APA
Click to copy
Bart, A. C., Englert, M., Aromando, J., Lee, H. R., & Rutherford, T. (2024). The CS1 Python Bakery: A Modern "Batteries Included" Open-Source Curriculum with All the Fixings. In Annual Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education.
Chicago/Turabian
Click to copy
Bart, Austin Cory, Megan Englert, John Aromando, Hye Rin Lee, and Teomara Rutherford. “The CS1 Python Bakery: A Modern &Quot;Batteries Included&Quot; Open-Source Curriculum with All the Fixings.” In Annual Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education, 2024.
MLA
Click to copy
Bart, Austin Cory, et al. “The CS1 Python Bakery: A Modern &Quot;Batteries Included&Quot; Open-Source Curriculum with All the Fixings.” Annual Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education, 2024.
BibTeX Click to copy
@inproceedings{austin2024a,
title = {The CS1 Python Bakery: A Modern "Batteries Included" Open-Source Curriculum with All the Fixings},
year = {2024},
journal = {Annual Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education},
author = {Bart, Austin Cory and Englert, Megan and Aromando, John and Lee, Hye Rin and Rutherford, Teomara}
}
Despite rising enrollment, CS Education struggles with training adequate educators, leading to increased teaching loads. Open-source teaching materials alleviate this by streamlining course preparation. Yet, there is a scarcity of free, open curricula that offer a contemporary coding experience while covering CS fundamentals. To address this gap, we introduce the CS1 Python Bakery curriculum with a "Batteries Included" approach, aiming to furnish instructors with comprehensive teaching resources. This curriculum refines an earlier open-source CS1 with detailed lesson plans, slides, rubrics, reference answers, student answers, and more. We present the learning content in a cross-platform, autograded textbook format and embrace modern Python features such as Dataclasses and static types. We deployed the curriculum in multiple university CS1 courses and collected data on the tradeoffs of our approach. This paper offers a thorough self-assessment based on student learning outcomes, code snapshot analyses, and reflection via the TEC Rubric for curriculum evaluation. Although we improved teacher accessibility, the change in student learning outcomes was unexpectedly minimal. Recognizing room for advancement, we conclude with recommendations for our next iteration to emphasize Equity, Community, and Identity.