Call for Participation

The United Kingdom and Ireland Computing Education Research (UKICER) conference from the UK ACM Special Interest Group in Computing Science Education Chapter is seeking high quality contributions to research relevant to computing science education.

Contributions are sought in a variety of categories with emphasis on high-quality and rigorous work. Researchers have the opportunity to disseminate their work as a full paper, workshop or poster.

Papers

We invite submissions of research papers on the topic of computing science education. Themes of interest include:

Computing science education pedagogy
Assessing and providing feedback on computing assignments
Issues of inclusivity and diversity
Tools to aid computing science education
Computing science education issues particularly relevant to a British and/or Irish context

All submissions related to computing science education are welcome, at any stage of formal education (or outside formal education).

Papers should describe a rigorously executed piece of work, include a motivating research question and discussion of prior related work. We welcome:

Research papers describing a research experiment in a school, university or informal educational setting. The experiment should be rigorously conducted – if this is the case, null results will still be considered for publication.

Tool design papers which carefully document design constraints, user considerations, relevant pedagogical concerns, and justify the design decisions taken in a way that would be useful to other designers, and include details of user testing or other initial measures of effectiveness.

All submitted papers should have a research component. Papers focused purely on practice-related topics such as implementation of new curricula or new course designs may be better suited to our sister Computing Education Practice conference.

Paper Format and Submission

Papers should be submitted in ACM double-column conference proceedings format. The page limit is six pages, not counting the references. The references may occupy a seventh page if the paper reaches the six-page limit. Papers must be submitted in an anonymised form for double-blind review. Accepted papers will be included in the proceedings, and presented in a session at the conference.

Workshops

We invite proposals for running 1-2 hour workshops. The workshops should be relevant to British and Irish educators (in a university or school setting) and/or computing science education researchers. Example workshops may be on the use of research techniques (e.g. qualitative methods), grant writing, pedagogical techniques (e.g. peer instruction), tools (e.g. programming environments, assessment tools), or any other topic which may be relevant to conference attendees.

Workshop organisers will be given an opportunity to advertise their workshop via a one-minute lightning talk earlier in the conference.

Posters

We invite posters for presentation and discussion at the conference. The posters should be relevant to British and Irish educators (in a university or school setting) and/or computing science education researchers. Example posters could include initial ideas, experimental designs, pedagogical techniques or early proposals to address open challenges in computing science education research.

Research in Practice Project Activities (RIPPAs)

Research in Practice Project Activities (RIPPAs) are a new form of collaborative, community-forming activity for Computing Science education research and practice at the United Kingdom and Ireland Computing Education Research (UKICER) conference.

The aim is to bring practitioners and researchers together in computing science education to form networks, exchanges ideas, form collaborations and put research into practice, incorporate research into practice or improving practice.

RIPPAs span several months and participants are expected to commit to participating in a small number of workshops asÓ well as conducting some activity in their context, such as incorporating research into practice, collecting data and/or conducting research.

Participation and Commitment

The specific participation and commitment requirements depends on the RIPPA, but broadly RIPPAS required participants to:

Join information hour. Prospective rippers should join one of several information hours to find out about the specific RIPPA and what it involves. Ask questions and meet others interested in the activity.

Attend start-up workshop. The workshop will introduce the RIPPA, methodologies and approaches utilised as well as provide an opportunity for participants to get to know each other and learn about what is happening across the community.

Perform activity. Rippers are expected to perform some activity as part of the project. This activity could be to conduct research in their own context, incorporate research into their own practice or improve their practice. Rippers would then share their contributes back to the group remotely.

Attend interim workshop. The workshop will give participants an opportunity to share their contributions as well as analyse results and discuss any insights from the activity. The group will then begin to form it into a complete outcome and decide next steps.

Capstone workshop. The final workshop to pull together together any remaining work involved in the activity and form into an artefact that can be disseminated among the community through the optimal channel, such as the Computing Education Practice (CEP) or United Kingdom and Ireland Computing Education Research (UKICER) conference.

Relax and unwind at a wrap-up dinner. Wrap-up meal and opportunity to reflect on the experience and plan future collaborations with other rippers.

Outcomes

The focus of RIPPAs is the participants and the expectation is that rippers will achieve the following from participating in a RIPPA:

Strengthened knowledge and skills in research and practice. Dependent on the specific RIPPA, the expectation is that participants will strengthen their knowledge and skills. This could be awareness emerging teaching practice and how to investigate it, appropriate methodologies for computing education research (CER) and/or deepened appreciation of the state of the art in CER.

Strengthened and expanded network of collaborators. Form connections with academics, scholars and researchers from across the computing science education community with similar interests and challenges. Valuable not only for conducting future research investigations but also to gain insight into innovative practice in other institutions as well as creating bonds with other academics to discuss on-going sector challenges and how to solve them.

Publication. The expectation is that outcomes of RIPPAs will be high-quality, multi-institutional studies that are authentic and steeped in data from contexts spanning many different from many perspectives. Participants will be authors on such high-quality contributions that are difficult to devise and coordinate for most sole academics.

Overview of Research in Practice Project Activities (PDF)

RIPPA 2021: Spatial Skills

The RIPPA 2021 aims to find out whether a) first-year students with better spatial skills have better programming skills (regardless of teaching environment or method), b) whether spatial skills change over a period of computing instruction and c) what demographic data contribute towards high spatial ability. Future goals of the project will be to investigate whether improving first-year students’ spatial skills improves their programming skills (regardless of teaching environment or method).

Review the RIPPA 2021 specification for more information, important dates and to express an interest in participating in the RIPPA.

Authors

Authors should familirise themselves with submission requirements, review process and publication guidance.

Submission. The submission requirements include guidance on the format of paper, workshop and poster submissions.
Review. The review guidance outlines the process, declaring conflicts of interest and information regarding the proxy chair and panel.
Publication. The publication guidance outlines the responsibilities of accepted authors as well as guidance on how to access previous proceedings.

Any questions about submissions should be emailed to the General and Programme Chairs, Joseph Maguire (joseph.maguire@glasgow.ac.uk) and Quintin Cutts (quintin.cutts@glasgow.ac.uk).

Submission

Research paper, workshop proposals and posters submissions must be made through EasyChair.

There is an option on the submission form to indicate whether the submission is a research paper, workshop proposal or poster abstract. There is seperate format guidnace for each submission type.

Research paper format. Six-page limit, references can occupy a seventh page.
Workshop proposal format. Two-page limit, including references.
Poster abstract format. One-page limit, including references.

All submission must confirm to the relevant ACM proceeding template.

Research paper format

Submissions must conform to the ACM proceeding template. The page limit is six pages, excluding references. The references may occupy a seventh page if the paper reaches the six-page limit.

Authors must make an electronic submission in the form of a PDF file via EasyChair. Authors will need to create an EasyChair account, if they do not have one, and complete a submission form. The submission form requires authors to detail the submission type, title, abstract as well as contact information.

Submissions from authors must be anonymised to support the review process. The initial submission for review must be anonymised, authors must remove all references to them, including affiliations and any identifying information within the body of the submission.

Note that reviewers will assume they are reviewing completed works, as they will eventually appear in the conference proceedings. Do not submit incomplete drafts.

Workshop proposal format

Workshop proposals should be submitted in ACM double-column conference proceedings format. The page limit is two pages, including references. Workshop proposal must be submitted in an anonymised form for review. Workshop proposals should include: details of the workshop’s content, whether or not this workshop has been run before, and intended take-away knowledge for participants. Authors must make an electronic submission in the form of a PDF file via EasyChair.

The authors of accepted workshop proposals will be invited to deliver the workshop at the conference. Organisers that have any questions or need additional information, can contact the Workshops Chair on workshops@ukicer.com.

Poster abstract format

Poster abstracts should be submitted in ACM double-column conference proceedings format. The page limit is one page, including references. Poster abstracts must be submitted in an anonymised form for review. Authors must make an electronic submission in the form of a PDF file via EasyChair.

Posters should describe the early or proposed work and contribution of it. Research Posters 101 provides a good starting point for considering the content and overall design of a strong research poster.

The authors of accepted poster abstracts will be invited to present a poster at the conference. Proposers that have any questions or need additional information, can contact the Posters Chair on posters@ukicer.com.

Review process

The review process is double-blind with authors required to submit anonymised artefacts. Each submission is reviewed by at least three members of the programme committee. Upon completion of reviews, reviewers enter the discussion stage and are expected to discuss their reviews anonymously, especially when notable differences exist. The programme chair utilises discussions and reviews to determine an appropriate balance of accepted papers.

Conflict of Interest. Reviewers are required to declare any conflicts of interest in advance of reviewing papers.
Proxy chair and expert panel. Submissions that represent a conflict of interest for any of the chairs are passed to the proxy chair and panel for initial consideration.
Accepted submissions. Authors must prepare accepted submissions for publication and at least one author is required to register and attend the conference.

Conflict of Interest

Authors must ensure their submissions abide by the ACM Conflict of Interest Policy (COI). Reviewers are required by chairs to identify any conflicts of interest prior to being allocated any submissions to review. Authors are expected to inform any conflicts of interest prior or at the point of submission of any artefacts for review.

Proxy chair and expert panel

Submissions that represent a conflict of interest for all conference chairs are passed to the proxy chair. The proxy chair assembles an expert panel of two or more members, the members are not required to be part of the programme committee. The members of the expert panel are not known to the chairs. The proxy chair and expert panel consider the conflicted papers, reviews and any discussion amongst reviewers. The expert panel makes the final decision on the conflicted papers and this is communicated to the conference chairs.

Accepted submissions

If accepted, authors must submit camera-ready source files through the ACM Production System (TAPS). The camera-ready submission must include author details, affiliations and any relevant information previously removed for the purposes of review.

The ACM Production System (TAPS). Authors of accepted submissions will manage the final version via TAPS.
The ACM provide proceeding templates as well as guide to the CCS2021.
Fonts. Guidance on the requirement that final submissions must include embedded scalable fonts.
References. Guidance on the requirement for balanced references in final paper submissions and that references can occupy a seventh page.
Accessibility. Guidance on how to ensure the final submission is accessible to a wide audience.
Copyright. Authors must ensure the final submission complies with ACM copyright policy.
ACM e-Rights Transfer Application. Authors are required to complete an electronic ACM e-Rights Transfer Application.
ACM Computing Classification System (CCS). Authors must include and display the ACM Computing Classification System (CCS) index terms.
ACM Support. Guidance for authors of accepted submissions on who to contact at the ACM regarding problems with TAPS.

The ACM Production System (TAPS)

The ACM provide Master Articile and Production Workflows in Microsoft Word and LaTeX. The ACM also provide best practice guidance and videos for TAPS.

Templates

The ACM provide proceeding templates as well as guide to the CCS2021.

Fonts

Final camera-ready submissions must have embedded scalable fonts, those submissions that do not will need to be corrected. The ACM have provided documentation to support authors in ensuring their camea-ready submission have embedded scalable fonts.

References

The references may occupy a seventh page if the paper reaches the six-page limit, only references may occupy a seventh page. Authors should ensure that references are balanced (the two columns of references on the final page should be the same length).

Accessibility

SIGACCESS have provided documentation to support authors in ensuring their camea-ready submission is accessible.

Copyright

Authors are expected to review the ACM Copyright policy and ensure the final camera-ready submission complies with the policy and that authors properly documents any third-party material.

ACM e-Rights Transfer Application

Authors are required to complete an electronic ACM e-Rights Transfer Application and include the appropriate ACM Right Statement and bibliographic strip in the camera-ready submission. ACM will contact accepted authors shortly after notification of acceptance with the details. Authors should check SPAM folders for any emails from rightsreview@acm.org.

ACM Computing Classification System (CCS)

The camera-ready submission must also include and display the ACM Computing Classification System (CCS) index terms, as designated by the authors. The interactive ACM CCS tool can be used to generate the appropriate code block.

ACM Support

Authors that have questions or have encountered difficulties with the ACM authoring templates should contact the Aptara support team (acmtexsupport@aptaracorp.com). For specific queries with the conference proceeding publication, authors can contact submissions@ukicer.com.

Publication

The official publication date of the conference proceedings is when they become available via the digital repository. The specific date may be up to 14 days prior to the initial day of the conference. Contributors should be aware of this publication date when considering other artefacts associated with published work, e.g. patent filings.

Previous proceedings. The proceedings for the previous conferences are accessible on the ACM Digital Library.
Author registration. At least one author of accepted submissions is required to register and present the submission at the conference.

Previous proceedings

The proceedings from the conference last year are available on the ACM Digital Library

Author Registration

The final submission will be published in the conference proceedings. At least one author must register for the conference and present the accepted paper for it to appear in the conference proceedings. All accepted submissions must be presented at the conference by a subset of the authors.

Attendees

The United Kingdom and Ireland Computing Education Research (UKICER) conference from the UK ACM Special Interest Group in Computing Science Education is going online! The conference event will occur entirely online and resources are accessed via EventBrite. Attendees need will automatically be able to gain access to the page once they have registered for the conference.

Programme

TIME	EVENT
THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 2, 2021
0845 - 0900	Arrival and Guidance
0900 - 1015	Activity Session Research and Practice RIPPA 2021: Spatial Skills and Computing Science Jack Parkinson, University of Glasgow. Workshop: Integrating New Research Faculty into the UK Computer Science Education Community Alan Hayes, University of Bath. Tom Crick, Swansea University. James Davenport, University of Bath. Alastair Irons, University of Sunderland. Tom Prickett, Northumbria University. A vibrant Computer Science Education (CSE) Community of Practice is emerging in the UK and Ireland (UK&I), promoted by national and international professional body/learned society specialist interest groups and supported through a number of CSE research and practice conferences. This workshop explores how this community of practice addresses the needs of new computer science academics to UK&I higher education and what opportunities there are to bring together and develop new academics as a part of this community. The complex and contesting demands of teaching, research and managing (courses and modules) in UK&I higher education make the early career of an academic challenging and potentially lonely. Typically, initial mentoring of early career academics is via the host Department providing support for working towards a Fellowship of Higher Education Academy. At this workshop attendees will participate in a qualitative research exercise and develop a proposal to further promote the value of early career academics engaging with CSE research to enhance and develop their own research activities. In particular, addressing: What current and future opportunities are there to establish a national mentorship scheme for early career academics. What format would such a scheme take and how can it be used to facilitate the development of CSE research. How can the subject community establish, develop and support a buddying scheme for early career academics. How can such a network be developed to stimulate the growth of CSE research. How can we continue to raise the profile of early career academics engaging in CSE research? Workshop Proposal
1015 - 1030	Coffee break
1030 - 1045	Opening Remarks Quintin Cutts, University of Glasgow Joseph Maguire, University of Glasgow
1045 - 1145	Paper Session Systems and Schools Session Chair: Maria Kallia, University of Glasgow. A Frame of Mind: Frame-based vs. Text-based Editing Neil Brown, King's College London. Charalampos Kyfonidis, King's College London. Pierre Weill-Tessier, King's College London. Brett Becker, University College Dublin. Joe Dillane, University College Dublin. Michael Kölling, King's College London. An online platform for teaching upper secondary school computer science. Jane Waite, Raspberry Pi Foundation. Andrea Franceschini, University of Cambridge. Sue Sentance, Raspberry Pi Foundation. Matthew Patterson, University of Cambridge. James Sharkey, University of Cambridge.
1145 - 1245	Lunch
1245 - 1400	Activity Session Perceptions and Partnerships Team Agreements Mitigate Team Nightmares: Facilitating Student Discussions to Create Team Agreements Bruce Scharlau, University of Aberdeen. My experience shows me that students fear team assessments in general, and that this is even more common in computing science due to our longer term, or year-long student group projects. Staff also discuss these issues too. We can borrow ideas from the software development industry, and other professions to guide us towards solutions. This workshop builds on previous ones done with MSc IT students as they prepare for the term-long group project as the final part of their degree, and aims to provide participants an experiential opportunity to explore the concerns their students have raised to see if collectively they might co-create solutions with fellow participants. Afterwards they can use the handouts and experience to guide their implementation of the workshop with their students. Workshop Proposal Do we belong? An innovation workshop for fostering a sense of belonging in Computer Science education. Alice Ashcroft, Lancaster University. Kelly Widdicks, Lancaster University. Emily Winter, Lancaster University. Lynne Blair, Lancaster University. Only 18% of Computer Science (CS) undergraduate students in 2018 were women ; academia and apprenticeships are also seeing fewer and fewer women choosing to pursue CS. This failure to engage women in CS education and training is recognised at a career-level too, with women comprising only 16% of UK IT professionals. Following this, efforts have been made to encourage women in the field, including initiatives that celebrate women in CS, and inclusive CS education principles such as EngageCSEdu. UK universities and academic institutions have also set gender equality commitments through the Athena Swan Charter, aiming to create inclusive environments for all students and staff. However, women are still under-represented in the sector, and prior work has shown that a main reason for this is that women do not feel a sense of belonging in CS. Through this workshop, we aim to build upon a focus group structure designed to uncover reasons for not belonging, and ideate solutions to overcome this, to create a collaborative space at UKICER 2021 where experts and professionals can reflect on their own experiences of belonging and their knowledge of CS education. By doing this, we aim to co-design solutions with the community that will help foster all students' belonging, regardless of their gender identity or membership of any underrepresented group. We also aim to gain participants' feedback and insights for future iterations of the innovative focus groups that can be utilised and applied for other underrepresented groups and in other institutions, departments or settings. Workshop Proposal
1400 - 1415	Posters and Coffee Predicting Success in CS1 - An Open Access Data Project Keith Quille, Technological University Dublin. Keith Nolan, Technological University Dublin. Do Popular Online Coding Tutorials Systems Address Novice Programmer Difficulties? Ohud Alasmari, University of Glasgow. Jeremy Singer, University of Glasgow.
1415 - 1515	Paper Session Attitudes and Beliefs Session Chair: Neil Brown King's College London Women's Sense of Belonging in Computer Science Education: The Need for a Collective Response Kelly Widdicks, Lancaster University. Alice Ashcroft, Lancaster University. Emily Winter, Lancaster University. Lynne Blair, Lancaster University. Female pupils’ attitudes to computing in early adolescence. Hayley C. Leonard, Raspberry Pi Foundation. Oliver Quinlan, Raspberry Pi Foundation. Sue Sentance, Raspberry Pi Foundation.
1515 - 1530	Coffee break
1530 - 1630	Keynote The Synergistic Cycle of Teaching and Computing Education Research Dr. Leo Porter, University of California, San Diego United States of America.
1630 - 1700	Panel Devising Your Cycle Building on the Keynote advisers gather to work with attendees to devise their own cycle.
1700	Close of Day One

FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 3, 2021
TIME	EVENT
0845 - 0900	Arrival and Guidance
0900 - 1030	Activity Session Methodologies Hermeneutic phenomenology for computing education research Sue Sentance, Raspberry Pi Foundation. Jane Waite, Raspberry Pi Foundation. There are many different approaches to qualitative research which can be used in empirical studies, but often in computing education research we do not specify exactly the approach we are using. A phenomenological approach, which can be descriptive or hermeneu- tic (interpretive), involves investigating the ’lived experience’ of research participants. It relates to the whole research process, not just to how we analyse data. Hermeneutic phenomenology is one approach that has been widely used in some fields, for example, in nursing research and general education, but is rarely, if at all, used in computing education research. As research within computing education may benefit from hermeneutic phenomenology, the pur- pose of this workshop is to introduce this methodology and offer participants some first-hand experience of approaching a study through a phenomenological lens. Workshop Proposal Measuring the Difference Between Student and Staff Perception of Self-Efficacy and Confidence Using Online Tools Laura Heels, Newcastle University. Becky Allen, Newcastle University. The COVID-19 pandemic has caused a shift in how we teach, how students learn, but has also drawn attention to the inequalities of pedagogy [1]. These inequalities have exacerbated the already known issues relating to student’s self-efficacy, metacognition and confidence [2]. We present a workshop designed to discuss best practice in relation to online learning, with discussions about its capacity to promote self-regulated learning and improve student confidence in their technical skills [3]. The workshop will present a tool which addresses some of the barriers and difficulties students may encounter when learning AI [4]. We then ask participants for their thoughts on improving student self-efficacy and inclusive learning. Participants will leave the workshop with a greater under- standing of these concepts and best practice they can implement within their own teaching. Workshop Proposal
1030 - 1100	Posters and coffee Next Steps on Conceptual transfer and Interventions in second programming language learning Ethel Tshukudu, University of Glasgow.
1100 - 1230	Paper Session Peers Session Chair: Keith Quille,Technological University Dublin Investigating Remote Pair Programming in Part-time Distance Education  Adeola Adeliyi, The Open University. Michel Wermelinger, The Open University. Karen Kear, The Open University. Jon Rosewell, The Open University. Peer Evaluation During University Team Projects: Exploring the Student Perspective on its Purpose Alexander Mitchell, Falmouth University. Terry Greer, Falmouth University. Warwick New, Falmouth University. Joseph Walton-Rivers, Falmouth University. Matt Watkins, Falmouth University. Douglas Brown, Falmouth University. Michael James Scott, Falmouth University. Student Perspectives of Peer Assessment in Programming Courses Amal Alkhalifa, Princess Nourah bint Abdulrahman University. Marie Devlin, Newcastle University.
1230 - 1330	Lunch break
1330 - 1430	Paper Session Community Session chair: Heather Yorston, University of Edinburgh The Development of Teaching Case Studies to Explore Ethical Issues Associated with Computer Programming  Damian Gordon, Technological University Dublin. Michael Collins, Technological University Dublin. Dympna O'Sullivan, Technological University Dublin. The Roles and Challenges of Computing Terminology in Non-Computing Disciplines  Brett Becker, University College Dublin.
1430 - 1500	Posters and Coffee Research-led Framework for Teaching and Learning Computer Science in the Early Primary Years in KSA Noha Alharbi, University of Glasgow.
1500 - 1515	Computing Education Practice 2022 General Chair: Steven Bradley, Durham University. Programme Chair: Rosanne English, University of Strathclyde.
1515 - 1530	United Kingdom and Ireland Computing Education Research 2022 General Chair: Keith Quille, Technological University Dublin. Programme Chairs: Joseph Maguire, University of Glasgow. Brett A. Becker, University College Dublin.
1530 - 1545	Closing remarks Quintin Cutts, University of Glasgow. Joseph Maguire, University of Glasgow.
1545	Conference close

Important Dates

There are several important dates for the United Kingdom and Ireland Computing Education Research conference.

Paper submissions

Milestone	Date and Time
Call for Participation	Thursday, January 8, 2021.
Abstracts (250 words)	~~Friday, June 18, 2021, anywhere on Earth (UTC-12).~~ Friday, July 2, 2021, anywhere on Earth (UTC-12).
Full papers	~~Friday, June 25, 2021, anywhere on Earth (UTC-12).~~ Friday, July 9, 2021, anywhere on Earth (UTC-12).
Notification of paper acceptance	~~Friday, July 23, 2021.~~ Friday, August 6, 2021.
Final camera ready submission	~~Friday, August 6, 2021, anywhere on Earth (UTC-12)~~ Friday, August 13, 2021, anywhere on Earth (UTC-12)

Workshop and Poster proposals

Milestone	Date and Time
Call for Participation	Thursday, January 8, 2021.
Workshop Proposal	~~Friday, June 25, 2021, anywhere on Earth (UTC-12).~~ Friday, July 9, 2021, anywhere on Earth (UTC-12).
Poster abstract	~~Monday, July 26, 2021, anywhere on Earth (UTC-12).~~ Friday, August 20, 2021, anywhere on Earth (UTC-12).
Notification of workshop acceptance	~~Friday, July 23, 2021.~~ Friday, August 6, 2021.
Notification of poster acceptance	~~Friday, August 6, 2021.~~ Wednesday, August 25, 2021, anywhere on Earth (UTC-12).

Review process

Milestone	Date and Time
Review process commences	~~Friday, June 18, 2021.~~ Friday, July 2, 2021.
Paper bidding commences	~~Monday, June 19, 2021.~~ Monday, July 3, 2021
Paper bidding completes	~~Friday, June 25, 2021.~~ Friday, July 9, 2021
Allocation	~~Saturday, June 26, 2021.~~ Saturday, July 10, 2021.
Reviews due	~~Wednesday, July 14, 2021.~~ Wednesday, July 28, 2021.
Review process completes	~~Friday, July 16, 2021.~~ Wednesday, July 28, 2021.
Discussion commences	~~Friday, July 16, 2021.~~ Thursday, July 29, 2021.
Discussion completes	~~Friday, July 23, 2021.~~ Wednesday, August 4, 2021.
Decision and notification completes	~~Friday, July 23, 2021.~~ Friday, August 6, 2021.

Conference Schedule

Milestone	Date and Time
Registration Opens	Monday, June 7, 2021.
Registration Closes	Monday, August 23, 2021, anywhere on Earth (UTC-12).
Workshops	Thursday, September 2 - Friday September 3, 2021.
UKICER Conference	Thursday, September 2 - Friday September 3, 2021.

UKICER 2021 is over, see you next year in Dublin!

Welcome to UKICER 2021

Online conference

Call for Participation

Papers

Paper Format and Submission

Workshops

Posters

Participation and Commitment

Outcomes

RIPPA 2021: Spatial Skills

Authors

Registration

Registration Terms and Conditions

Attendees

Programme

THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 2, 2021

0845 - 0900

Arrival and Guidance

0900 - 1015

Activity Session

Research and Practice

RIPPA 2021: Spatial Skills and Computing Science

Workshop: Integrating New Research Faculty into the UK Computer Science Education Community

1015 - 1030

Coffee break

1030 - 1045

Opening Remarks

1045 - 1145

Paper Session

Systems and Schools

A Frame of Mind: Frame-based vs. Text-based Editing

An online platform for teaching upper secondary school computer science.

1145 - 1245

Lunch

1245 - 1400

Activity Session

Perceptions and Partnerships

Team Agreements Mitigate Team Nightmares: Facilitating Student Discussions to Create Team Agreements

Do we belong? An innovation workshop for fostering a sense of belonging in Computer Science education.

1400 - 1415

Posters and Coffee

Predicting Success in CS1 - An Open Access Data Project

Do Popular Online Coding Tutorials Systems Address Novice Programmer Difficulties?

1415 - 1515

Paper Session

Attitudes and Beliefs

Women's Sense of Belonging in Computer Science Education: The Need for a Collective Response

Female pupils’ attitudes to computing in early adolescence.

1515 - 1530

Coffee break

1530 - 1630

Keynote

The Synergistic Cycle of Teaching and Computing Education Research

1630 - 1700

Panel

Devising Your Cycle

1700

Close of Day One

FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 3, 2021

0845 - 0900

Arrival and Guidance

0900 - 1030

Activity Session

Methodologies

Hermeneutic phenomenology for computing education research

Measuring the Difference Between Student and Staff Perception of Self-Efficacy and Confidence Using Online Tools

1030 - 1100

Posters and coffee

Next Steps on Conceptual transfer and Interventions in second programming language learning

1100 - 1230

Paper Session

Peers

Investigating Remote Pair Programming in Part-time Distance Education

Peer Evaluation During University Team Projects: Exploring the Student Perspective on its Purpose

Student Perspectives of Peer Assessment in Programming Courses

1230 - 1330

Lunch break

1330 - 1430

Paper Session

Investigating Remote Pair Programming in Part-time Distance Education 

The Development of Teaching Case Studies to Explore Ethical Issues Associated with Computer Programming 

The Roles and Challenges of Computing Terminology in Non-Computing Disciplines 