CaMeLOT: An educational framework for conceptual data modelling
Introduction
Conceptual data modelling can be considered a crucial part of software engineering curricula, being “the phase of the information systems development process that involves the abstraction and representation of the real world data pertinent to an organization” [1]. Such development process involves solving ill-structured problems and implies activities at high levels of abstraction, which poses a substantial challenge for educators. Moreover, due to the ill-structured nature of modelling problems, which are in most cases context-dependent, software engineering students have to grasp not only the modelling techniques themselves, but also certain specifics of the domain and context in which the task is situated [2].
Though data modelling is part of the majority of software engineering curricula, no generally accepted educational framework for data modelling exists to this moment. Subsequently, educators become the ones responsible for setting the learning outcomes to be pursued in the data-modelling course and for designing the entire course, based mostly on their own experience and professional judgement. However, not every educator has necessary experience and time resources to come up with a full set of learning outcomes, even though clearly set learning outcomes are essential for the learning process [3]. The path between the two states of “novice modeler” and “expert modeler” remains relatively unclear despite the fact that the differences between them have been already explored in a large number of scientific studies (e.g. [4], [5], [6]). Such differences include the stages of modelling implemented by the experts, the differences in modelling patterns, and strategies.
While many educators rely on existing educational literature on data modelling as a basis for their course material and design, the initial study of current educational resources on conceptual data modelling has shown a considerable number of gaps in the learning outcomes presented in those sources [7]. As the research showed, one of the most important types of tasks – evaluation of models, – was significantly underrepresented in the practical educational materials. Moreover, while the tasks related to the ultimate goal – creation of the model, were present in all types of educational resources, the scaffolding steps and the lower levels leading to the mastery of creative skills in modelling remain unequal and lack consistency.
Student experiences from conceptual modelling courses have also not been flawless. Despite the fact that the history of conceptual modelling education spans more than several decades, the most common difficulties and mistakes in novice modellers’ solutions persist: the difficulties they faced more than 20 years ago, such as understanding the requirements, or choosing the right multiplicity [8], are very similar to those they faced 10 and 20 years later [9], [10]. These persistent difficulties and errors correspond to the initial skills that the students have to acquire before being able to create fully functional models.
These concerns suggest that the scaffolding process in conceptual modelling education requires a thorough review and improvement. This study aims at filling the identified gaps by presenting a systematic educational framework for data modelling education, based on the revised Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives [11]. The work includes the identification of scaffolded content areas, a domain-specific definition of the Bloom's taxonomy's levels, the development of recommendations for learning outcomes classification as well as examples of learning outcomes to be pursued in the identified particular content areas of the course.
Section snippets
Background and related work
In the last 2 decades, numerous studies have been made on software engineering pedagogy, exploring various approaches to curriculum development and enhancement (e.g. [12], [13], [14]). However, very few of them explore the pedagogy related to the data-modelling phase of software engineering in depth. In 2005, Cowling [15] argued that modelling in general had not been given sufficient attention in the software engineering curriculum, while the role of modelling is crucial in the software
Design methodology
CaMeLOT's design was performed using the design science approach adapted from the Information Systems Research Framework developed by Hevner et al. [27]. The choice of the approach was determined by the nature of the aim of this study: development of a taxonomy of learning outcomes for future practical use by the conceptual modelling educators, taking into account the current state of the art and needs of the modelling community.
As described by Hevner et al., design science research (DSR) is
CaMeLOT: a revised Bloom's taxonomy for conceptual data modelling
Next to an adapted definition of the knowledge and cognitive levels, CaMeLOT also proposes the identification of a set of distinct content areas and their scaffolding.
Example sets of learning outcomes
To validate the classification framework as a practical tool to be used by educators, we have developed example sets of learning outcomes for six content areas covering two subdomains of conceptual data modelling. For each content area, one or two tables with a line of example learning outcomes per knowledge level is given. Not every content area would have all the knowledge levels presented and certain intersections between content areas are expected in many cases. The exception is
Evaluation
To perform the preliminary evaluation of the current version of the framework, seven experts in the field of conceptual modelling education were contacted and asked to participate in the framework evaluation in a form of an interview that followed the presentation of the framework and the experts’ familiarization with the guidelines. Three experts were found willing to participate in an in-depth interview. The summary of the interview gathering process is presented in Table 18.
As a result of
Discussion
The set of tables presented in Section 5 provides examples and guidelines to conceptual data modelling educators wishing to enrich their educational practice with new types of exercises and assessment items or to identify the gaps in the existing curriculum.
Conclusion
In this study, we have developed CaMeLOT as a revised Bloom's taxonomy adapted for conceptual data modelling. Besides a reinterpretation of the knowledge and cognitive levels, the framework also identifies and scaffolds content areas in the domain of conceptual modelling. While the content area of Model Creation was elaborated specifically for data modelling, it can easily be extended for other types of modelling (e.g. business process modelling). The content area of General Modelling, as its
Acknowledgment
This research is funded by grant C24/16/002 of the KU Leuven Research Council.
References (49)
- et al.
Process mining analysis of conceptual modeling behavior of novices–empirical study using JMermaid modeling and experimental logging environment
Comput. Hum. Behav.
(2014) - et al.
Change the face of software engineering education: a field report from Taiwan
Inf. Softw. Technol.
(2011) The role of modelling in the software engineering curriculum
J. Syst. Softw.
(2005)- et al.
Conceptual data modelling in theory and practice
Eur. J. Inf. Syst.
(1995) Instructional design models for well-structured and III-structured problem-solving learning outcomes
Educ. Technol. Res. Dev.
(1997)Learning outcomes and instructional objectives: is there a difference?
Med. Teach.
(2002)- et al.
How novices formulate models. Part I: qualitative insights and implications for teaching
J. Oper. Res. Soc.
(2007) Teaching novice conceptual data modellers to become experts
- et al.
Domain Modelling in Bloom: Deciphering How We Teach It
(2017) - et al.
Novice errors in conceptual database design
Eur. J. Inf. Syst.
(1994)
A practical conceptual modeling teaching method based on quantitative error analyses for novices learning to create error-free simple class diagrams
A Revision of Bloom's Taxonomy, Theory Into Practice
Curriculum guidelines for graduate degree programs in software engineering
MSIS 2006
ACM SIGCSE Bull
Curriculum guidelines for undergraduate degree programs in software engineering
Comput. Curric. Ser.
Handbook on Formative and Summative Evaluation of Student Learning
Biology in bloom: implementing Bloom's taxonomy to enhance student learning in biology.
CBE Life Sci. Educ.
Application of Bloom's taxonomy debunks the "MCAT
Science
The Blooming anatomy tool (BAT): a discipline-specific rubric for utilizing Bloom's taxonomy in the design and evaluation of assessments in the anatomical sciences
Anat. Sci. Educ.
Climbing Bloom's taxonomy pyramid: lessons from a graduate histology course
Anat. Sci. Educ.
Bloom's taxonomy revisited
Cited by (22)
Combining low-code development with ChatGPT to novel no-code approaches: A focus-group study
2023, Intelligent Systems with ApplicationsAn effective deep learning pipeline for improved question classification into bloom’s taxonomy’s domains
2023, Education and Information TechnologiesPractitioners’ experiences with model-driven engineering: a meta-review
2023, Software and Systems ModelingComparison of Required Competences and Task Material in Modeling Education
2023, Enterprise Modelling and Information Systems ArchitecturesAutomated Assessment of Conceptual Models in Education: A Systematic Literature Review
2023, Enterprise Modelling and Information Systems ArchitecturesHow teaching conceptual modeling to robotics students changes their perception of software engineering
2023, CEUR Workshop Proceedings