Emma Hogan

Previous research has been devoted to improving the experience of non-majors in introductory CS courses. In this study, we compare the experiences of non-majors in two different introductory CS courses, specifically with respect to fears about taking the course and change in confidence levels. CS0 is a computing course intentionally designed for non-majors, and CS1 is a more traditional introductory computing course. Both of these courses were composed primarily of non-majors and were taught by the same instructor. Survey data was collected from 124 students enrolled in CS0, and 502 students enrolled in CS1. Through qualitative analysis, we found that the fears of non-major students entering both of these introductory CS courses fell into one or more of nine distinct categories (e.g., Coding, Perceiving STEM as Difficult, Managing Workload). Additionally, using students’ confidence levels at the beginning and end of the courses, we found that students in CS0 had a greater increase in confidence level than those in CS1. Finally, we explored connections between students’ fears and how their confidence changed by the end of the course. We found that students across both courses with fears related to coding, lack of preparation, and being left behind had the highest average increase in confidence levels.

This research contributes to answering this question of how to improve correctional education by defining the role of technology in its ideal implementation, in order to maximize the impact of education for as many incarcerated learners as possible. In Part I, I detail the survey conducted in Albany County Jail to support this research with the primary source of perspectives from currently incarcerated learners. From that point forward, first-hand accounts from these individuals are spread throughout the paper (indicated with italics and block quotes at the beginnings of sections to which they apply) in order to situate all of the points I make within the context of the lives this work intends to serve. Part II focuses on current policy related to correctional education, grounding my arguments in the reality of what the law does and does not require and how this dictates the current state of education in prisons and jails. In Part III, I identify the specific learning needs of the incarcerated population. Part IV assesses how the current state of correctional education fails to meet these needs, and particularly the limitations of technology in its current implementation. My research culminates in Part V with recommendations on the role technology should have in the future of correctional education.