Kimberly Michelle Ying
ABSTRACT
Collaborative coding offers many benefits to students, but there has been little research on evaluating the applications that students use to collaborate on code. In this preliminary work, we ask "are students' needs being met by existing applications for collaborative coding"? A survey was distributed to students and faculty of computer science to determine if students had experience collaborating on programming projects and identify what applications, if any, they used to facilitate their collaborations. Survey respondents were also asked about the strengths and weaknesses of the applications they used. From the 126 student responses and 23 faculty responses representing 31 unique institutions, over 50 applications were mentioned. We manually clustered the applications based on their affordances and used participant responses to identify opportunities for improvement. We found that many students are retrofitting non-coding applications for their programming projects as a workaround to facing the large learning curves that many collaborative coding tools require. Our findings suggest a need for more novice-friendly collaborative tools.
- A. Ahmed, S. Ahmad, N. Ehsan, E. Mirza, and S. Z. Sarwar. 2010. Agile Software Development: Impact on Productivity and Quality. In 2010 IEEE International Conference on Management of Innovation Technology. 287--291. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ICMIT.2010.5492703Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Ritu Arora, Sanjay Goel, and Ravi Kant Mittal. 2017. Supporting Collaborative Software Development over GitHub. Software: Practice and Experience 47, 10 (2017), 1393--1416.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Hani Bani-Salameh and Clinton Jeffery. 2014. Collaborative and Social Development Environments: A Literature Review. International Journal of Computer Applications in Technology 49, 2 (2014), 89--103.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Kristy Elizabeth Boyer, August A. Dwight, R. Taylor Fondren, Mladen A. Vouk, and James C. Lester. 2008. A Development Environment for Distributed Synchronous Collaborative Programming. SIGCSE Bull. 40, 3 (June 2008), 158--162. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1597849.1384315Google ScholarDigital Library
- Davor Cubranic and Margaret Anne D. Storey. 2005. Collaboration Support for Novice Team Programming. In Proceedings of the 2005 International ACM SIGGROUP Conference on Supporting Group Work (GROUP '05). ACM, NY, NY, USA, 136--139. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1099203.1099229Google ScholarDigital Library
- Bernardo José da Silva Estácio and Rafael Prikladnicki. 2015. Distributed Pair Programming: A Systematic Literature Review. Information and Software Technology 63 (2015), 1--10.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Jakub Fiala, Matthew Yee-King, and Mick Grierson. 2016. Collaborative Coding Interfaces on the Web. In Proceedings of the 2016 International Conference on Live Interfaces. 49--58.Google Scholar
- Git. Retrieved December 25, 2019 from https://git-scm.com/.Google Scholar
- GitHub. Retrieved December 25, 2019 from https://github.com/.Google Scholar
- Max Goldman, Greg Little, and Robert C. Miller. 2011. Real-Time Collaborative Coding in a Web IDE. In Proceedings of the 24th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology (UIST '11). ACM, NY, NY, USA, 155--164. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2047196.2047215Google ScholarDigital Library
- Timothy J. Hickey, John Langton, and Richard Alterman. 2005. Enhancing CS Programming Lab Courses using Collaborative Editors. Journal of Computing Sciences in Colleges 20, 3 (2005), 157--167.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Laura Koesten, Emilia Kacprzak, Jeni Tennison, and Elena Simperl. 2019. Collaborative Practices with Structured Data: Do Tools Support What Users Need?. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '19). ACM, NY, NY, USA, Article Paper 100, 14 pages. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/3290605.3300330Google ScholarDigital Library
- Aditya Kurniawan, Christine Soesanto, and Joe Erik Carla Wijaya. 2015. CodeR: Real-time Code Editor Application for Collaborative Programming. Procedia Computer Science 59 (2015), 510--519.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Andrés Moreno, Niko Myller, and Erkki Sutinen. 2004. JeCo, a Collaborative Learning Tool for Programming. In 2004 IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages Human Centric Computing. 261--263. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/VLHCC.2004.33Google ScholarDigital Library
- Nachiappan Nagappan, Laurie Williams, Miriam Ferzli, Eric Wiebe, Kai Yang, Carol Miller, and Suzanne Balik. 2003. Improving the CS1 Experience with Pair Programming. SIGCSE Bull. 35, 1 (Jan. 2003), 359--362. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/792548.612006Google ScholarDigital Library
- Special Interest Group on Computer Science Education. 2019. Mailing Lists. Retrieved December 20, 2019 from https://sigcse.org/sigcse/membership/mailing-lists.html.Google Scholar
- Michael Reeves and Jihan Zhu. 2004. Moomba - A Collaborative Environment for Supporting Distributed Extreme Programming in Global Software Development. In International Conference on Extreme Programming and Agile Processes in Software Engineering. Springer, 38--50.Google Scholar
- U.S. News & World Report. Best Computer Science Schools. Retrieved November 30, 2019 from https://www.usnews.com/best-graduate-schools/top-science-schools/computer-science-rankings.Google Scholar
- Stephan Salinger, Christopher Oezbek, Karl Beecher, and Julia Schenk. 2010. Saros: An Eclipse Plug-in for Distributed Party Programming. In Proceedings of the 2010 ICSE Workshop on Cooperative and Human Aspects of Software Engineering (CHASE '10). ACM, NY, NY, USA, 48--55. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1833310.1833319Google ScholarDigital Library
- Till Schümmer and Stephan Lukosch. 2009. Understanding Tools and Practices for Distributed Pair Programming. Journal of Universal Computer Science 15, 16 (2009).Google Scholar
- Jason Vandeventer and Benjamin Barbour. 2012. CodeWave: A Real-Time, Collaborative IDE for Enhanced Learning in Computer Science. In Proceedings of the 43rd ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education. ACM, 75--80.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Laurie Williams, Robert R. Kessler, Ward Cunningham, and Ron Jeffries. 2000. Strengthening the Case for Pair Programming. IEEE Software 17, 4 (2000), 19--25.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Kimberly Michelle Ying, Lydia G. Pezzullo, Mohona Ahmed, Kassandra Crompton, Jeremiah Blanchard, and Kristy Elizabeth Boyer. 2019. In Their Own Words: Gender Differences in Student Perceptions of Pair Programming. In Proceedings of the 50th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education. ACM, 1053--1059.Google ScholarDigital Library
Index Terms
- Understanding Students' Needs for Better Collaborative Coding Tools
Recommendations
Collaborative tools: computer science students' skills versus software industry needs
Software companies encourage and further the use of collaborative tools and skills at the work place in pursuit of the benefits of their use: they improve communication, productivity and efficiency, and competitiveness. Besides, undergraduate and ...
Collaborative Practices with Structured Data: Do Tools Support What Users Need?
CHI '19: Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing SystemsCollaborative work with data is increasingly common and spans a broad range of activities - from creating or analysing data in a team, to sharing it with others, to reusing someone else's data in a new context. In this paper, we explore collaboration ...
A study of collaborative tool use in collaborative learning processes
Koli Calling '14: Proceedings of the 14th Koli Calling International Conference on Computing Education ResearchStudent collaboration has been shown to be beneficial in many contexts in computer science education. However, little research has been performed on the factors that affect collaboration processes either negatively or positively. In this study a partial ...
Comments