Call for Submissions:
SIGCSE TS 2027: It Seemed Like a Good Idea at the Time
A proposed SIGCSE TS 2027 Panel
Submission Deadline:
May 1, 2026We often learn of successful pedagogical experiments, but we seldom hear of the ones that failed. Based on the premise that learning from failure is at least as effective as learning from success (and potentially more entertaining), we are proposing to continue a well-loved special session at SIGCSE TS 2027: "It Seemed Like a Good Idea at the Time ". If accepted, the session will be structured as it was last year (and years before), similar to the popular "Nifty Assignments" session. To that end, we are soliciting submissions from the SIGCSE membership. Up to four submissions will be selected to be part of our special session proposal. If the proposal is accepted, the selected authors will present during the session at SIGCSE's Technical Symposium (TS). We are looking for contributions that describe pedagogical attempts that seemed to be good ideas ("what could go wrong?") but turned out as failures.
WHAT ARE WE LOOKING FOR?Negative or unanticipated teaching experiences can span quite a range, and not all would make for a good presentation.
We welcome all submissions!
This year, we especially want K-12 teachers to apply, junior faculty who may not have presented at the TS before, or anyone who has tried to incorporate AI into their classes! (did you accidentally launch Skynet?) The following list shows some of the features we will use for selection:
*
Reasonable expectation of success. Why /did/ it seem like a good idea at the time?
*
Evidence that it wasn't such a good idea after all. Submissions that can provide evidence of the failure will be given preference over anecdotal claims. Some of the most effective possibilities would include videos of elected officials publicly denouncing you and your methods, photos of students burning you in effigy, letters of reprimand, viral Reddit posts, etc. We expect more common evidence to include (representative) examples of horrifying work (your own, or that of students), detailed course statistics such as exceptional Withdraw/Fail/Drop numbers, angry emails, etc.
*
Attempted adoption of published work. We commonly read about experiments that went well in SIGCSE publications, but rarely hear about other people following up. If other instructors are adopting these ideas and seeing them fail, this is important to hear about.
*
Reasons for the failure. Submissions that can account for the failure might help others avoid such failures. Speculation about the reasons is better than nothing.
*
Implications for practice. Given this experience, what should the rest of the CSEd community be aware of when teaching their own courses?
By sharing these experiences, we will provide cautionary tales, or at least some entertainment, to other instructors. In providing a forum to discuss the failed experiment, we hope to encourage risk-taking in the classroom ("If it doesn't go well, at least I can get a SIGCSE TS presentation out of it!"). By focusing on evidence, we hope to foster a community with a greater eye for documenting our classroom experiments.
The previous "It Seemed Like a Good Idea at the Time" sessions are available in the ACM Digital Library:
https://dl.acm.org/action/doSearch?text1=It+seemed+like+a+good+idea+at+the+timeTO APPLY:Fill in the Google Form (
https://forms.gle/gQv25dhtKtuLvxMY8) containing the following 6 questions:
** TO BE CHOSEN (no need to wordsmith this very much, this would be the story you'd tell to us in an elevator) **
1) A description of the good idea, including your inspiration, how it was implemented, and the expected results.
2) A description of the actual results.
3) A simple description of the evidence supporting failure that you will be able to supply.
4) Ideas for your presentation.
** FOR THE ACTUAL SUBMISSION (please make this semi-ready for publication, we'll all help tighten the final copy) **
5) A 150-word summary that we would use for the SIGCSE TS special session submission.
6) Your one-line bio for the actual submission.
If you are chosen, we will use your (5) summary and (6) bio in the SIGCSE submission, and you will be a co-author in the proceedings if the submission is accepted. We also expect that you are willing to present your failure in public at the SIGCSE Technical Symposium. If desired, you will be allowed to protect your identity by making your presentation in disguise.
Applications received by
May 1, 2026 will receive full consideration; feel free to send questions or comments to the committee below.
Committee:
Dan Garcia / UC Berkeley /
ddgarcia@cs.berkeley.eduJim Huggins / Kettering University /
jhuggins@kettering.edu