Advertisement

Discovery of Interconnection Among Knowledge Areas of Standard Computer Science Curricula by a Data Science Approach

  • Yoshitatsu MatsudaEmail author
  • Takayuki Sekiya
  • Kazunori Yamaguchi
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10638)

Abstract

Computer Science Curricula 2013 (CS2013) is a widely-used standard curricula of computer science, which has been developed jointly by the ACM and the IEEE Computer Society. CS2013 consists of 18 Knowledge Areas (KAs) such as Programming Languages and Software Engineering. Though it is obvious that there are strong interconnections among the KAs, it was hard to investigate the interconnections objectively and quantitatively. In this paper, the interconnections among the KAs of CS2013 are investigated by a data science approach. For this purpose, a collection of actual syllabi from the world’s top-ranked universities was constructed. Then, every actual syllabus is projected to the KA space by a probabilistic model-based method named simplified, supervised Latent Dirichlet Allocation (denoted by ssLDA). Consequently, the following interesting properties of the interconnections among the KAs were discovered: (1) There are the high interconnections among the KAs in each syllabi; (2) A plausible hierarchical structure of the KAs is found by utilizing the interconnections; (3) The structure shows that the KAs are classified into the three principal independent factors (HUMAN, THEORY, and IMPLEMENTATION). The factor of IMPLEMENTATION can be divided into PROGRAMMING and SYSTEM. The factor of SYSTEM can be divided further into DEVICES and NETWORK.

Keywords

Data mining Computational education Curriculum analysis Latent Dirichlet allocation 

References

  1. 1.
    ACM/IEEE-CS Joint Task Force on Computing Curricula: Computer science curricula 2013. Technical report, ACM Press and IEEE Computer Society Press (2013)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Sekiya, T., Matsuda, Y., Yamaguchi, K.: Analysis of computer science related curriculum on LDA and Isomap. In: Proceedings of 15th Annual SIGCSE Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education (ITiCSE 2010), pp. 48–52 (2010)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gluga, R., Kay, J., Lister, R.: PROGOSS: mastering the curriculum. In: Proceedings of Australian Conference on Science and Mathematics Education (formerly UniServe Science Conference) (2012)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Zhao, L., Su, X., Wang, T.: Bring CS2013 recommendations into C programming course. Procedia - Soc. Behav. Sci. 176, 194–199 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Walker, H.M., Rebelsky, S.A.: Using CS2013 for a department’s curriculum review: a case study. J. Comput. Sci. Coll. 29(5), 138–144 (2014)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    McGuffee, J.W., Palmer, E.K., Guzman, I.R.: Assessing the tier-1 core learning outcomes of CS2013. In: Proceedings of 47th ACM Technical Symposium on Computing Science Education (SIGCSE 2016), pp. 485–489. ACM (2016)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dai, Y., Asano, Y., Yoshikawa, M.: Course content analysis: an initiative step toward learning object recommendation systems for MOOC learners. In: Proceedings of 9th International Conference on Educational Data Mining (EDM 2016), pp. 347–352 (2016)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Matsuda, Y., Sekiya, T., Yamaguchi, K.: Curriculum analysis of CS departments based on computing curricula by simplified, supervised LDA (2017, submitted manuscript)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Blei, D.M., Ng, A.Y., Jordan, M.I.: Latent Dirichlet allocation. J. Mach. Learn. Res. 3, 993–1022 (2003)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Wang, C., Blei, D., Li, F.F.: Simultaneous image classification and annotation. In: IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CPVR 2009), pp. 1903–1910. IEEE (2009)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Blei, D.M., McAuliffe, J.D.: Supervised topic models. In: NIPS, vol. 7, pp. 121–128 (2007)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sekiya, T., Matsuda, Y., Yamaguchi, K.: Curriculum analysis of CS departments based on CS2013 by simplified, supervised LDA. In: Proceedings of 5th International Conference on Learning Analytics And Knowledge (LAK 2015), pp. 330–339. ACM (2015)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Times Higher Education: The 2014–2015 Times Higher Education World University Rankings, Subject Ranking 2014–15: Engineering & Technology. http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/world-university-rankings/2014-15/subject-ranking/subject/engineering-and-IT. Accessed 2 Oct 2015
  14. 14.
    Ward, J.H.: Hierarchical grouping to optimize an objective function. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 58(301), 236–244 (1963)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Duda, R.O., Hart, P.E., Stork, D.G.: Pattern Classification, 2nd edn. Wiley, Hoboken (2000)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Educational Testing Service: ETS®Major Field Tests. https://www.ets.org/mft/. Accessed 21 December 2016
  17. 17.
    Sekiya, T., Matsuda, Y., Yamaguchi, K.: A web-based curriculum engineering tool for investigating syllabi in topic space of standard computer science curricula. In: Proceedings of 2017 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE 2017). IEEE (2017, in press)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yoshitatsu Matsuda
    • 1
    Email author
  • Takayuki Sekiya
    • 2
  • Kazunori Yamaguchi
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of General Systems StudiesThe University of TokyoTokyoJapan
  2. 2.Information Technology CenterThe University of TokyoTokyoJapan

Personalised recommendations