This paper details a general roadmap for computer science education from the k-12 level up through the graduate level. It touches on many topics related to the general theory of cs education. The point I found most interesting is how the field of computer science is a moving target: difficult to keep a steady bead on.

The paper recommends a number of solutions to the problem of keeping up with advances in the field. At the k-12 level, the authors suggest that more qualified teachers could be had if students with knowledge in the field were more encouraged to move into education. The lack of ability or, more accurately, the varying range of ability at the k-12 level is indeed a serious issue.

In teaching an introductory level undergraduate cs course, one difficulty is the wide range in ability of the students. And I can't imagine this gap between the students with a strong background and those without lessening in the next few years.

At the undergraduate level, keeping up to date is less a matter of getting up to speed, but rather of staying on top of the current base of knowledge in the field. I'm not sure how this applies particularly to an introductory level course, but I can see specific examples of new advancements being integrated into courses or spawning new courses. An example which is related to this is the proped 17-18 track which will allow for a fresh outlook Brown's introduction to cs.

Brown does an excellent job of maintaining current on advances in cs, but it's something that should we should always be aware of.

A perfect example of keeping up with the times is 224..yeah Monte Carlo methods!

I am convinced that the gap will increase as affluent high schools implement computer science curriculums. (Personally, I am still convinced that computer science is a rich white man's club.)