Cited by 39Teaching and Learning ProgrammingDigital Accessibility for DisabilitiesDisability Education and Employment

Computer Science Principles for Teachers of Blind and Visually Impaired Students

Open access
Stefik, Andreas, Ladner, Richard E., Allee, William, Mealin, Sean·2019·Proceedings of the 50th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education

Abstract

The College Board's AP Computer Science Principles (CSP) content has become a major new course for introducing K-12 students to the discipline. The course was designed for many reasons, but one major goal was to broaden participation. While significant work has been completed toward equity by many research groups, we know of no systematic analysis of CSP content created by major vendors in relation to accessibility for students with disabilities, especially those who are blind or visually impaired. In this experience report, we discuss two major actions by our team to make CSP more accessible. First, with the help of accessibility experts and teachers, we modified the entire Code.org CSP course to make it accessible. Second, we conducted a one-week professional development workshop in the summer of 2018 for teachers of blind or visually impaired students in order to help them prepare to teach CSP or support those who do. We report here on lessons learned that are useful to teachers who have blind or visually impaired students in their classes, to AP CSP curriculum providers, and to the College Board.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/3287324.3287453

Cites

16 of 16 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Jane K. Lartec and Felina P. Espique. 2012. Communication Strategies of Teachers Educating Students Who Are Legally Blind in the General Education Setting. Insight 5, 2 (2012), 70.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Stefik, A., Ladner, R. E., Allee, W., & Mealin, S.
Affiliations
  • University of Nevada, Las Vegas (US)
  • University of Washington (US)
  • North Carolina State University (US)
Venue
Proceedings of the 50th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education
Publisher
ACM
Published
2019-02-22
Pages
766-772
OpenAlex
W2917287583
Cited by
39
References
16
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 4
FWCI
4.92
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (SIGCSE) (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Science Foundation (1738259 and 1738252)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Science Applications › Teaching and Learning Programming
  • Social Sciences › Human Factors and Ergonomics › Digital Accessibility for Disabilities
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Disability Education and Employment
Keywords
AP Computer Science Principles, accessibility, blind and visually impaired students, students with disabilities, Code.org, curriculum change, teacher professional development, widening participation, K-12 computer science

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review