IB CS

IB defines computing (p. 6) as having three branches:

CS
Technology literacy
information technology This is relevant for positioning CS and ICT at ISF.

If the subject aims of CS (p. 7) are taken seriously, I’m not sure what is left for ’technology literacy.’ In my CT taxonomy (Kafai, Proctor, Lui, 2019), it seems like all three scales of practice are addressed.

Objectives (p.8) organized according to Bloom’s taxonomy

The syllabus outline (p. 9) takes a three-pronged approach to big topics in CS (abstraction, design, development, evaluation):

systems in theory
systems in practice
systems in context

As I read the content of the syllabus table, it seems like they are approaching “in practice” and “in context” as content buckets, not as distinct epistemologies. For example, “software modelling” (Design / Systems in practice, p. 30) does not appear to mean students will engage in the practice of modelling software. It means they can answer test questions about UML diagrams. In general, I feel like the syllabus is patchy and overly specific in a way that feels kind of arbitrary. A symptom of this is that the essential questions on each topic sheet are not essential questions as defined by Wiggins & McTighe, as “signposts to big ideas” within a discipline which “recur throughout our lives,” and which help diverse learners find their way into the discipline. Another symptom is the discrete allocation of time to diffferent topics. I’m not familiar with the current IB way of doing things; I wonder how much these will change. If they don’t, they will be assessing some very particular approaches to CS and we’ll need to make sure the 11-12 curriculum is aligned, and the 9-10 curriculum prepares students for it while addressing other paradigms and topics.

One way we could position the work of G9CS and G10CS is a movement from context to practice to theory. You can’t powerfully theorize what you have not experienced in practice; you can’t have real practices out of context. Thus the need to invest heavily in building a computing culture at the beginning. If we followed this pattern, it would explain why we propose to start layering in theory in G10 CS.

Assessment outline (p. 48) everyone should read this. Paper 1: Extended response question requires reading and writing code in Java or Python (student’s choice). Propose committing ISF CS to Python as the primary language. IA (p. 50): Structure the capstone G10CS project around this structure: plannning, systems design overview, development, and evaluation. Design the project so it will fit within this framework.