GenAI in CS Education Consortium Workshop

Computing
Beyond Code

Teaching programming as conversation
GC
Geoffrey Challen
Illinois
KL
Kevin Lin
UW
CG
Cory Gwin
GitHub
geoffreychallen.com/talks/2026-07-08

The other fork

Leo and Dan just showed an AI-integrated CS1 where students still write code.

We want to talk about the other fork: a pure elective for non-technical students where, as much as we can manage, they never see code at all. No syntax, no error messages, no stack traces. The programming happens entirely through conversation with an agent.

Nobody has taught this yet, us included. So this is a conversation, not a pitch. Please jump in any time, by unmuting or in the chat.

CG
Cory Gwin
GitHub
The Split: a course of its own
  • For non-computing students, free of integration with the CS degree
  • A complete resequencing of what comes first
  • Early: software architecture, complex systems, QA, how the pieces fit together
  • Later: complex algorithms, data structures, deep software-engineering rigor
Read: The Split → corygwin.com/posts/the-split
KL
Kevin Lin
UW
A near-term response: Steve Seitz's course
  • A low/no-code applied course at UW this autumn
  • For students with some programming already; a showcase of today's tools
  • The curriculum itself is vibe-coded, regenerated to track the latest tools
  • The short-term horizon; the long-term is a rethink from scratch
GC
Geoffrey Challen
Illinois
Conversational programming
  • A pilot this fall: an elective where students never see code
  • Which concepts survive, and how to teach them without writing any
  • A door left open for the curious to go further
  • And how to give the course structure
See what students built → usingandunderstanding.ai/…/showcase cs124.org/duckies

We're setting the tools aside

You don't teach a carpenter the saw. You teach them to build, and the saw is just part of the shop.

Tools change every semester, so we won't debate platforms today. We want the three things that don't change:

Goals
what a course like this is for
Concepts
what students must understand
Structure
how you build it so learning is felt
Discussion 1 of 3  /  15 min  /  Cory drives

Goals

What is a course like this for? What should a non-technical student walk away able to do or think?

Not content coverage. Durable capability. Computational literacy, creative confidence, judgment, getting real things done? We don't agree on the primary one.

Jump in: unmute any time, or drop it in the chat

Discussion 2 of 3  /  15 min  /  Geoffrey drives

Concepts

With no code on screen, what must students actually understand? What do abstraction and decomposition even mean here?

A candidate answer: the durable skill is a good mental model of the agent. Predict what it will do, catch it when it's wrong, specify so it does what you meant. Is that enough?

Jump in: unmute any time, or drop it in the chat

Discussion 3 of 3  /  13 min  /  Kevin drives

Structure

How do you build it so learning is felt? Chatting and building works, but it doesn't feel like the ladder of a normal intro course.

One project or many? What cadence? Could an architecture studio and critique carry the structure? And how would you even grade it?

Jump in: unmute any time, or drop it in the chat

What do we even call it?

Vote in the chat: type the code for your favorite. Write-ins welcome.

CP1conversational programming
VC1vibe coding
CA1coding agents
AI1you know why
CT1computational thinking
CC1computational creation
AD1agentic development
NL1natural-language programming
SS1software studio
CB1computing beyond code (this talk)

Where we're headed

Where we agree: the durable skill beats the tools, and building is the point.

Where we don't yet agree: what the goals are, how to make the learning felt, and how to grade it. That's the fun part, and it's why we wanted to think it through with you.

Geoffrey's piloting a version this fall, and we've heard of a few other pilots starting up. Let's keep in touch and compare notes.