.3 What is our SIGCS membership price sensitivity?
- A little over half (54%) paid their dues out of pocket
- 42% were in the <=$100 category; about 35% in the $100-300 category
A significant number feel strongly enough about computing education to pay for the membership with their own dollars. While the respondents are about evenly split between the below $100 category and the $100 and $300 categories, they prefer membership costs in two CS organizations to total $100 or less. It appears that cost will not be a determining factor when people decide whether to maintain or add a membership in SIGCS; however, it cannot be ignored.
2.4 What is the professional involvement of our SIGCS membership?
- 4/5 (81%) are members in another organization and about 70% of those organizations are technology-focused
- Most of the respondents (81%) had not heard of CSTA
- 3/5 (60%) would likely be members of both CSTA and SIGCS
- About 1/3 (29%) would likely maintain membership in SIGCS only
- More than half would like these two organization to extend or complement one another
- 70% think both organizations can prosper
Our membership is very involved in professional organizations and more than half would be a member of both CSTA and SIGCS. The 29% who would not join CSTA is mitigated by the fact that 31% do not teach computing. Respondents prefer that the two organizations be complementary to one another rather than competing or duplicating services. Most believe both organizations can exist and prosper for the benefit the CS community.
3 Interpretations and Inferences
As with most surveys, there are some rather obvious conclusions. At the same time, there are few, if any, very strong bases for any particular conclusion. The discussion below identifies ideas various reviewers saw from their perspective when examining the survey results.
3.1 General SIG Health and Activities
We did the right thing a couple of years ago in deciding to support the ACM’s model curriculum for K-12 education, and to expand our mission more formally and revise our statement of purpose and by-laws. Our membership indeed appears to cover the range of K-12 education and beyond. We may wish to consider expanding our mission further than K-12 given that community colleges experience many of the same issues we see in K-12.
We have a significant base of members new to ISTE, thus, it may be useful to determine how to retain them by offering something for someone who is in the "new" category.
Despite the number of people who are only a member of our SIG, relatively few joined ISTE because of our existence. Perhaps we need to capitalize on this by using the breadth and expertise of the whole of ISTE as we support our smaller community.
Our membership (or at least those 140 who responded to our survey) are committed to computing in education given their involvement in other similar professional education organizations and that many pay for their membership out of their own dollars.
We should look for ways to tie JCSE and discussion forums to encourage more cross-pollination (e.g., articles spurring discussions). We should look for ways to encourage our membership to use the new communities on the ISTE Web site effectively (these communities have replaced the mailing lists).
The great interest in JCSE, online teaching resources, and sessions at national conferences, suggests that we need to focus and redouble our efforts in those activities. We may wish to consider targeting various categories of members. Perhaps a follow-up survey would help to get more detailed information?
Apparently if SIGCS and CSTA are sufficiently complementary, both can exist and most respondents would join both organizations, however, the total cost for both needs to be less than $100.
Having 140 responses (actually the first survey which was inadvertently wiped out had about 230 responses) indicates a solid interest in our SIG. This coupled with the 25 or so individuals who volunteered to help out with the survey analysis suggests that we have a base of volunteers from whom we can draw on if we develop some interesting projects.
3.2 Collaboration with CSTA
There is clear support for SIGCS’s continued existence in spite of the debut of CSTA, a national organization (in its own right, rather than a SIG of a differently focused organization). Respondents are encouraging collaboration rather competition. The implication is that SIGCS leaders need to be interacting with CSTA leaders in planning how best to serve those who teach computing.
Certainly, we should plan to continue the collaborative work on JCSE which has been well received and has a publishing history could be offered to members of CSTA as a journal to supplement their current newsletter. (Currently, JCSE Online is not available to non-ISTE members, thus some mechanism for subscribing will have to be developed.) CSTA may produce resources that might be made available to SIGCS members.
CSTA is planning to develop a Web Repository of CS Curricular Materials. This would appear to be another way in which the organizations could collaborate. It would seem much better for both organizations to work together to develop and maintain such a site.
Other ideas for collaboration include:
- Given the national presence of ISTE including a Washington, D.C. office, both of our organizations could use this as a platform to work on curriculum reform and certification issues which have been posed by CSTA. The ISTE Advocacy Kit is a good start in this direction. Though virtually no respondent indicated a need for an organization with a national presence, in the broader picture, some of the issues that CSTA is trying to deal with can only be dealt with in this manner. ISTE/SIGCS has this expanded breadth that CSTA needs and could be an important point of collaboration.
- Given the breadth of ISTE's SIGs and the recent interest to develop collaboration among the ISTE SIGs, we would be able to offer CSTA access to this breadth of knowledge, expertise and volunteers for purposes of enhancing our CS community. For example, the SIGTE might be very interested in working with SIGCS and CSTA to work on some of the teacher education issues that have been noted by CSTA. And SIGAdmin might be very interested in the curriculum and certification issues that have been noted by CSTA.
- Some of the curriculum items noted in the ACM K-12 Guidelines are very much of interest to various ISTE SIGs and could benefit from collaboration with those SIGs if we establish some kinds of collaborative efforts between SIGCS and CSTA. For example, the entire pre-secondary curriculum was developed with the ISTE NETS Standards in mind. Secondary level areas such as multimedia/web design (HyperSIG), and networking and system support (SIGTC) might benefit from the collaboration SIGCS can bring to the table. There is continued drive on everyone's part for inclusion of special populations which SETSIG might be interested in collaborating on. Finally, issues with smaller populations in schools interested in taking CS courses might be dealt with in collaboration with SIGTEL.
If some areas of cooperation can be developed, joint committees can be formed with members from both of our organizations involved. Further, each executive board could have a representative from the other organization on its board.
3.3 As an Organization
As an organization we need to grow the skills of the organization membership—involving long-time members yet not alienating the newcomers to the field and organization.
We need to develop over the next few months a clear picture of what we want to be so that we can both clearly and substantively talk with CSTA and so that our membership understands both the differences and similarities of our two organizations. Thus, our mission statement will need to clearly identify our goal of enhancing the teaching of computer skills (usage skills and programming-related skills) while simultaneously developing students’ capabilities at problem solving, higher order thinking, and project work (both individually and collaboratively).
We need to make our organization attractive to both our membership and to CSTA.
Whatever SIGCS accomplishes, it does so with volunteer work. We need the support and time of a number of volunteers to move ahead with this vital work. Thus, it is important that we move rapidly to determine and implement activity to recruit and involve members to aid in our quest to provide our members good service that enhances their teaching of computing.
4 Summary Recommendations
Generally, the survey results suggest that SIGCS should focus on providing information to K-12 computing teachers. We should continue with our past activities seeking to improve or enhance them. Changes in the Web tools ISTE provides offers an opportunity to finally add capabilities we have desired for some time.
We believe the survey supports a number of previously planned and new initiatives. Specific recommendations are:
- Revisit the proposed changes to the SIGCS mission statement and bylaws and submit them to the membership for approval.
- Assuming approval of the bylaws, recruit officers to serve in the various capacities.
- Reestablish regular publication of JCSE Online and JCSE Annual with scope extending to all K-12 levels and all aspects of teaching computing and supporting teachers of computing. Establish the journal as a resource for all teachers of computing rather than the voice of SIGCS.
- Use the “SIGCS Community” of the ISTE Web site to provide ongoing communication about all manner of ideas and issues confronting SIGCS members as they teach computing.
- Establish a relationship with CSTA.
- Work with CSTA (and others) to provide online resources for teachers of computing.
- Continue (and improve where possible) past activity
- “CS” strand at NECC
- “CS” workshop(s) at NECC
- CS & IT Symposium participation
- SIGCS participation in accreditation activity
Once the expanded leadership (new officers) of SIGCS is established, additional ideas are likely to appear.
Contact:
Joe Kmoch
kmoch@whs.edu
Philip East
east@cs.uni.edu
Other contributors to this work are named below. Hopefully, we have not left anyone out.
Charmaine Bentley
Rich Lamb
Pedro Leite
Sharon Meyers
John Thompson
|
