MediaWiki

It is noteworthy that interest in Labs peaked in the 1990s, and Online, remote or MOOC delivery peaked a decade or so later. The apparent fall-off in work on remote delivery mechanisms could be due to the advent of new conferences specifically addressing these topics, leading to a migration in where such research is presented. Papers Dealing with ACM model curricula peaked in the 1990s, while How CS1 relates to CS0 and CS2 featured in ten papers, all appearing after 2002 (with four of these since 2016). Perhaps related to this, there has been relatively recent interest in completely rethinking the structure and approach of CS1 itself, as evidenced by a 2010 paper by Hertz titled “What do CS1 and CS2 Mean? Investigating Differences in the Early Courses” [19], and Harvard’s ‘reinventing’ of CS1 resulting in their popular CS50 course, which was redesigned due to two problems that they hypothesized the course suffered from: poor perception and a dated design [31]. It is interesting to note that the idea of redesigning the CS1 course is not new; Cherniak delivered a paper at the 1976 Symposium on reconsidering the CS1 approach [10]. It is noteworthy that despite being presented over 40 years ago, this paper discussed high school programming syllabi. Other notable ‘early mentions’ were liberal arts colleges in 1980 [15] and delivering CS1 online in 1999 [9].