Literaturnachweis - Detailanzeige
| Autor/inn/en | Tamburri, Damian Andrew; Casale, Giuliano |
|---|---|
| Titel | Cognitive Distance and Research Output in Computing Education: A Case-Study |
| Quelle | In: IEEE Transactions on Education, 62 (2019) 2, S.99-107 (9 Seiten)Infoseite zur Zeitschrift
PDF als Volltext |
| Zusatzinformation | ORCID (Tamburri, Damian Andrew) ORCID (Casale, Giuliano) |
| Sprache | englisch |
| Dokumenttyp | gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz |
| ISSN | 0018-9359 |
| DOI | 10.1109/TE.2018.2868551 |
| Schlagwörter | Computer Science Education; Differences; Group Activities; Expertise; Cultural Differences; Background; Interdisciplinary Approach; Foreign Countries; Researchers; Europe |
| Abstract | Contribution: This paper quantifies the phenomenon of more versus better research output in computing research education and elaborates on how the organizational variable known as cognitive distance plays a fundamental role in mediating such more versus better research output relation. Background: To improve the current educational system, investigation and quantification is needed of the "silos." Cognitive distance--a measure of the differences in background, culture, and expertise between collaborators--may be a factor influencing the lack of quality and variety in research outputs. Addressing this is a key enabler for fruitful collaboration. Research Question: Does collaboration with similarly expert researchers yield better research? Methodology: A quantitative survey provides baseline data for cognitive distance while publication data allowed creation of a co-authorship network between 123 researchers in a European computing research department. The network was analyzed through quantitative and qualitative research methods. Findings: Increased expertise overlaps across sub-fields of computing is a strong predictor for further collaboration (quantity), but research impact (quality) decreases with larger overlaps. This reveals an educational silo effect in doctoral computing education and, consequently, a flaw in the connected research output. The lack of a single, agreed way to evaluate research impact across sub-fields further hinders cross-departmental collaboration among doctoral students. Conclusion: Three recommendations emerge for policy makers and educational leaders: 1) departments should be cross-functional and focused on societal interests; 2) communities of practice should be created at the level of doctoral education and upward; and 3) departments should hold matchmaking and speed-meeting events regularly within and across institutions. (As Provided). |
| Anmerkungen | Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc. 445 Hoes Lane, Piscataway, NJ 08854. Tel: 732-981-0060; Web site: http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/RecentIssue.jsp?punumber=13 |
| Erfasst von | ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC |
| Update | 2020/1/01 |
Literaturbeschaffung und Bestandsnachweise in Bibliotheken prüfen
Permalink als QR-Code
Inhalt auf sozialen Plattformen teilen (nur vorhanden, wenn Javascript eingeschaltet ist)
Teile diese Seite:
