skip to main content
research-article

Uncovering “Threshold Concepts” in Web Development: An Instructor Perspective

Published:04 March 2015Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

The field of Web development has evolved and diversified significantly in recent years, and narrowing the gap between the requirements of academia and the demands of industry remains a challenge. Moreover, many faculty members often struggle with knowing “how much” of a particular subject they should teach to their students and at what level. This small-scale, exploratory study seeks to uncover the existence of “threshold concepts” within Web development. Threshold concepts are the fundamental concepts which, once mastered, allow a learner to progress to a deeper understanding of a subject. An online questionnaire was sent out to 24 instructors within UK higher education institutions who teach Web development subjects. Nine participants responded to the questionnaire and interviews were conducted with five to discuss and expand on the responses provided, resulting in the identification of four areas that were perceived as difficult for students to grasp when learning Web development. Analysis of these areas suggests that threshold concepts do exist within the subject and we offer up two candidates for the field of Web development: basic programming principles and decomposition and abstraction. Designing a curriculum based on threshold concepts and less on the latest methods, tools, and techniques can go a long way in helping students to become experts in their chosen discipline.

References

  1. Joelle Adams and Nicole McNab. 2013. Understanding arts and humanities students: Experiences of assessment and feedback. Arts and Humanities in Higher Education: An International Journal of Theory, Research and Practice 1 (2013), 36--52. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1474022212460743Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Charles Anderson. 1997. Enabling and Shaping Understanding through Tutorials. Scottish Academic Press, 184--197.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Tony Beecher. 1994. The significance of disciplinary differences. Stud. High. Educ. 19, 2 (1994), 151--161. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03075079412331382007Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. John B. Biggs. 2003. Teaching for Quality Learning at University: What the Student Does (2nd ed.). Buckingham: Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press (John Burville).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Jonathan D. Blake. 2011. Language considerations in the first year CS curriculum. J. Comput. Sci. Coll. 26, 6 (2011), 124--129. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Sue Bloxham. 2007. Developing Effective Assessment in Higher Education: A Practical Guide. Open University Press, Maidenhead.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Jonas Boustedt, Anna Eckerdal, Robert McCartney, Jan Erik Moström, Mark Ratcliffe, Kate Sanders, and Carol Zander. 2007. Threshold concepts in computer science: Do they exist and are they useful? SIGCSE Bull. 39, 1 (2007), 504--508. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1227504.1227482 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Virginia Braun and Victoria Clarke. 2006. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual. Res. Psychol. 3, 2 (2006), 77--101. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oaGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. Sally Brown and Peter Knight. 1994. Assessing Learners in Higher Education. Kogan Page, London, Philadelphia.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Cordelia Bryan and Karen Clegg. 2006. Introduction. Routledge, Abingdon, 1--7.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Kate Caelli, Lynne Ray, and Judy Mill. 2003. “Clear as mud”: Toward greater clarity in generic qualitative research. Int. J. Qual. Meth. 2, 2 (2003), 1--13.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Patrick Carmichael. 2010. Threshold concepts, disciplinary differences and cross-disciplinary discourse. Learning & Teaching in Higher Education: Gulf Perspectives 7, 2 (2010), 53--72.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Patrick Carmichael, Keith Johnstone, Frances Tracy, and Helen Burchmore. 2007. Threshold Concepts: An Emerging Interdisciplinary Research Agenda in Higher Education Research. Sense Publishers, Rotterdam, Netherlands.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. Randy Connolly. 2012. Criticizing and modernizing computing curriculum: The case of the web and the social issues courses. In Proceedings of the 17th Western Canadian Conference on Computing Education (WCCCE'12). ACM, New York, NY, 52--56. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2247569.2247587 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Randy W. Connolly. 2011. Awakening Rip van Winkle: Modernizing the computer science web curriculum. In Proceedings of the 16th Annual Joint Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education (ITiCSE'11). ACM, New York, NY, 18--22. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1999747.1999756 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Michael Cooper, Andrew Kilpatrick, and Joshue O. Connor. 2014. Techniques for WCAG2.0. Retrieved from http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20-TECHS/Overview.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Glynis Cousin. 2006. An introduction to threshold concepts. Planet 17 (2006), 4--5. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.11120/plan.2006.00170004Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. John W. Creswell. 1998. Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Traditions. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Mira Crouch and Heather McKenzie. 2006. The logic of small samples in interview- based qualitative research. Soc. Sci. Inf. 45, 4 (2006), 483--499. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0539018406069584Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. Peter Davies. 2003. Threshold Concepts: How Can We Recognise Them? (August 26--30, 2003). Retrieved from http://www.staffs.ac.uk/schools/business/iepr/etc/WorkingPapers/etcworkingpaper1.pdf.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Peter Davies. 2012. Threshold Concepts in Economics Education. Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, Cheltenham, 250--256.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Peter Davies and Jean Mangan. 2007. Threshold concepts and the integration of understanding in economics. Stud. Higher Educ. 32, 6 (2007), 711--726. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03075070701685148Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. Brian Dorn and Mark Guzdial. 2010. Discovering computing: Perspectives of web designers. In Proceedings of the 6th International Workshop on Computing Education Research (ICER'10). ACM, New York, NY, 23--30. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1839594.1839600 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Magnus Englander. 2012. The interview: Data collection in descriptive phenomenological human scientific research. J. Phenom. Psychol. 43, 1 (2012), 13--35.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  25. Noel James Entwistle. 1988. Styles of Learning and Teaching: An Integrated Outline of Educational Psychology for Students, Teachers, and Lecturers. David Fulton, London.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Tia Ghose. 2013. What is Gravity? Retrieved from http://www.livescience.com/37115-what-is-gravity.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Ken Goldman, Paul Gross, Cinda Heeren, Geoffrey Herman, Lisa Kaczmarczyk, Michael C. Loui, and Craig Zilles. 2008. Identifying important and difficult concepts in introductory computing courses using a delphi process. SIGCSE Bull. 40, 1 (2008), 256--260. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1352322.1352226 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. Greg Guest, Kathleen M. MacQueen, and Emily E. Namey. 2012. Applied Thematic Analysis. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Ann Harlow, Jonathon Scott, Mira Peter, and Bronwen Cowie. 2011. “Getting stuck” in analogue electronics: Threshold concepts as an explanatory model. Eur. J. Eng. Educ. 5 (2011), 435--447. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03043797.2011.606500Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  30. Jens Kabo and Caroline Baillie. 2009. Seeing through the lens of social justice: A threshold for engineering. Eur. J. Eng. Educ. 34, 4 (2009), 317--325. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03043790902987410Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  31. Ray Land. 2012. “Venturing into Strange Places: Thresholds, Troublesome Knowledge, Liminality, the Doctoral Journey.” Guest lecture delivered to Doctoral Students at Lancaster University.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Ray Land, Glynis Cousin, Jan H. F. Meyer, and Peter Davies. 2005. Threshold Concepts and Troublesome Knowledge (3): Implications for Course Design and Evaluation. Oxford Centre for Staff and Learning Development, Oxford, 53--64.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Jean Lave and Etienne Wenger. 1999. Learning Pedagogy in Communities of Practice. Chapman, London, 21--33.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. Sara Lin, Jennifer Loertscher, Vicky Minderhout, David Green, and Jennifer Lewis. 2014. Use of student interviews to identify and refine threshold concepts for biochemistry (618.23). FASEB J. 28, 1 Supplement (2014). Retrieved from http://www.fasebj.org/content/28/1_Supplement/618.23.abstract.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. Robert McCartney, Jonas Boustedt, Anna Eckerdal, Jan Erik Moström, Kate Sanders, Lynda Thomas, and Carol Zander. 2009. Liminal spaces and learning computing. Eur. J. Eng. Educ. 34, 4 (2009), 383--391. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03043790902989580Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  36. Velda McCune and Dai Hounsell. 2005. The development of students' ways of thinking and practising in three final-year biology courses. Higher Educ. Int. J. Higher Educ. Educ. Plann. 49, 3 (2005), 255--289. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10734-004-6666-0Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. Jan H. F. Meyer and Ray Land. 2003. Threshold Concepts and Troublesome Knowledge (1)—Linkages to Ways of Thinking and Practicing within the Disciplines. Oxford Centre for Staff and Learning Development, Oxford.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. Jan H. F. Meyer and Ray Land. 2005. Threshold concepts and troublesome knowledge (2): Epistemological considerations and a conceptual framework for teaching and learning. Higher Educ. Int. J. Higher Educ. Educ. Plann. 49, 3 (2005), 373--388. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10734-004-6779-5Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. Jan H. F. Meyer and Ray Land. 2006. Overcoming Barriers to Student Understanding: Threshold Concepts and Troublesome Knowledge. Routledge, London.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. Jan H. F. Meyer, Ray Land, and Peter Davies. 2006. Implications of Threshold Concepts for Course Design and Evaluation. Routledge, London.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  41. Jennifer A. Moon. 2002. The Module & Programme Development Handbook: A Practical Guide to Linking Levels, Learning Outcomes & Assessment. Kogan Page, London.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  42. Janice M. Morse. 1998. Designing Funded Qualitative Research (2nd ed.). Vol. 2. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  43. Jan Erik Moström, Jonas Boustedt, Anna Eckerdal, Robert McCartney, Kate Sanders, Lynda Thomas, and Carol Zander. 2009. Computer science student transformations: Changes and causes. SIGCSE Bull. 41, 3 (2009), 181--185. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1595496.1562935 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  44. David Nicol. 2009. Quality Enhancement Themes: The First Year Experience. Transforming Assessment and Feedback: Enhancing Integration and Empowerment in the First Year. Linney Direct, Mansfield. http://www.enhancementthemes.ac.uk/docs/publications/transforming-assessment-and-feedback.pdf.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  45. Thomas H. Park and Susan Wiedenbeck. 2011. Learning web development: Challenges at an earlier stage of computing education. In Proceedings of the 7th International Workshop on Computing Education Research (ICER'11). ACM, New York, NY, 125--132. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2016911.2016937 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  46. David Perkins. 1999. The many faces of constructivism. Educ. Leadership 57, 3 (1999), 6--11.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  47. Mouath Qadah and Saleh M. Al-Shomrani. 2011. Teaching web development course in information system department. In Proceedings of the 2011 3rd International Congress on Engineering Education (ICEED'11). 165--168. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ICEED.2011.6235382Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  48. Kathleen Quinlan, Sally Male, Caroline Baillie, Artemis Stamboulis, Johnny Fill, and Zahira Jaffer. 2013. Methodological challenges in researching threshold concepts: A comparative analysis of three projects. Int. J. High. Educ. Res. 66, 5 (2013), 585--601. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10734-013-9623-yGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  49. Paul Ramsden. 2003. Learning to Teach in Higher Education (2nd ed.). RoutledgeFalmer, London.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  50. Nicola Reimann and Ian Jackson. 2006. Threshold Concepts in Economics: A Case Study. Routledge, London, 115--133.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  51. Sylvia Rodger and Merrill Turpin. 2011. Using threshold concepts to transform entry level curricula. In Proceedings of the 34th HERDSA Annual International Conference, K. Krause, M. Buckridge, C. Grimmer, and S. Purbick-Illek (Eds.). Higher Education Research and Development Society of Australasia, Inc., 263--274.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  52. Pauline M. Ross, Charlotte E. Taylor, Chris Hughes, Noel Whitaker, Louise Lutze-Mann, Michelle Kofod, and Vicky Tzioumis. 2010. Threshold concepts in learning biology and evolution. Biol. Int. 47, (Sept. 2010), 47--54. http://biologyinternational.org/volume-47/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  53. Kate Sanders, Jonas Boustedt, Anna Eckerdal, Robert McCartney, Jan Erik Moström, Lynda Thomas, and Carol Zander. 2012. Threshold concepts and threshold skills in computing. In Proceedings of the 9th Annual International Conference on International Computing Education Research (ICER'12). ACM, New York, NY, 23--30. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2361276.2361283 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  54. Robert Joel Schinke, Kerry R. McGannon, Randy Cesar Battochio, and Greg D. Wells. 2013. Acculturation in elite sport: A thematic analysis of immigrant athletes and coaches. J. Sports Sci. 31, 15 (2013), 1676--1686. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02640414.2013.794949Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  55. Martin P. Shanahan, Gigi Foster, and Jan H. F. Meyer. 2006. Operationalising a threshold concept in economics: A pilot study using multiple choice questions on opportunity cost. Int. Rev. Econ. Educ. 5, 2 (2006), 29--57. https://www.economicsnetwork.ac.uk/iree/v5n2/.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  56. Dermot Shinners-Kennedy. 2008. The Everydayness of Threshold Concepts: “State” as an Example from Computer Science. Sense Publishers, Rotterdam, Netherlands, 119--128.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  57. Dermot Shinners-Kennedy and Sally A. Fincher. 2013. Identifying threshold concepts: From dead end to a new direction. In Proceedings of the 9th Annual International ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research (ICER'13). ACM, New York, NY, 9--18. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2493394.2493396 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  58. Juha Sorva. 2010. Reflections on threshold concepts in computer programming and beyond. In Proceedings of the 10th Koli Calling International Conference on Computing Education Research (Koli Calling'10). ACM, New York, NY, 21--30. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1930464.1930467 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  59. Helen S. Speziale and Dona R. Carpenter. 2007. Qualitative Research in Nursing: Advancing the Humanistic imperative (4th ed.). Lippincott Williams and Wilkins, Philadelphia.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  60. Sanjeev K. Srivastava. 2012. Threshold Concepts Framework: An Effective Approach to Address Future Spatial Sciences Pedagogical Challenges. Retrieved from http://www.sssi.org.au/userfiles/docs/QLDRegion/documents_1349830710.pdf.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  61. Charlotte Taylor. 2006. Threshold Concepts in Biology: Do They Fit the Definition. Routledge, London, 87--99.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  62. Charlotte E. Taylor and Jan H. F. Meyer. 2010. The Testable Hypothesis as a Threshold Concept for Biology Students. Educational Futures: Rethinking Theory and Practice, Vol. 42. Sense Publishers, Rotterdam, Netherlands.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  63. Lori Townsend, Korey Brunetti, and Amy R. Hofer. 2011. Threshold concepts and information literacy. Portal: Libr. Acad. 11, 3 (2011), 853--869.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  64. Sarah J. Tracy. 2010. Qualitative quality: Eight big-tent criteria for excellent qualitative research. Qual. Inquiry 16, 10 (2010), 837--851. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1077800410383121Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  65. Victor Witter Turner. 1969. The Ritual Process: Structure and Anti-Structure. Routledge & K. Paul, London. Bibliography: pp. 204--208.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  66. Victor Witter Turner. 1982. From Ritual to Theatre: The Human Seriousness of Play. Performing Arts Journal Publications, New York. Includes bibliographical references.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  67. Evgenia Vagianou. 2006. Program working storage: A beginner's model. In Proceedings of the 6th Baltic Sea Conference on Computing Education Research: Koli Calling 2006 (Baltic Sea'06). ACM, New York, NY, 69--76. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1315803.1315816 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  68. Arnold van Gennep. 1960. The Rites of Passage. Routledge and Kegan Paul, London.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  69. Ellen L. Walker and Logan Browne. 1999. Teaching web development with limited resources. In The Proceedings of the 30th SIGCSE Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (SIGCSE'99). ACM, New York, NY, 12--16. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/299649.299667 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  70. Ye Diana Wang. 2011. Teaching web development at a distance. In Proceedings of the 2011 Conference on Information Technology Education (SIGITE'11). ACM, New York, NY, 91--96. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2047594.2047620 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  71. Ye Diana Wang and Nima Zahadat. 2009. Teaching web development in the web 2.0 era. In Proceedings of the 10th ACM Conference on SIG-information Technology Education (SIGITE'09). ACM, New York, NY, 80--86. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1631728.1631753 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  72. Kerry Wimshurst. 2011. Applying threshold concepts theory to an unsettled field: An exploratory study in criminal justice education. Stud. High. Educ. 3 (2011), 301--314. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03075070903556063Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  73. April L. Wright and Anne Gilmore. 2012. Threshold concepts and conceptions: Student learning in introductory management courses. J. Manag. Educ. 5 (2012), 614--635. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1052562911429446Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  74. Carol Zander, Jonas Boustedt, Robert McCartney, Jan Erik Moström, Kate Sanders, and Lynda Thomas. 2009. Student transformations: Are they computer scientists yet? In Proceedings of the 5th International Workshop on Computing Education Research Workshop (ICER'09). ACM, New York, NY, 129--140. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1584322.1584337 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Uncovering “Threshold Concepts” in Web Development: An Instructor Perspective
    Index terms have been assigned to the content through auto-classification.

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in

    Full Access

    • Published in

      cover image ACM Transactions on Computing Education
      ACM Transactions on Computing Education  Volume 15, Issue 1
      Special Issue on Web Development
      March 2015
      65 pages
      EISSN:1946-6226
      DOI:10.1145/2742853
      Issue’s Table of Contents

      Copyright © 2015 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 4 March 2015
      • Accepted: 1 November 2014
      • Revised: 1 October 2014
      • Received: 1 October 2013
      Published in toce Volume 15, Issue 1

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article
      • Research
      • Refereed

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader