24 hours have passed since my third CAS London conference,
so here is a write-up. This is my second time presenting at the CAS London
conference. You can find my slides from last year’s session on secondary
pedagogy here.
The organisation leading in to the 2020
event was incredible, Jane Waite and Jo Brodie clearly sacrificed a lot to
put together such a smooth and successful event. The more seamless the event,
the more well-organised it is. You never seem to notice when things don’t do
wrong!
I was escorted to my room on arrival which was already set
up. I quickly loaded my slides, checked everything was working and went back
downstairs to catch up with friends and fellow teachers from the CAS network. I
spoke to one of my seniors from the Teach First programme, Peter Kemp who is
currently in charge of the ITT course at Kings’ College London. We chatted about
our open source projects Pete’s A-Level
WikiBooks and my Little Book of Algorithms
and Computer Science Colouring Book (sneak preview below).
I also got chatting to Rochelle Laurencin from ScreenSkills. ScreenSkills support
Peter Kemp’s 3DAmi animation school and it was
fascinating to hear of all the work they do, from their bursaries for courses
to their apprenticeships. I have a student who does not want to go to
university and wants to go into the film industry, so we exchanged details and
I picked up some flyers and posters to share when I returned to school.
The Keynote was by John Nixon. He’s an HMI (one of Her
Majesty's Inspectors) and Ofsted's National Lead for Computing and Online
Safety. I wasn’t expecting to take so many notes. However, with the new
inspection framework, I found myself scribbling away furiously and I realised
that the four pages I filled, was the most amount of notes compared to any of
the other sessions on the day. His keynote deserves its own separate blog post.
I figured that a lecture theatre operates very much like a
stack data structure, last in first out (LIFO), so I made sure I was at the end
of the second row and made a speedy exit to get to my session. My session was
about one dimension from Legitimation Code Theory – Semantics. I hoped to
introduce attendees to Semantic Waves and how they could apply some of the
associated principles immediately on their return to school on Monday. I
started out by looking at the big picture of classroom best practice and then
considered the role of Semantic Waves in our practice.
Perhaps Semantic Waves are a missing piece of the infinite and addictive puzzle that we also call “teaching”.
A bold claim.
We looked at the theory and went through some practical tasks, along with a sample lesson. All of these resources are available here.
We looked at the theory and went through some practical tasks, along with a sample lesson. All of these resources are available here.
In choosing sessions for a conference, I have a few
parameters that go into my so called selection algorithm:
- Have I attended the session before?
- How good is the speaker? – What is their background? Do they have a proven track record? How good were their previous sessions?
- Can I make use of their workshop in the next week, day, month or year?
Based on criteria 1, I therefore automatically de-selected
Sue Sentance’s and Peter Kemp’s sessions on PRIMM, Programming with Python and
Flask and 3DAmi. All excellent sessions which I chose based on criteria 2 and 3
at previous conferences. The three remaining sessions, I must admit I went by the
presenter’s reputation first. I chose:
- Hardip Mothada’s session on Stacks using Forth
- Paul Curzon’s session on Semantic Waves
- Katie Vandepere-Brown’s session on the Fetch Execute Cycle
I was not disappointed. I left trying to pick a favourite
session and at first I thought it was Hardip’s, but then I couldn’t put it
above either Paul’s or Katie’s. So why were these sessions chosen and why do
they all receive a resounding 5-star review from me?
Hardip is a rare gem in that he currently teaches both OCR
and AQA A-Level Computer Science. He taught himself how to write computer games on the Commodore 64
in the 80’s and his understanding and ability to break down and deliver complex
concepts will leave you in awe. His session used a programming language called
Forth. Hardip told us that Forth is a programming language, an IDE and a
philosophy too (woah, mind blow already). He reeled us in further by telling us
Forth was used to write programs for robotic arms on the International Space
Station and some of these programs are less than 4kb! The language is clearly robust
and it is entirely stack based which make it wonderful for teaching and
learning stacks. Despite not using Forth for 30 years, Hardip demonstrated
fluency whilst also pacing us gently through the exercises, which were all of
course mapped to AQA and OCR spec points. I chose this session based on
Hardip’s reputation and I was not disappointed. I left feeling as though I’d
just been given the cheat code to teaching stacks. How had I not realised the
sequencing and thought about using a stack-based language sooner? His iterative
approach, re-visiting how stacks are used was a key theme throughout the
conference. Thanks Hardip. You’re incredible. If you’re reading this wondering how
you can find out more about Hardip or whether he might be able to help your
school, he does outreach work as he is currently part time. So if you require
some training or 6-12 week development/teaching particularly at A-Level
standard, you can email Hardip at HardipmATgmailDOTcom.
Lunch was great as usual. I recalled that at my last
visit to Gladesmore Community School (GCS) I was impressed by the facilities
and I must say, my return left me thinking it really is a brilliant venue with great staff and students. Between Igli and his team at
GCS and Jane and Jo’s CAS London team, it sets a high standard for other
conferences. The conference’s 200 tickers were sold out and 80+ were on the waiting list. The success of this conference made me think back
to the CSTA conference – an international conference that I attended in
Baltimore in 2017. I wouldn’t be exaggerating if I said that I think we could
host something of similar scale in the UK – 1 week of Computing CPD in the
summer or Easter holidays. I’ve got so much faith in Jo, Jane and her team. I
don’t know if the CAS National Conference will make a return or not, but I can envision
an international conference within the next 5 years in the UK. We definitely
have the quality in terms of workshop /session facilitators. It was clear that
many of the sessions on Saturday could have lasted 90 mins or even 2 hours. A
format that the CSTA conference sometimes uses, allowing for 3 sessions in a
day over the week. It's something worth thinking about…
Back to the sessions. Session 3 was a somewhat unusual
choice for me. My session was entitled, "Going from abstract to concrete and back again with Semantic Waves" so why did I also attend
Paul Curzon’s session entitled "Semantic Waves"? In the run-up, Jane expressed slight frustration that I had chosen to
deliver a session with the same focus as Paul’s. However, having attended both,
I can assure her now that attendees would have got something different from
both sessions and it was totally worth it. I chose Paul’s session for several
reasons. I’ve been attending Paul’s training sessions since I first started
teaching in 2006; he’s been running sessions at Queen Mary University London
(QMUL) often with William Marsh and Jo Brodie – quite possibly they were doing this before the
existence of CAS. I always leave those sessions thinking Paul is a crazy genius
(in the nicest possible way) and that I could never deliver or teach like he
does. This is exactly the reason why I keep coming back. Paul recently won the
IEEE Computer Society 2020 Taylor L. Booth Education Award. The previous link
goes into a some detail about Paul’s contributions to computing education.
However, his attitude and work rate were exemplified by the fact that he delivered
four sessions on Saturday (including a lunchtime one!). I just about had enough head space to run one session and deliver a TeachMeet presentation. Paul clearly
operates on another level. He is a seasoned professional on the conference and
CPD circuit.
The most important takeaways from Paul’s LCT Semantic Waves
session was firstly that Semantic Waves can be used to evaluate lessons and
lesson planning. His clear division of disciplines into technical language and
abstract concepts was also powerful. Lastly, I left with the important
differentiation between a teacher planning Semantic Waves in their lesson
activities and students actually doing the repacking themselves and riding the
wave themselves.
Yes, you may be teaching…but what are the students doing and what are they thinking about?
This emphasis on the students doing the repacking, not just the teacher was such a simple point, but it is an important lever in working with Semantic Waves. We had different foci and emphasis in our sessions and I left feeling even more informed. Of course, I also got to witness some signature unplugged teaching activities from Paul too.
The fourth session was with Katie Vanderpere-Brown. Katie is
a regular contributor on the weekly #CASChat on Twitter (Every Tues at 8pm). I
signed up to Katie’s session based on our similar views on computing education,
our interest in cognitive science and our skepticism towards some online
learning platforms. We met briefly over lunch and when someone tells you that
they’ve come up with a way to print onto post-it notes, you realise that you’re
talking to someone who is serious about their teaching craft or someone who is
addicted to stationary or both. Katie is both.
There’s a few people who have debated with me about the
importance of passion and enthusiasm in teacher delivery style. A prolific
tweeter once proclaimed that it just wasn’t their style and enthusiasm and
passion were not important-you just need knowledge and good behaviour
management. I have to disagree! I think I can spot a good teacher within 30
seconds of watching them teach. This sounds arrogant, but I’m quite confident
in my “thin slicing” after developing and observing (probably over fifty) teachers over
the years. One of the things I subconsciously notice very quickly is whether or
not the teacher wants to be there-how passionate are they about the subject and
the lesson they are teaching? Would I want to be taught by this teacher? Within
ten seconds, Katie passed this test. Her relaxed and humble demeanor, enthusiasm and
informed delivery puts you at ease. After a minute, it felt like I was sitting
at home catching up with an old friend. Except, this was someone I’d never met
before. Katie went through three different ways of teaching the fetch-execute cycle
and I have no doubt that if you ask any of her students, they could tell you
the name and function of the registers and memory during the CPU’s fetch
execute cycle. The first activity was a card sort with printed post it notes, the
second an unplugged physical activity and then she consolidated by
demonstrating how we could use different LMC simulators. We were her guinea
pigs for some NCCE/Isaac Computer Science material and I think we all left
pretty impressed, particularly given that she was weaving metacognitive theory
in between her tasks.
The first task with post it notes, simple as it was, generated a lot of debate
about sequencing. It made us all think about what the pre-requisite knowledge was for teaching the fetch execute cycle. The three simulators that we saw: 101 Computing , Peter Higginson’s new RISC LMC
and Higginson’s AQA LMC
were all new to me. I'd grown so used to the original LMC, I had not really invested the time into exploring the new versions and I have to admit, the 101Computing one is my favourite.
Whilst the physical unplugged task which demonstrated the use of cache memory would be difficult for me to implement in my computer suite, I could see how it would work if we had a different room layout. It is a lovely idea and clearly shows how some instructions in cache clearly have a faster access time. The misconception we need to be careful of here is the student's discussion of distance. Frequently students say that the cache is nearer than the RAM and this is why it is faster. Distance is somewhat insignificant in the fetch execute cycle as electrical signals move so quickly over such short distances. This is something that a lot of students misunderstand. The real focus of the activity should be on the access speed of different memory types and the overall execution time.
Whilst the physical unplugged task which demonstrated the use of cache memory would be difficult for me to implement in my computer suite, I could see how it would work if we had a different room layout. It is a lovely idea and clearly shows how some instructions in cache clearly have a faster access time. The misconception we need to be careful of here is the student's discussion of distance. Frequently students say that the cache is nearer than the RAM and this is why it is faster. Distance is somewhat insignificant in the fetch execute cycle as electrical signals move so quickly over such short distances. This is something that a lot of students misunderstand. The real focus of the activity should be on the access speed of different memory types and the overall execution time.
After the last session, I managed to catch up with a few old colleagues and friends
before delivering my TeachMeet presentation. My TeachMeet presentation was on
the importance of language, etymology and storytelling in computing education. My example was on the origins of cache memory and how the term "cache" originates from 18th century French Canadian fur trappers! This presentation was inspired by one of my former head teachers, the great Oli Knight. I hope those that attended will share this story far and wide.
