Anya Tafliovich
Andrew Petersen
Jennifer Campbell
ABSTRACT
Project experience and teamwork have been identified as two of the most important deficiencies of recent graduates, so experiences with team projects are a critical component of computer science and software engineering education. However, evaluating these projects is difficult, as it requires a balance between rewarding the team's effort (and the development of skills that enable the team to work effectively) and recognizing individual contributions. We report on an investigation of the student perspective on evaluation of software development team projects. We find that (1) computer science and software engineering educators hold several misconceptions about students' preferences in teamwork evaluation methods, (2) that students' preferences with regard to evaluation change dramatically as they advance through the program and even in the course of a single term, and (3) that the change in preference occurs early in the term, before they complete any work as a team, with most students shifting their preference towards putting more weight on the team's effort.
- A. Andreescu, I. Intorsureanu, A. Uta, and R. Mihalca. Team work in software development student projects. In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Computer Systems and Technologies and Workshop for PhD Students in Computing, pages 80:V.18--80:1, 2008. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- M. Barrick, G. Stewart, M. Neubert, and M. Mount. Relating member ability and personality to work-team processes and team effectiveness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83(3):377--391, 1998.Google ScholarCross Ref
- L. Bender, G. Walia, K. Kambhampaty, K. E. Nygard, and T. E. Nygard. Social sensitivity and classroom team projects: An empirical investigation. In Proceedings of the 43rd ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, pages 403--408, 2012. Google ScholarDigital Library
- G. Beranek, W. Zuser, and T. Grechenig. Functional group roles in software engineering teams. SIGSOFT Softw. Eng. Notes, 30(4):1--7, 2005. Google ScholarDigital Library
- N. Clark, P. Davies, and R. Skeers. Self and peer assessment in software engineering projects. In Proceedings of the 7th Australasian Conference on Computing Education - Volume 42, pages 91--100, 2005. Google ScholarDigital Library
- M. Craig, D. Horton, and F. Pitt. Forming reasonably optimal groups: (frog). In Proceedings of the 16th ACM International Conference on Supporting Group Work, pages 141--150, 2010. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Y. Dubinsky and O. Hazzan. Using a role scheme to derive software project metrics. Journal of Systems Architecture, 52(11):693--699, 2006. Google ScholarDigital Library
- H. E. Dunsmore, D. P. Moffet, and S. T. Ward. Software engineering team project group member evaluations: Some empirical results. SIGCSE Bull., 21(2):40--45, 1989. Google ScholarDigital Library
- K. Egea, S.-K. Kim, T. Andrews, and K. Behrens. Approaches used by cross-cultural and cross-discipline students in teamwork for a first-year course in web design. In Proceedings of the Twelfth Australasian Conference on Computing Education - Volume 103, pages 87--96, 2010. Google ScholarDigital Library
- S. Faraj and L. Sproull. Coordinating expertise in software development teams. Management Science, 46(12):1554--1568, 2000. Google ScholarDigital Library
- A. Gates, N. Delgado, and O. Mondragon. A structured approach for managing a practical software engineering course. In 30th Annual Frontiers in Education Conference, 2000. Google ScholarDigital Library
- N. Gorla and Y. W. Lam. Who should work with whom?: Building effective software project teams. Commun. ACM, 47(6):79--82, 2004. Google ScholarDigital Library
- J. H. Hayes, T. C. Lethbridge, and D. Port. Evaluating individual contribution toward group software engineering projects. In Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Software Engineering, pages 622--627, 2003. Google ScholarDigital Library
- O. Hazzan. Computer science students' conception of the relationship between reward (grade) and cooperation. SIGCSE Bull., 35(3):178--182, 2003. Google ScholarDigital Library
- O. Hazzan and Y. Dubinsky. Students' cooperation in teamwork: binding the individual and the team interests. In Proceedings of the ACM international conference companion on Object oriented programming systems languages and applications companion, pages 151--152, 2010. Google ScholarDigital Library
- N. Herbert. Quantitative peer assessment: Can students be objective? In Proceedings of the Ninth Australasian Conference on Computing Education - Volume 66, pages 63--71, 2007. Google ScholarDigital Library
- J. R. Hoffman and S. G. Rogelberg. A guide to team incentive system. Team Performance Management: An International Journal, 4(1):23--32, 1998.Google ScholarCross Ref
- J. M. Hogan and R. Thomas. Developing the software engineering team. In Proceedings of the 7th Australasian Cnference on Computing Education - Volume 42, pages 203--210, 2005. Google ScholarDigital Library
- D. Ian Brown. Team-based reward plans. Team Performance Management: An International Journal, 1(1):23--31, 1995.Google ScholarCross Ref
- M. Ikonen and J. Kurhila. Discovering high-impact success factors in capstone software projects. In Proceedings of the 10th ACM Conference on SIG-information Technology Education, pages 235--244, 2009. Google ScholarDigital Library
- J. Karn and T. Cowling. A follow up study of the effect of personality on the performance of software engineering teams. In Proceedings of the 2006 ACM/IEEE International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering, pages 232--241, 2006. Google ScholarDigital Library
- D. Kaufmann, R. Felder, and H. Fuller. Accounting for individual effort in cooperative learning teams. Journal of Engineering Education, 89:133--140, 2000.Google ScholarCross Ref
- R. Layton, M. Loughry, M. W. Ohland, and G. D. Ricco. Design and validation of a web-based system for assigning members to teams using instructor-specified criteria. Advances in Engineering Education, 2, 2010.Google Scholar
- R. Layton and M. Ohland. Peer ratings revisited: Focus on teamwork, not ability. In Proceedings of American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference, 2001.Google Scholar
- R. A. Layton, M. L. Loughry, M. W. Ohland, and G. D. Ricco. Design and validation of a web-based system for assigning members to teams using instructor-specified criteria. Advances in Engineering Education, 2(1):1--28, 2010.Google Scholar
- R. Lingard and E. Berd. Teaching teamwork skills in software engineering based on an understanding of factors affecting group performance. Frontiers in Education, 3, 2002.Google Scholar
- V. Pieterse, D. G. Kourie, and I. P. Sonnekus. Software engineering team diversity and performance. In Proceedings of the 2006 Annual Research Conference of the South African Institute of Computer Scientists and Information Technologists on IT Research in Developing Countries, pages 180--186, 2006. Google ScholarDigital Library
- A. Radermacher and G. Walia. Gaps between industry expectations and the abilities of graduates. In Proceeding of the 44th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, SIGCSE '13, pages 525--530, 2013. Google ScholarDigital Library
- A. Radermacher, G. Walia, and D. Knudson. Investigating the skill gap between graduating students and industry expectations. In Companion Proceedings of the 36th International Conference on Software Engineering, ICSE Companion 2014, pages 291--300, 2014. Google ScholarDigital Library
- A. Radermacher, G. Walia, and D. Knudson. Investigating the skill gap between graduating students and industry expectations. In Companion Proceedings of the 36th International Conference on Software Engineering, pages 291--300, 2014. Google ScholarDigital Library
- S.-T. Shen, S. Prior, A. White, and M. Karamanoglu. Using personality type differences to form engineering design teams. Engineering Education, 2:54--66, 2007.Google ScholarCross Ref
- H. H. Smith, III and D. L. Smarkusky. Competency matrices for peer assessment of individuals in team projects. In Proceedings of the 6th Conference on Information Technology Education, pages 155--162, 2005. Google ScholarDigital Library
- A. Woolley, C. Chabris, A. Pentland, N. Hashmi, and M. Thomas. Evidence for a collective intelligence factor in the performance of human groups. Science, 330(6004):686--688, 2010.Google ScholarCross Ref
Index Terms
- On the Evaluation of Student Team Software Development Projects
Recommendations
Evaluating Student Teams: Do Educators Know What Students Think?
SIGCSE '16: Proceedings of the 47th ACM Technical Symposium on Computing Science EducationThe subject of this work is evaluation methods of student software development team projects. Over a two year period in three courses, we study student preferences for team evaluation methods, the reasons behind their preferences, the changes in ...
Team work in software development student projects
CompSysTech '08: Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Computer Systems and Technologies and Workshop for PhD Students in ComputingTo enhance students' capabilities regarding team work in real software development projects, should be a major objective for any Computer Science department within a University. Starting from the authors' experience in coordinating student teams for the ...
Large team projects in software engineering courses
A key goal of educators teaching software engineering is to provide students with useful experience that will benefit them after graduation. A key component of this experience is usually a class project that is meant to expose students to the issues ...
Comments