Cognitive distance and research output in computing education: a case-study

Damian A. Tamburri (Corresponding author), Giuliano Casale

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

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.

Original languageEnglish
Article number8485649
Pages (from-to)99-107
Number of pages9
JournalIEEE Transactions on Education
Volume62
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 May 2019

Fingerprint

Education computing
education
impact research
expertise
lack
Education
quantitative research
quantification
level of education
educational system
qualitative method
research method
qualitative research
expert
leader

Keywords

  • bias
  • diversity concerns
  • graduate-level education
  • Organizational assessment
  • setting
  • workplace

Cite this

@article{a6bcfc1b48ee429c91fe9ee766dfa528,
title = "Cognitive distance and research output in computing education: a case-study",
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.",
keywords = "bias, diversity concerns, graduate-level education, Organizational assessment, setting, workplace",
author = "Tamburri, {Damian A.} and Giuliano Casale",
year = "2019",
month = "5",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1109/TE.2018.2868551",
language = "English",
volume = "62",
pages = "99--107",
journal = "IEEE Transactions on Education",
issn = "0018-9359",
publisher = "Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers",
number = "2",

}

Cognitive distance and research output in computing education : a case-study. / Tamburri, Damian A. (Corresponding author); Casale, Giuliano.

In: IEEE Transactions on Education, Vol. 62, No. 2, 8485649, 01.05.2019, p. 99-107.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Cognitive distance and research output in computing education

T2 - a case-study

AU - Tamburri, Damian A.

AU - Casale, Giuliano

PY - 2019/5/1

Y1 - 2019/5/1

N2 - 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.

AB - 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.

KW - bias

KW - diversity concerns

KW - graduate-level education

KW - Organizational assessment

KW - setting

KW - workplace

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85054519889&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1109/TE.2018.2868551

DO - 10.1109/TE.2018.2868551

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85054519889

VL - 62

SP - 99

EP - 107

JO - IEEE Transactions on Education

JF - IEEE Transactions on Education

SN - 0018-9359

IS - 2

M1 - 8485649

ER -