skip to main content
10.1145/3422392.3422481acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagessbesConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Competencies Development based on Thinking-based Learning in Software Engineering: An Action-Research

Published:21 December 2020Publication History

ABSTRACT

For a long time, the teaching of Software Engineering (SE) has been carried out in a traditional way without taking into account relevant aspects of the student's personality reflected in their learning. There is still a lack of research focused on SE that promotes adequate teaching methods so that new generations of students and future professionals have a humanistic, critical and reflexive formation. A novel teaching method called Thinking-based Learning (TBL) was proposed to develop effective thinking in students using thinking skills, habits of the mind and the metacognition during the teaching of subject content. The action research as a methodology to improve their teaching practices in education has been seen as a positive change in educational practices. The aim of this research was to perform an action research based on TBL method to assist in the development of competencies that are less attended by traditional methods currently used during the teaching and learning process of students in SE. Moreover, a Systematic Literature Review (SLR) was conducted to identify gaps in the contribution of teaching methods in SE until the present. The data are obtained by comparing the competencies achieved with TBL with the traditional methods previously used in the discipline, and additionally with the data obtained from the SLR. The results indicated that critical thinking, autonomy, problem solving and creativity were the most developed competencies by students during the course period. We are planning to expand the TBL and applying it in other disciplines of the same course as well as in other research areas to determine its functionality and interdisciplinarity. We hope that this experience with TBL will encourage the development of competencies among SE teachers.

References

  1. Pep Alsina, Ana María Argila Irurita, Montserrat Aróztegui Trenchs, Marc Badia-Miró, Anna Carreras Marín, Miquel Colomer i Busquets, Mercedes Gracenea Zugarramurdi, Lyda Halbaut, Pere Juárez Vives, Francisco Llórente Galera, et al. 2013. Rúbricas para la evaluación de competencias. (2013).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Marilyn Binkley, Ola Erstad, Joan Herman, Senta Raizen, Martin Ripley, May Miller-Ricci, and Mike Rumble. 2012. Defining twenty-first century skills. In Assessment and teaching of 21st century skills. Springer, 17--66.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Maura Borrego, Kevin A. Nguyen, Caroline Crockett, Matt DeMonbrun, Prateek Shekhar, Sneha Tharayil, Cynthia J. Finelli, Robyn S. Rosenberg, and Cynthia Waters. 2019. Systematic Literature Review of Students' Affective Responses to Active Learning: Overview of Results. 2018 IEEE Front. Education Conference (2019). https://doi.org/10.1109/fie.2018.8659306Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Robert Davison, Maris G Martinsons, and Ned Kock. 2004. Principles of canonical action research. Information systems journal 14, 1 (2004), 65--86.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Sandro Marques de Carvalho and Eudis Oliveira Teixeira. 2014. Usabilidade e adaptabilidade web: Uma proposta de inovação de um sistema de apoio à gestão escolar. In Anais dos Workshops do Congresso Brasileiro de Informática na Educação, Vol. 3. 435.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Centro Interuniversitario de desarrollo CINDA. 2014. Evaluación del aprendizaje en innovaciones curriculares de la Educación Superior, Santiago, Chile. Colección Gestión Universitario (2014).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. David Moises Barreto dos Santos, Carlos Alberto dos Santos Da Silva, and Jefferson Da Silva Moreira. 2018. Aprendizagem baseada em problemas em Engenharia de Computação: uma avaliação qualitativa. Imagens da Educação 8, 2 (2018), 42390. https://doi.org/10.4025/imagenseduc.v8i2.42390Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. Paulo Sergio Medeiros Dos Santos and Guilherme Horta Travassos. 2011. Action research can swing the balance in experimental software engineering. In Advances in computers. Vol. 83. Elsevier, 205--276.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. C Drago. 2017. Manual de apoyo docente: evaluación para el aprendizaje. Santiago de Chile: Editorial Universidad Central de Chile (2017).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. H Erdogmus and C Péraire. 2017. Flipping a Graduate-Level Software Engineering Foundations Course. In 2017 IEEE/ACM 39th International Conference on Software Engineering: Software Engineering Education and Training Track (ICSE-SEET). 23--32. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSE-SEET.2017.20Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. M Flores Fonseca, Jesica Gómez, Revista Iberoamericana, De Tecnologia, Víctor M Flores Fonseca, and Jesica Gómez. 2017. Applying Active Methodologies for Teaching Software Engineering in Computer Engineering " Applying Active Methodologies for Teaching Software Engineering in Computer Engineering. IEEE Revista Iberoamerican De Technologies Del Aprendizaje 12, 3 (2017), 147--155.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Miguel Ángel Fortea Bagán. 2019. Metodologías didácticas para la enseñanza/aprendizaje de competencias. (2019).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Sergio Antonio Andrade De Freitas, Wander C.M.P. Silva, and George Marsicano. 2016. Using an active learning environment to increase students' engagement. Proceedings - 2016 IEEE 29th Conference on Software Engineering Education and Training, CSEEandT 2016 (2016), 232--236. https://doi.org/10.1109/CSEET.2016.24Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. Alicia García-Holgado, Francisco J García-Peñalvo, and Maria José Rodríguez-Conde. 2018. Pilot experience applying an active learning methodology in a Software Engineering classroom. In 2018 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON). IEEE, 940--947.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Hartini Hashim, Mohd Norawi Ali, Mohd Ali Shamsudin, et al. 2017. Infusing High Order Thinking Skills (HOTs) through Thinking Based Learning (TBL) during ECA to enhance students interest in STEM. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences 7, 11 (2017), 1191--1199.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. Raphael Magalhães Hoed. 2016. Análise da evasão em cursos superiores: o caso da evasão em cursos superiores da área de Computação. Brasília, DF: Universidade de Brasília (2016).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Andrew P Johnson. 2012. A short guide to action research. (2012).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Jeevamol Joy and V G Renumol. 2018. Activity oriented teaching strategy for software engineering course: An experience report. Journal of Information Technology Education: Innovations in Practice 17 (2018), 181--200.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. Barbara A Kitchenham and S. Charters. 2007. Guidelines for performing Systematic Literature Reviews in Software Engineering. 2.3 (2007).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Stan Kurkovsky, Stephanie Ludi, and Linda Clark. 2019. Active Learning with LEGO for Software Requirements. In Proceedings of the 50th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (SIGCSE '19). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 218--224. https://doi.org/10.1145/3287324.3287444Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. José Vinícius Lima, Mozart de Melo Alves Júnior, Andres Moya, Ricardo Almeida, Patricia Anjos, Maria Lencastre, Roberta Andrade de Araújo Fagundes Fagundes, and Fernanda Alencar. 2019. As Metodologias Ativas e o Ensino em Engenharia de Software: uma revisão sistemática da literatura. In Anais do Workshop de Informática na Escola, Vol. 25. 1014.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Julia H Littell, Jacqueline Corcoran, and Vijayan Pillai. 2008. Systematic reviews and meta-analysis. Oxford University Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. S Matalonga, G Mousqués, and A Bia. 2017. Deploying Team-Based Learning at Undergraduate Software Engineering Courses. In 2017 IEEE/ACM 1st International Workshop on Software Engineering Curricula for Millennials (SECM). 9--15. https://doi.org/10.1109/SECM.2017.2Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Nancy Montes de Oca Recio and Evelio F Machado Ramírez. 2011. Estrategias docentes y métodos de enseñanza-aprendizaje en la Educación Superior. Humanidades Médicas 11, 3 (2011), 475--488.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Jakob Nielsen. 1994. Heuristic evaluation. In Usability inspection methods. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 25--62.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. N M Paez. 2017. A Flipped Classroom Experience Teaching Software Engineering. In 2017 IEEE/ACM 1st International Workshop on Software Engineering Curricula for Millennials (SECM). 16--20. https://doi.org/10.1109/SECM.2017.6Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Gemma París, Silvia Blanch, Pilar Comes, Mequè Edo, Joan Estrada, Xavier Gimeno, Mar Morón, and Tomás Peire. 2017. Rúbrica d'autoavaluació de competències i habilitats personals i prosocials. (2017).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Cristiane Soares Ramos, Ricardo Ajax Dias Kosloski, Elaine Venson, Rejane M da Costa Figueiredo, and Victor Hugo A Deon. 2018. TBL As an Active Learning-teaching Methodology for Software Engineering Courses. In Proceedings of the XXXII Brazilian Symposium on Software Engineering (SBES '18). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 289--297. https://doi.org/10.1145/3266237.3266253Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. Sergio Romero-Montero and Xavier Torrebadella Flix. 2018. CoRubrics: Una evaluación innovadora para una escuela innovadora. Revista Prácticum 3, 2 (2018), 77--94.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Harry Budi Santoso, Oenardi Lawanto, Betty Purwandari, R Yugo K Isal, and Rian Fitriansyah. 2017. Investigating Students' Metacognitive Skills while Working on Information Systems Development Projects. In 2017 7th World Engineering Education Forum (WEEF). IEEE, 478--483.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Wang Shaoshuai, Guo Lili, Chen Ling, Liu Weiyong, Cao Yong, Zhang Jingyi, and Feng Ling. 2020. A case report of neonatal COVID-19 infection in China. Clinical infectious diseases: an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America (2020).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Robert J Swartz, Arthur L Costa, Barry K Beyer, Rebecca Reagan, and Bena Kallick. 2010. Thinking-Based Learning: Promoting Quality Student Achievement in the 21st Century. ERIC.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Robert J Swartz and David N Perkins. 2016. Teaching thinking: Issues and approaches. Routledge.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. Charles Thevathayan, Maria Spichkova, and Margaret Hamilton. 2017. Combining Agile Practices with Incremental Visual Tasks. In Proceedings of the Nineteenth Australasian Computing Education Conference. 103--112.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. Michel THIOLLENT. 2007. Metodologia da pesquisa-ação. 16a. São Paulo: Cortez (2007).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. Jose Ricardo Mello Viana, Nayane Ponte Viana, Fernando Antonio Mota Trinta, and Windson Viana De Carvalho. 2014. A Systematic Review on Software Engineering in Pervasive Games Development. Brazilian Symposium on Games and Digital Entertainment, SBGAMES 2014-Decem, December (2014), 51--60. https://doi.org/10.1109/SBGAMES.2014.16Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. R Villarroel, H Cornide-Reyes, R Muñoz, and T Barcelos. 2017. Flipped classroom + plickers, an experience to propitiate collaborative learning in software engineering. In 2017 36th International Conference of the Chilean Computer Science Society (SCCC). 1--7. https://doi.org/10.1109/SCCC.2017.8405139Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. Competencies Development based on Thinking-based Learning in Software Engineering: An Action-Research

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Other conferences
      SBES '20: Proceedings of the XXXIV Brazilian Symposium on Software Engineering
      October 2020
      901 pages
      ISBN:9781450387538
      DOI:10.1145/3422392

      Copyright © 2020 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 21 December 2020

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article
      • Research
      • Refereed limited

      Acceptance Rates

      Overall Acceptance Rate147of427submissions,34%

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader