[ieee 2013 international conference on interactive collaborative learning (icl) - kazan, russia...

Cooperative Learning and Website in Software Project Management Pedagogy

Sharbani Bhattacharya Associate Professor(IT)

IEC College of Engineering & Technology, Greater Noida,India

[email protected] Abstract- Software Project Management Course is part of syllabus in Mahamaya Technical University (MTU) Noida in B.Tech(IT/CSE) in VI/VIII Semester respectively. Here, in this course students learn managing the project. The pre-requisite course of Software Project Management (SPM) is Software Engineering (SE). SE is taught in B.Tech(IT/CSE) III Semester. We have used both cooperative learning assignments as well as individual assignment pattern. There is also teacher’s website on Software Project Management. It is managed, updated and revised by teacher along with classroom lessons, lab and project. The teacher’s website has study material for course as well as enhanced material for further study. Students were given flexibility in learning hours and having meetings inside the class as well outside the class. Students have to submit minutes of meetings with pseudo- customer and within the group for the project. Students became more concern about well behavior as it was carrying marks for final gradation. Keywords- Software Project Management; Cooperative Learning; Teacher’s Website; Engineering Pedagogy

I. INTRODUCTION

Software Project Management Course is part of syllabus in Mahamaya Technical University (MTU) Noida(Part of Uttar Pradesh Technical University, Lucknow) in B.Tech(IT/CSE) in VI / VIII Semester. The course is enhancement of Software Engineering Course. Here, students learn managing the project.

The pre-requisite course of Software Project Management (SPM) is Software Engineering (SE). SE is taught in B.Tech(IT/CSE) III Semester. SE consists of Software Development Life Cycle (SDLC) , Metrics & Models of SE, Introduction to Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI) of Software Engineering Institute , Carnegie Mellon University SEI CMU, IEEE Standards, Quality Assurance Institute (QAI) and Introduction to Testing. The Project Management involves higher end of SE where role of project manager is explained. The goal of course is to prepare students to be effective project manager and executive. Students are given MS Project , Gantt Project and other SPM tools for Project Monitoring & Control, Resource Allocation, Risk Management, Quality Assurance , Testing, Team Coordination and Software Configuration Management. Students are assigned lab assignments and projects apart from theory. Total number of lectures are 40X 1 hours= 40 hours, Lab classes 20 X 2 hours= 40 hours and project-based-learning 20 X2 hours = 40 hours. The assessment is done with 150 marks of theory and 50 marks of lab and project. In this paper we have divided the subject into three parts.

1) Theory included Lectures, Assignments & Case Studies.

2) Lab includes using SPM Tools. 3) Project-Based-Learning includes projects

allotted in groups.

We have used both cooperative learning assignments as well as individual assignment pattern. There is also teacher’s website on Software Project Management. It is managed, updated and revised by teacher along with classroom lessons, lab and project. The teacher’s website contains study material for course as well as enhanced material for further study. This is for student’s answers to further query after attending the class or missing the class. The notes are updated, assignments, case studies are available in the class as

2013 International Conference on Interactive Collaborative Learning (ICL)Page 323

978-1-4799-0153-1/13/$31.00 ©2013 IEEE 25-27 September 2013, Kazan National Research Technological University, Kazan, Russia

well as in teacher’s websites. It was done to increase the teacher - student’s interaction and maximizing the knowledge level of students. Less attendance or bunking classes cannot be valid excuse for any student so students have to submit all assignments and case studies in cooperative manner as well as individually. Assignments are given as follows

1) Five assignments to be submitted individually.

2) Eight Case Studies to be submitted in cooperative learning method (in groups).

3) Three project planning & scheduling in Project-based-learning in cooperative learning method (in groups).

4) One Presentation of SPM topic in cooperative learning method (in groups).

Website is used for all the purpose from theory lectures, lab, projects, feedback and submitting hand written assignments. Sometimes, for few students who are very ignorant or not ready to submit assignments were allowed to give soft copy at last moment before the examination. They were not able to perform well and having low attendance.

II. COOPERATIVE LEARNING AND SPM

Cooperative learning is used here in Software Project Management pedagogy. Students were divided into group in the beginning of the semester and they remain in the same group up to the end of semester. Students are not allowed to change the group unless and until there is a valid reason to it.

A. Group Formation

Group formation is done on the basis of sitting trends and those who work together. Students are combined in group of four. For each project, assignment or case study they have to choose one coordinator, one recorder and two checkers. Roles will differ one after other assignments. Everyone should be assigned all the roles at least once. In cooperative learning students are given glimpse of industrial environment as new comer. They cannot choose their own group rather they are allotted a group and project. They have to work in team and adjust and cooperate in right manner. They need to manage their work ,

marks , grade and above all good relationship with their peers.

B. Peer Review

There is also peer-review added in the Lab assignments and project-based learning. Students are not allowed to outcast one student. They are supposed to be manipulative as well as diplomatic to get the project running while communicating with pseudo-customer. As peer review is also used for final grading so good relations are important in group.

Peer Review

Give marks out of 5. Group Name-D

P1 :Rajat Hora

P2: Pragya Joshi

P3: Piyush Raghav

P4: Harshit Seth

Table -1 Peer Review Sheet submitted by Group D P1 P2 P3 P4 Teacher’s

View P1 5.0 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.8 P2 4.5 5.0 4.5 4.5 5.0 P3 4.5 4.5 5.0 4.5 4.6 P4 4.5 4.5 4.5 5.0 4.7

C. Project-Based-Learning

Project-based-learning is the foremost pedagogy for Engineering. Students can learn , memorize and develop a useful concept into working model. Designing a curriculum for project-based-learning for any course requires following points-

1. Concepts which are to be dealt is to be listed.

2. Proper planning needs to be designed for each concepts.

3. Each concept needs to be correlated to form a project.

4. It should be organized properly to designated in a sequence to form a project.



Using project-based-learning in software project management is very effective. This gives students glimpse of real-world experience for interacting with customer. Students were supported to ask questions to pseudo customers. Students will discuss and make a report of their work and present it. Students are divided in group and they need to complete their task within the specified time. The group formation is done here using cooperative learning method. Students are given their respective projects pseudo customer. They have to conduct meeting with pseudo customer and find relevant requirement analysis for planning the project. They have appropriate Software Project Management Tool and uses proper analytical method for the project. In the end of the course they have to present their planning and get acceptance of pseudo customer. They need to convince their plan and prepare lab file report in the group. Lab file contains all the points of software project management of choosing team leader, tester, reporter and analyst. These roles are same as in cooperative learning coordinator, checker, recorder and analyzer respectively. The cooperative learning have overall positive impact on project-based-learning in SPM. The usage of proper technology , tools and analytical method in project planning and scheduling. The assessment is done on the basis of peer reviews , students report , lab organization, tools and analysis. The students also give their feedback for the course overview at the end.

The project-based-learning method used SPM. The students are given projects like

1) Intranet 2) Library Management System 3) Hotel Management

Students can choose either college computer center, any cyber café or automated office for case study. They are the pseudo customer for the project planning and scheduling. Students have to conduct meetings and record minutes. The meetings are for roles, team objective, project description and planning. The SPM tools are chosen for Project Planning and to prepare PERT Chart , Work Breakdown Structure, Critical Path Method, Slip Chart and Gantt Chart. The customer‘s requirement

,delight and grievance are noted down properly. The role of the team member is well defined and they are needed to be self evaluating and peer reviewed. Scheduling tasks ,allocation of resources and estimation of cost are to be done using SPM tools. Risk analysis and management are also included in curriculum. At the end of project students come to know how work is done in real environment.

1) How to collect information regarding system?

2) How to get loop holes of present running system?

3) Issues and challenges of present system. 4) New added feature required for the

enhancement. 5) Estimation of time , cost and resources for

enhancing the system.

The file is made in group of students and each team member is assigned a work. Everyone have to fulfill the assigned work and evaluate. The meeting are of three types

1) Within the group 2) Group and pseudo customer 3) Group and teacher

Minutes of meeting are recorded and filed with time, venue and discussion. Questionnaires are prepared by teacher to know students view. The projects are planned and reviewed by the group member and then presented before teacher and students. Every group is supposed to present in 10 minutes and question and answer session of 5 minutes. Teacher also take viva of each student and team member for final gradation. Each team have to submit assignments with their respective names labeled to the part of the assignment done by him/her.

D. Case Studies

Case Studies are also assessed using cooperative learning in classroom. There were eight case studies from Project Management Institute (PMI). There were five questions for each case study which is supposed to be done by students in group. If any of the group member have not attended class, the student have to submit case study separately available in the teacher’s website. All the students have to give

2013 International Conference on Interactive Collaborative Learning (ICL)25


at least five assignments for their final grading of Theory.

III. INTERACTIVE TEACHER’S WEBSITE AND SPM

Website is maintained for the benefit of students for syllabus, lecture notes, assignments, question bank, case study, standards, attendance and marks. Students are given the facility to give feedback in the website. They were also having assignments for home work individually and case studies at class work to submit in group. When they miss it they need to download it from site and submit to teacher on specified date. Site also refers to papers of SPM journals.

Fig 1 Website of Teacher on SPM

Fig2 Website of Teacher on SPM

Fig 3 Website of Teacher on SPM

IV. ASSESSMENT

We are assessing cooperative learning method along with teacher’s website in classroom teaching of Software Project Management in an innovative way. Students were given flexibility in learning hours and having meetings inside the class as well outside the



class. Students have to submit minutes of meetings with pseudo- customer and within the group for the project. Peer reviews and teacher’s review have 50% weight age and 50% weight age for meetings and project works. Students became more concern about well behavior as it was carrying marks for final grading. Overall remark was given as Excellent, Very Good, Good, Satisfactory, Ordinary and No show. There were 47 students to be assessed in cooperative learning assignment. Finally, overall remarks we got are two students- excellent, 35 students- very good, six students -good, two -satisfactory and two- ordinary. There was increase in Very Good category in Cooperative learning as compared to individual assignment. Moreover, there were no students who were in category of No Show in cooperative learning. There were students who were not cooperative but they wanted to be in group. Two poor performers were thrown out by group so their viva, lab file , project work and assignments were taken individually and are given remark ordinary.

A. Assessment In Theory

Assessment is done in four Part is Theory (Maximum out of 150)

1)Class Tests(Out of 60 slashed down to 30)

2) Attendance(10)

3) Assignments ,Quizzes, & Case Studies(out of 30 slashed down to 10)

4)Close Book Examination at University(out of 100)

B. Assessment In Laboratory

Assessment is done in four part for Lab (Maximum Marks 50)

1)Peer Review(out of 25)

2)File Work(out of 15)

3)Team Evaluation(out of 10)

4)Lab work and Viva- By External Examiner(out of 25)

Total marks accumulated is out of 75 which is slash down to 50.

Chart 1 Showing Overall Lab work Assessment

Table2-1Over all Lab Work Grading of 47 students

Remark No. of Students

Excellent 2

Very Good 35

Good 6

Satisfactory 2

Ordinary 2

No show 0

Student Evaluation Form

This form is to initiate evaluation of team member with teacher for review and final grading.

1- Never 2-Rarely 3-Sometimes 4-Usually 5-Always

Name of the Student_______________

Group Name ___________

1. Has the student attended your group meetings ? 1 2 3 4 5

2. Has student gave prior notice for not attending meeting? 1 2 3 4 5

3. Has the student made effort at assigned work? 1 2 3 4 5

4. Has he/she made contribution in assignments? 1 2 3 4 5

Student Grades

Excellent

Very Good

Good

Satisfactory

Ordinary

No show



5. Is he/she cooperative to the group member? 1 2 3 4 5

Overall rating on the following scale(out of 25) __________________________________

Excellent(24 to 25 )

Very Good (22 to 23)

Good(20 to 21)

Satisfactory(18 t o 19)

Ordinary(17 to 18)

No Show(less than 17)

Software Project Management -Questionnaire

Name of the Student__________

Roll No_______________

Group Name ________

1-Never 2-Rarely 3-Sometimes 4-Usually 5-Always

1. How much you need to use internet for SPM ?

1 2 3 4 5

2. How much Cooperative Learning is useful for SPM?

1 2 3 4 5

3. How much Peer Review is useful for SPM assignments?

1 2 3 4 5

4. How much teacher’s site is important for SPM activities?

1 2 3 4 5

5. How much Case Studies are important for concepts of SPM?

1 2 3 4 5

Table 3- Views of Students on SPM Questionnaire

5 4 3 2 1 Internet Usage 18% 77.2% 13.6% 0 0 Cooperative learning 45.5% 31.8% 27.2% 0 0

Peer Review 63.6% 27.2% 4.5% 0 0

Teacher's site 31.8% 45.5% 18.1% 0 0

Case study 59% 9% 31.8% 0 0

V. CONCLUSION

This method of cooperative learning, teacher’s website and comparison of class room teaching evolved some interesting results like peer review shows that students try to give good grades to other in lieu of getting good remark from others. This initiated team building, looking forward for friendship as well assessing the peer with teacher. Students gave positive feedback for teacher’s website, internet usage, cooperative learning, peer reviews and case studies for Software Project Management course.

Chart 2 Showing results SPM Questionnaire

0102030405060708090

5

4

3

2

1



REFERENCES

[1] S. Djenic, R. Krneta, and J. Mitic “BlendedLearning of Programming in the Internet Age”,IEEE Transactions on Education, Vol. 54, No. 2, May 2011 ,Page No. 247

[2] Vladan Deved zic´ and Sa sa R. Milenkovic,“Teaching Agile Software Development: A Case Study”, IEEE Transactions on Education, Vol. 54, No. 2, May 2011, Page No. 273.

[3] Minhong Wang, Haiyang Jia, Vijayan Sugumaran, Weijia Ran, and Jian Liao , “A Web-Based Learning System for Software Test Professionals”, IEEE Transactions on Education, Vol. 54, NO. 2,May 2011 , Page no.263.

[4] Chien-Chou Shih, Member, IEEE, and Lain-Jinn Hwang.,“Learning Embedded Software Design in an Open. 3A Multiuser Laboratory”, IEEE Transactions on Education, Vol. 54, No. 2, May 2011,Page No 279.

[5] Konstantinos Antonis, Thanasis Daradoumis, Spyros Papadakis, and Christos Simos ,“Evaluation of the Effectiveness of a Web-Based Learning Design for Adult Computer Science Courses”, IEEE Transactions on Education, Vol.54, NO. 3, August 2011,Page No374.

[6] Andreas Zendler, Christian Spannagel, and Dieter Klaudt,“Marrying Content and Process in Computer Science Education”, IEEE Transactions on Education, Vol. 54, NO. 3, August 2011, Page No 387.

[7] Maria-Dolores Cano,“Students’ Involvement in Continuous Assessment Methodologies: A Case Study for a Distributed Information Systems Course”, IEEE Transactions on Education, Vol. 54, NO. 3, August 2011, Page No442.

[8] Zhilbert Tafa, Goran Rako cevic´, Djordje Mihailovic´, and Veljko Milutinovic´,“Effecs of Interdisciplinary Education on Technology-Driven Application Design”, IEEE Transactions on Education, Vol. 54, NO. 3, August 2011, Page No-462.

[9] Fernando Alonso, Member, IEEE, Daniel Manrique, Loïc Martínez, and José M. Viñes,“How Blended Learning Reduces Underachievement in Higher Education: An Experience in Teaching Computer Sciences”, IEEE Transactions on Education, Vol. 54, NO. 3, August 2011, Page No 471.

[10] Richard M. Felder1, and Rebecca Brent,Department of Chemical Engineering N.C. State University,Raleigh, NC 27695-79052Education Designs, Inc., Cary, NC 27518, “Cooperative Learning”.

[11] Richard M. Felder,Rebecca Brent,North Carolina State University ,”Effective Strategies for Cooperative Learning”, J. Cooperation & Collaboration in College Teaching, 10(2), 69–75 (2001).

[12] Deborah B. Kaufman and Richard M. Felder, “Accounting for Individual Effort In cooperative Learning Teams”, Department of Chemical Engineering,Hugh Fuller,College of Engineering,North Carolina State University, J. Engr. Education, 89(2), 133–140 (2000).

[13] Cynthia R. Haller,Department of EnglishVictoria J. Gallagher, Department of Communication Tracey L. Weldon, Department of EnglishRichard M. Felder, Department of Chemical Engineering,North Carolina State University,“Dynamics of Peer Education in Cooperative Learning Workgroups”, J. Engr. Education, 89(3), 285–293 (2000).

[14] Barbara A. Oakley, Senior Member, IEEE, Darrin M. Hanna, Member, IEEE, Zenon Kuzmyn, and Richard M. Felder,“Best Practices Involving Teamwork in the Classroom: Results From a Survey of 6435 Engineering Student Respondents”, IEEE Transactions on Education, Vol. 50, No. 3, August 2007,Page No 266.

[15] Richard M. Felder, and Rebecca Brent, Department of Chemical Engineering, N.C. State University, “Designing and Teaching Courses to Satisfy the ABET Engineering Criteria”, Journal of Engineering Education January 2003, Page No 8.

[16] Richard M. Felder ,Department of Chemical. Engineering, North Carolina State University, “A longitudinal study of engineering student performance and retention. Iv. Instructional methods and student responses to them”, Journal of Engineering Education, 84(4),Page No-361-367(1995).

[17] D. Rodríguez1, M. Satpathy1, and D. Pfahl2 “Effective Software Project Management Education through Simulation Models: An Externally Replicated Experiment”, PROFES 2004, LNCS 3009, pp. 287–301, 2004. ©Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2004.

[18] Stephanie Farrel , Director, Rowan University, USA ,Workshop Handbook of “Essentials of Learner- Centered Teaching” by on 26th September 2012 at Villach, Austria.

[19] Sharbani Bhattacharya, “Teaching Software Engineering in Blended Learning”, iJEP – Volume 3, Special Issue 2: "IGIP2012 Conference", March 2013.

[20] Bin-Shyan Jong, Chien-Hung Lai, yen-The Hsia,Tsong-Wuu Lin and Cheng-Yu Lu,”Using Game-Based Cooperative learning to improve Learning Motivation: AStudy of Online Game Use in an Operating Systems Course”, IEEE Transactions on Education, Vol.56, No.2,May 2013 page 183.



[ieee 2013 international conference on interactive collaborative learning (icl) - kazan, russia...

Documents