Pathways to Quantum Science for High-School and Incoming College Students

Charles Pope; Dan-Adrian German; John Phillips; Michele Roberts; Rebekah Randall

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 19 references

Pathways to Quantum Science for High-School and Incoming College Students

T0 review · 4 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read A five-year dual-credit course shows that high school and incoming college students can learn the operational core of quantum computing—superposition, interference, phase kickback, teleportation—using a virtual lab, misty states notation…

desk verdict A useful description of a dual-credit quantum computing pathway for high schoolers, but the success claim rests on self-report ratings and needs either stronger evidence or a softer framing. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.12437 v1 pith:55GD5K4D submitted 2026-08-12 physics.ed-ph quant-ph

Dan-Adrian German , Rebekah Randall , Charles Pope , Michele Roberts , John Phillips This is my paper · ORCID

classification physics.ed-phquant-ph PACS 01.40.Fk03.67.-a

keywords QuantumcomputingeducationFirst-timelearnersFlytrapMistystatesZXcalculusDual-creditclassesAPHighschoolcurriculum

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper is trying to establish that the operational core of quantum computing can be taught to high-school and incoming college students without first learning advanced mathematics. It reports a five-year dual-credit course built on three visual tools: a browser-based virtual optics lab, a 'misty states' notation that writes superpositions as sets of possible outcomes, and the ZX diagrammatic calculus. The authors argue that this combination removes the usual barriers—counter-intuitive phenomena and unfamiliar math—and also supplies materials for teacher training and a route around missing state standards. If the claim is right, quantum topics can enter pre-college classrooms as a credit-bearing pathway rather than waiting for new standards or specialized teachers.

What carries the argument

Three objects carry the argument. Misty states are a notation in which a superposed qubit is written as a set of possible outcomes, so students compute probabilities by adding amplitudes rather than probabilities. Quantum Flytrap is an interactive virtual optics lab where students can actually run interference and interaction-free measurement experiments. ZX calculus is a diagrammatic language of colored 'spiders' and fusion/copy rules, which the paper treats as mathematical subroutines for deriving circuit identities. The course moves through these in order: students first see quantum phenomena in the virtual lab, then reason about them in misty states, then translate the same reasoning into circuits and ZX diagrams.

What would settle it

A controlled comparison would settle it: teach one group the same topics with misty states and ZX diagrams and another with standard linear algebra, then give both a pre/post test that asks them to predict interference probabilities and apply a ZX rule to an unseen circuit; if the visual group shows no gain over the standard group, the paper's central claim is falsified.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that a carefully sequenced visual curriculum can give first-time learners a working command of quantum computation's key ideas without first mastering linear algebra. The paper demonstrates the sequence on concrete examples: a misty state with three possible snacks shows why amplitudes rather than probabilities add, giving a measured probability where a classical guess would be wrong; the virtual lab lets students run a bomb-detection experiment and observe detection without explosion; and ZX diagrams derive phase kickback in a few graphical moves while revealing the hidden black-box answer in one step. The authors report that students then go on to circuit coding, entanglement, teleportation, integer factorization, and post-quantum encryption, and that the course has run for five years with self-reported success.

Load-bearing premise

The central claim rests on the assumption that the course's reported outcomes—average self-ratings of 7.4 for the virtual lab and 8.6 for misty states, plus selected student comments—are genuine evidence of learning, since the paper does not report any objective pre/post test, control group, or measure of concept mastery.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

High-school students can reach functioning quantum circuits—including entangling gates, teleportation, and phase kickback—without first solving differential equations or learning linear algebra.
The same three-tool sequence can double as teacher professional development, since the materials were already used with high-school and middle-school teachers.
A single dual-credit college course can map onto three high-school courses with equivalent credit, giving schools a concrete route to add quantum topics to their catalogs.
The topic list, from interference and entanglement to integer factorization and post-quantum encryption, fits within one semester and satisfies general-education science or mathematics requirements.
If adopted widely, the model could supply a ready-made structure for a high-school quantum information science course and exam, addressing the quantum workforce shortage without waiting for new state standards.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

The diagrammatic derivations suggest a transfer test the paper does not run: if ZX rules are genuine mathematical subroutines, students who learn phase kickback pictorially should re-derive the same result faster in standard linear-algebra notation; a crossover study could check this directly.
Because the tools are web-based and paper-based, the same sequence could scale to schools without quantum hardware or specialized physics teachers, which would make the quantum workforce pathway far cheaper than lab-based alternatives.
The paper's reliance on self-reported learning implies a natural next experiment: a short concept inventory on interference probabilities and circuit outputs, given before and after the course, would separate engagement from mastery.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Quick take: this is a legitimate experience report about a dual-credit quantum computing course for high school and incoming college students. The authors integrate three existing tools — Quantum Flytrap, misty states, and ZX calculus — into a concrete teaching sequence with some nice case studies (Elitzur-Vaidman, Bernstein-Vazirani, the snake equation). The paper is useful if you are designing a similar course and want a week-by-week topic list, and the ZX phase kickback derivation is a nice addition, even if calling it the “shortest possible proof” is only compared against the authors’ own earlier work.

The soft spot is exactly where the stress-test note lands: Section 8’s evidence for “success” is two self-reported ratings (7.4/10 for Flytrap, 8.6/10 for misty states) and a handful of selected student quotes. No sample size, no pre/post test, no control condition, no scored artifact. On counterintuitive material, perceived understanding is a weak proxy for actual understanding, and novelty can inflate ratings. The citations to [1,2,5,11] show the tools have worked elsewhere, but they don’t validate this cohort or this specific pathway. The paper says the tools “have been shown to be successful” and Section 10 asserts the topic list is “feasible and appropriate” based on five years of teaching; that is plausible, but it is not measured evidence.

The math is also harder to check than it should be. The misty states probability example in Section 3 has garbled equations (the √2 expressions are mangled), and the key ZX proofs appear only in figures, not in LaTeX. For a paper that leans heavily on the correctness of a “shortest proof” claim, the reader cannot fully verify the derivation from the text. The abstract’s opening about AI and quantum cybersecurity breaking encryption by 2030 is tangential and reads like a grant narrative; the real content is the curriculum, not the doomsday framing.

That said, this is an education paper, not a physics result. As a course description with preliminary observations, it is a reasonable SIGCSE submission. The central pedagogical idea — that misty states plus a virtual lab plus ZX diagrams can let high schoolers reason about quantum circuits — is plausible and worth airing. The citation practice leans on the authors’ own prior work, but the work is real and publicly available, so that is a minor issue, not a fatal one.

Who gets value: instructors building quantum computing courses for high school or early college, and people thinking about state standards or a future AP course. It deserves a serious referee, because the pathway is concrete and the community needs experience reports. But I would send it back for revision: either add a real learning measure (even a simple pre/post quiz with a sample size) or drop the “success” language and frame Section 8 as anecdotal student feedback. And fix the garbled equations so the proof claims can be checked. If the authors do that, it becomes a solid contribution.

Referee Report

4 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper reports on a dual-credit quantum computing course for high-school and incoming college students, developed at Indiana University and Canterbury High School. The course sequence uses three tools: Quantum Flytrap (a virtual lab), the Misty States Formalism (probability amplitudes in plain language), and Quantum in Pictures (ZX calculus). Section 8 presents student feedback, including perceived-learning ratings of 7.4/10 for Flytrap and 8.6/10 for misty states, plus selected positive quotes. The authors claim that these tools have been shown to be successful and that the course has been taught for five years. The paper also lists proposed topics and outlines next steps, including adding quantum topics to state high-school standards and developing an AP Quantum Computing course.

Significance. The topic is timely and relevant for the SIGCSE community given the growing interest in quantum computing education and the need for accessible high-school curricula. The paper's strength lies in its concrete description of a multi-formalism pedagogy (misty states, virtual labs, ZX calculus) that could serve as a model for other institutions. The authors have prior publications and teaching experience in this area, and they reference independent work on the effectiveness of these tools. However, the manuscript as written does not provide objective evidence that the described course succeeds in teaching quantum concepts; the central success claim rests on self-reported ratings and selected quotes. If the authors either add rigorous learning-outcome evidence or moderate their claims to position the paper as an experience report, the paper could make a useful contribution.

major comments (4)

[Sections 2 and 8] The central claim that the tools 'have been shown to be successful' (Section 2) is not supported by evidence in this manuscript. The only course-specific outcome data in Section 8 are self-reported ratings (7.4 and 8.6) and selected positive quotes, with no sample size, no pre/post test, no control condition, and no objective measure of concept mastery. Perceived learning is a weak proxy for actual understanding, especially on counterintuitive material. Please either provide objective learning evidence (e.g., pre/post tests, scored artifacts, retention checks) or reframe the paper explicitly as an experience report whose contribution is the curriculum design, not a demonstrated effectiveness claim.
[Sections 3 and 6] The mathematical content is garbled and not verifiable. Section 3 introduces misty states with the notation '{ ,{ , }}' that is not defined, and the probability computation for the modified state (0.853 vs 0.75) is asserted without a clear derivation; the displayed formula for |Ψ⟩ appears corrupted with misplaced square roots. Section 6 presents the phase kickback derivation as an unreadable sequence of braces and brackets. Since the paper explicitly claims to provide simpler and more self-contained proofs, the derivations must be written in standard, readable mathematical notation. Please rewrite these sections completely.
[Section 7, Figure 10] The claim that Figure 10 is 'the shortest possible proof for phase kickback' is not established. The comparison is only against the authors' earlier work [9], which does not constitute a general claim of minimal proof length. Please either provide a systematic argument for minimality or replace 'shortest possible' with a more measured phrase such as 'a very short proof'.
[Section 10] The list of proposed topics is presented without any evidence that it is feasible or appropriate for the target audience. The only support is the authors' statement that they have taught the class for five years and believe the selection to be feasible. If the paper aims to provide a roadmap for other institutions, it should include some evidence of which topics were successfully implemented, student performance on those topics, or feedback from instructors at other sites.

minor comments (6)

[Abstract] The abstract opens with a lengthy discussion of cybersecurity and a 2030 prediction for cryptographically relevant quantum computers, but this is not connected to the rest of the paper. Please either integrate this motivation into the course rationale or trim it to a single motivating sentence.
[Section 8] There is a typo: 'explictly' should be 'explicitly' in the sentence 'without students being explictly aware of that.'
[Section 8] The student quotes are edited inconsistently, with some words in square brackets and some not. Please clarify the editing conventions (e.g., indicate added or corrected text using a standard bracket style).
[General] Several figures (e.g., Figures 2, 3, 5) are not referenced in the text. Please add explicit references so readers know when to look at each figure.
[References] Reference [8] lists the SIGCSE 2024 proceedings but appears to cite a version of the paper published in a different venue; please verify the bibliographic details.
[Title and keywords] The title 'Pathways to Quantum Science' is broad; consider making it more specific to the described curriculum (e.g., 'A Dual-Credit Quantum Computing Pathway for High-School and Incoming College Students'). The keyword 'AP Quantum Computing' appears in the CCS Concepts but no AP course is developed yet; please align the keywords with the content.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the tool-success claim is supported by independent external references, and the self-reported student feedback is an evidence-quality issue, not a derivation-by-construction.

full rationale

This paper is an educational experience report rather than a formal derivation chain, so most circularity patterns do not apply. The closest candidate is Section 2's claim that Quantum Flytrap, misty states, and ZX calculus 'have been shown to be successful [1,2,5,11]'. Reference [5] is an author self-citation, but the same sentence also cites independent external sources ([1] Oxford high-school course, [2] Economou/Rudolph/Barnes, [11] virtual optics laboratory), so the success claim does not reduce to self-citation. Section 4's references to prior 'great success' ([7],[8],[5],[6]) are self-descriptions of earlier classroom use, but they serve as anecdotal background rather than as the derivation of any formal result. Section 6 cites the authors' [9] only as one of 'many authors' proving phase kickback with misty states, and Section 7 compares its ZX derivation with [9] rather than importing the result from it; the ZX diagrams themselves carry the argument. Section 8's student ratings (7.4 for Quantum Flytrap, 8.6 for misty states) and selected quotes are self-reported and lack objective learning measures, but they are presented as feedback, not as a prediction or as an output that was pre-built into the input. No equation in the paper is identical by construction to its input, no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction, and no uniqueness or ansatz is imported from the authors' prior work. The absence of external validation for this particular cohort is a correctness/evidence concern, not circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No free parameters are fitted to data; the student ratings are descriptive observations. The paper relies on standard quantum mechanics and ZX calculus as mathematical background, plus the domain assumptions that self-reports reflect learning and that the cited prior work is valid evidence of success.

assumptions (4)

standard math Standard quantum mechanics (superposition, Born rule) is valid and applicable to the misty state examples.
Section 3 computes outcome probabilities via squared amplitudes, invoking the Born rule without proof.
standard math The ZX calculus graphical rules (copy, fusion, spider rules) are correct and can be taught with minimal linear algebra.
Section 7 uses ZX rewriting rules to show phase kickback and the Bernstein-Vazirani algorithm, without deriving the rules.
domain assumption Self-reported student ratings and quotes are a valid indicator of learning of quantum computing concepts.
Section 8 uses ratings of 7.4 and 8.6 and selected positive comments as the main evidence for the course's success.
domain assumption The prior works cited as 'shown to be successful' (e.g., [1], [2], [5], [11]) genuinely demonstrate effectiveness.
The authors cite these works in §2 to support the success of the tools, but do not evaluate the strength of those studies.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Pathways to Quantum Science for High-School and Incoming College Students." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/55GD5K4D

@misc{pith2026260812437,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Pathways to Quantum Science for High-School and Incoming College Students},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/55GD5K4D}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.12437}
}

read the original abstract

The convergence of AI and quantum computing requires a new approach to cybersecurity. Credible experts estimate that by 2030 a cryptographically relevant quantum computer will be capable of breaking the encryption that underpins all of our digital communication. One of the most disruptive technology in history is coming and it's expected to change everything. In this context academic institutions will contribute to their states' future economic prosperity by leveraging their strengths and resources, particularly talent development, in key and emerging areas prioritized across the state. We report on current efforts to develop a Pathways Plus to Quantum Information Science (QIS) degree, a set of dual credit courses for high-school (HS) students and incoming college students pursuing a minor or specialization in Quantum Computing (QC). As of today, in the US, quantum topics appear on the HS curriculum standards in just two states: OH (Computing) and TX (Physics). Reaching out to HS and even middle school students (and their teachers) presents obvious long-term benefits in terms of workforce development for the quantum industrial ecosystem. Standing in the way of successful, widespread introduction of QC and QIS topics in HS and middle school are three distinct obstacles: (a) lack of materials at the right level for students and instructors, (b) funding and support for professional development for teachers, and (c) lack of state standards. In this paper we address all three aspects with a special focus on the benefits of quantum virtual labs and ZX calculus in the classroom.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.12437 by the authors.

**Figure 2.** Chance of detecting bomb without explosion: 25%. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 5.** The Snake Equation as an IBM Qiskit circuit. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_5.png] view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (7 more)

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: Misty states can explain the Flytrap experiment. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png]

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: Misty states can explain the GHZ state circuit. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_4.png]

**Figure 10.** Figure 10: The shortest possible proof for phase kickback. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_10.png]

**Figure 11.** Figure 11: Starting point for a Bernstein-Vazirani challenge. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_11.png]

**Figure 14.** Figure 14: Quantum seeing in the dark (student solution). [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_14.png]

**Figure 15.** Figure 15: Without a bomb the detector is always silent [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_15.png]

**Figure 16.** Figure 16: Inspiring artwork (for us) by unknown author [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_16.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

19 extracted references · 16 canonical work pages

[9]

Phillips

Dan-Adrian German, Christina Snyder, and John M. Phillips. 2026. Quantum Computing for First-Time Learners.ACM Inroads 16, 4 (Dec. 2026), 32–41. doi:10. 1145/3774781

work page 2026
[1]

Pothos, Sieglinde Pfaendler,VincentWang-Mascianica1,ThomasCervoni,FerdiTomassini,Vincent Anandraj, Peter Sigrist1, and Ilyas Khan1

Bob Coecke, Aleks Kissinger, Stefano Gogioso, Selma Dundar-Coecke, Caterina Puca, Lia Yeh, Muhammad Hamza Waseem, Emmanuel M. Pothos, Sieglinde Pfaendler,VincentWang-Mascianica1,ThomasCervoni,FerdiTomassini,Vincent Anandraj, Peter Sigrist1, and Ilyas Khan1. 28 Nov 2025.High schoolers excel at Oxford quantum course using pictorial mathematics . Retrieved J...

work page arXiv 2025
[2]

8 Aug 2020.Teaching quantum information science to high-school and early undergraduate students

Sophia Economou, Terry Rudolph, and Edwin Barnes. 8 Aug 2020.Teaching quantum information science to high-school and early undergraduate students . Retrieved July 2, 2026 from https://arxiv.org/pdf/2005.07874

arXiv 2020
[3]

Dayton Ellwanger. 2019. A Quantum Computing Pamphlet . Independently published (September 8, 2019)

work page 2019
[4]

Adrian German, Marcelo Pias, and Qiao Xiang. 2023. On the Design and Imple- mentation of a Quantum Architectures Knowledge Unit for a CS Curriculum. In Proceedings of the 54th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education V. 1 (Toronto ON, Canada)(SIGCSE 2023). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1150–1156. doi:10.1145/3545945.3569845

arXiv 2023
[5]

Adrian German, Christian Scott, Christina Snyder, Carla Gehlhausen, Matt Min- dach, Blake Clevenger, Scott Winchester, Rebekah Randall, Ahmad Faiz, and Elmar Bucher. 15-16 September 2024 (QSEEC24).Towards a Faculty Learning Quantum Pathways Submitted to ACM SIGCSE ’27, February 17–20, 2027, Sacramento, CA Community in Quantum Education for High-School and...

work page 2024
[6]

2024.Extended Abstract for the Talk at QSEEC (IEEE Quan- tum Week) 2024

Dan-Adrian German. 2024.Extended Abstract for the Talk at QSEEC (IEEE Quan- tum Week) 2024. Retrieved August 11, 2026 from https://homes.luddy.indiana. edu/dgerman/flc/qis/2024/final-submission.pdf

work page 2024
[7]

2024.The Little Qubitzer (Introduction to Quantum Advan- tage)

Dan-Adrian German. 2024.The Little Qubitzer (Introduction to Quantum Advan- tage). Retrieved August 11, 2026 from https://homes.luddy.indiana.edu/dgerman/ 2024/the-little-qubitzer.pdf

work page 2024

Show all 19 references

[8]

Dan-Adrian German, Marcelo Pias, and Qiao Xiang. 2024. A Quantum Abacus for Teaching Quantum Algorithms. InProceedings of the 55th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education V. 2 (Portland, OR, USA)(SIGCSE 2024). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, US...

2024
[10]

2023.Quantum in Pictures

Stefano Gogioso and Bob Coecke. 2023.Quantum in Pictures. Quantinuum

2023
[11]

May 15, 2021 (QCE22).The Virtual Quantum Optics Laboratory

Brian LaCour, Maria Maynard, Parth Shroff, Gabriel Ko, and Evan Ellis. May 15, 2021 (QCE22).The Virtual Quantum Optics Laboratory . Retrieved July 2, 2026 from https://arxiv.org/pdf/2105.07300

2021 arXiv
[12]

2015.The Mathematics of Quantum Mechanics

Martin LaForest. 2015.The Mathematics of Quantum Mechanics . Retrieved July 2, 2026 from https://uwaterloo.ca/institute-for-quantum-computing/sites/default/ files/uploads/files/mathematics_qm_v23_qsys.pdf

2015
[13]

Piotr Migdał, Klementyna Jankiewicz, Paweł Grabarz, Chiara Decaroli, and Philippe Cochin. 2022. The Quantum Game . Retrieved July 3, 2026 from https://quantumgame.io/

2022
[14]

Arlington, VA, April

Quantum Economic Development Consortium (QED-C). Arlington, VA, April
[15]

2024.Quantum in Pictures (Lectures)

Quantinuum. 2024.Quantum in Pictures (Lectures) . Retrieved July 3, 2026 from https://quantuminpictures.org/resources/

2024
[16]

2017.Q is for Quantum

Terry Rudolph. 2017.Q is for Quantum . Independently published

2017
[17]

2010.Six Quantum Pieces: A First Course in Quantum Physics

Valerio Scarani, Chua Lynn, and Liu Shi Yang. 2010.Six Quantum Pieces: A First Course in Quantum Physics . World Scientific, Singapore

2010
[18]

March 23, 2026 in WSJ.Quantum Computing Is Today’s Manhat- tan Project

Tom Tugendhat. March 23, 2026 in WSJ.Quantum Computing Is Today’s Manhat- tan Project. Retrieved July 1, 2026 from https://www.wsj.com/opinion/quantum- computing-is-todays-manhattan-project-9746be3b

2026
[2026]

RetrievedJuly1,2026fromhttps://quantumconsortium.org/publication/ 2026-state-of-the-global-quantum-industry-report/

State of the Global Quantum Industry 2026: Quantum Computing Market Forecast. RetrievedJuly1,2026fromhttps://quantumconsortium.org/publication/ 2026-state-of-the-global-quantum-industry-report/

2026

Pith tools

Reviewed August 16, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [9]

Phillips

Dan-Adrian German, Christina Snyder, and John M. Phillips. 2026. Quantum Computing for First-Time Learners.ACM Inroads 16, 4 (Dec. 2026), 32–41. doi:10. 1145/3774781

work page 2026

[2] [1]

Pothos, Sieglinde Pfaendler,VincentWang-Mascianica1,ThomasCervoni,FerdiTomassini,Vincent Anandraj, Peter Sigrist1, and Ilyas Khan1

Bob Coecke, Aleks Kissinger, Stefano Gogioso, Selma Dundar-Coecke, Caterina Puca, Lia Yeh, Muhammad Hamza Waseem, Emmanuel M. Pothos, Sieglinde Pfaendler,VincentWang-Mascianica1,ThomasCervoni,FerdiTomassini,Vincent Anandraj, Peter Sigrist1, and Ilyas Khan1. 28 Nov 2025.High schoolers excel at Oxford quantum course using pictorial mathematics . Retrieved J...

work page arXiv 2025

[3] [2]

8 Aug 2020.Teaching quantum information science to high-school and early undergraduate students

Sophia Economou, Terry Rudolph, and Edwin Barnes. 8 Aug 2020.Teaching quantum information science to high-school and early undergraduate students . Retrieved July 2, 2026 from https://arxiv.org/pdf/2005.07874

arXiv 2020

[4] [3]

Dayton Ellwanger. 2019. A Quantum Computing Pamphlet . Independently published (September 8, 2019)

work page 2019

[5] [4]

Adrian German, Marcelo Pias, and Qiao Xiang. 2023. On the Design and Imple- mentation of a Quantum Architectures Knowledge Unit for a CS Curriculum. In Proceedings of the 54th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education V. 1 (Toronto ON, Canada)(SIGCSE 2023). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1150–1156. doi:10.1145/3545945.3569845

arXiv 2023

[6] [5]

Adrian German, Christian Scott, Christina Snyder, Carla Gehlhausen, Matt Min- dach, Blake Clevenger, Scott Winchester, Rebekah Randall, Ahmad Faiz, and Elmar Bucher. 15-16 September 2024 (QSEEC24).Towards a Faculty Learning Quantum Pathways Submitted to ACM SIGCSE ’27, February 17–20, 2027, Sacramento, CA Community in Quantum Education for High-School and...

work page 2024

[7] [6]

2024.Extended Abstract for the Talk at QSEEC (IEEE Quan- tum Week) 2024

Dan-Adrian German. 2024.Extended Abstract for the Talk at QSEEC (IEEE Quan- tum Week) 2024. Retrieved August 11, 2026 from https://homes.luddy.indiana. edu/dgerman/flc/qis/2024/final-submission.pdf

work page 2024

[8] [7]

2024.The Little Qubitzer (Introduction to Quantum Advan- tage)

Dan-Adrian German. 2024.The Little Qubitzer (Introduction to Quantum Advan- tage). Retrieved August 11, 2026 from https://homes.luddy.indiana.edu/dgerman/ 2024/the-little-qubitzer.pdf

work page 2024