The work-reflection-learning cycle - Department of Computer and ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

the modes of traversal, overview, and exploring the state of the artifact was easily achieved. The ease with which several months’ work can thus be navigated in Trac by participants contrasts with the effort needed to examine less structured data on collaborative work, e.g. video recorded meetings [49]. While the data in the tool reflects socially distributed cognition, the timeline reflects the temporal distribution of cognition and is a starting point for identifying significant events. Another aspect of the temporarily distributed cognition is that when the tool is used retrospectively to make sense of data, familiarity with the tool provides context for the user. Justin had been using the Trac timeline daily throughout the project to get an overview of current project status. Justin’s experience and skills in how to make sense of the process through the collaboration tool mediated his retrospective reflection. 6.3 Appropriately Organizing the Process of Retrospective Reflection Essential to the success of the reflection workshop was its organization. The example in Fig. 2 shows individual use of Trac to reconstruct a timeline, but as a whole, our study shows how historical data successfully plays a role in supporting cooperative work. A core idea in the approach [8-9] on which the workshop was based is that individual perspectives should be utilized in the construction of a shared understanding. In the study, individual timelines mediated individual recall and reflection as well as collective timeline construction. From a distributed cognition perspective, the individual and shared timelines can be seen as external representations of the project trajectory, and the steps of the workshop as a process of coordinating the cognitive processing between internal and external representational states. In our study, we looked at a collaboration tool as a resource for the cognitive processing between internal and external representational states. This happens in three ways, as illustrated in Fig. 5: The day-to-day work, seen as a process trajectory along which there are multiple points of action and interaction, leaves a trace of external representations of the distributed cognition involved, in the form of historical data in the tool. This is a result of Trac’s role in supporting the dayto-day cooperative project work (1). In the process of retrospective reflection, Trac is used as an aid to individuals’ recall of project events (2), resulting in the creation of the individual timelines, which are also external representations of the project trajectory. The individual timelines are next used as a resource when the team collaboratively creates another external representation of the project trajectory: the shared timeline. To aid the alignment of the individual timelines, Trac is used collaboratively by the team as an aid to clarify details in the construction of a shared representation of the project (3), e.g. exact dates and times of specific events. Fig. 5 is an instantiation of the more generic model of retrospective reflection outlined in [18]. Used in retrospective reflection on day-to-day development work the collaboration tool serves as a boundary object between that practice and retrospective reflection [50]. Developers’ awareness that the tool will be used retrospectively may affect their day-to-day work practice [24]. For instance, software developers may start providing more informative comments about their updates to make it easier to understand them retrospectively. This is likely to benefit day-to-day coordination. A change with 204
potentially negative effects is if developers, to make a good retrospective impression of their work, start hiding information. For instance, mistakes in intermediate stages of work can be hidden by making less frequent updates or by avoiding commenting about error corrections (a type of comment common in the Trac timeline in our study). This could adversely affect day-to-day workspace awareness as well as the possibility to get a realistic picture of the development process from the Trac timeline. Fig. 5: Trac in a dual role as a collaboration tool in a project: supporting day-to-day work and retrospective reflection on that work. Adapted from [18]. Our findings indicated that the team in our study through the tool-aided retrospective reflection succeeded in creating new knowledge about their software development practice. However, the individual differences in respect of how helpful Trac was in the recall of events, point to challenges of uneven power distribution in the team. The benefit of using a development-oriented collaboration tool to aid reflection appeared greater for those dominating the development work. Strong involvement in the activity from which the data originated provided them with context for recognizing the data as connected to project events. Having identified the pre-study coding event, the two lead programmers seemed to retain ownership of the event in the team’s discussion, which can explain why alternative viewpoints on prestudy coding among some team members were never properly disclosed. 205
Page 1 and 2:
Birgit Rognebakke Krogstie The work
Page 3 and 4:
Figure 1: Most used terms in the th
Page 5 and 6:
Abstract In project based learning,
Page 7 and 8:
Preface This thesis is submitted to
Page 9 and 10:
Acknowledgements I would like to th
Page 11 and 12:
Contents 1 Introduction ...........
Page 13 and 14:
Research paper P4 135 Research pape
Page 15 and 16:
Figure 17: Support for learning in
Page 17:
Abbreviations CSCL CSCW IS NITH NTN
Page 20 and 21:
The work-reflection-learning cycle
Page 22 and 23:
Page 24 and 25:
Page 26 and 27:
Page 28 and 29:
Page 30 and 31:
Page 32 and 33:
Page 34 and 35:
Page 37 and 38:
3 Software Engineering student proj
Page 39 and 40:
Software Engineering student projec
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45:
Page 48 and 49:
Page 50 and 51:
Page 52 and 53:
Page 55 and 56:
5 Results This chapter presents an
Page 57 and 58:
Results The background of P2 is a l
Page 59 and 60:
Results project management and coll
Page 61 and 62:
Results proposed in P5 was to allow
Page 63 and 64:
Results Analysis of the results sho
Page 65 and 66:
Results archives are found to conta
Page 67 and 68:
Results (SVN). Trac provides lightw
Page 69:
Results Figure 15: A model outlinin
Page 72 and 73:
Page 74 and 75:
Page 76 and 77:
Page 78 and 79:
Page 81 and 82:
7 Evaluation In this chapter, I eva
Page 83 and 84:
Evaluation adds to the CSCW literat
Page 85 and 86:
Evaluation 7.3 Evaluation of the re
Page 87 and 88:
Evaluation In the longitudinal stud
Page 89 and 90:
Evaluation According to the princip
Page 91 and 92:
Evaluation However, only some of th
Page 93 and 94:
Evaluation to design is problematic
Page 95 and 96:
8 Conclusion and further work This
Page 97 and 98:
Conclusion and recommendations for
Page 99 and 100:
9 References Abran, A., Moore, J. W
Page 101 and 102:
References Cobb, P. (1994). "Where
Page 103 and 104:
References Herbsleb, J. D., Mockus,
Page 105 and 106:
References Leont'ev, A. N. (1981).
Page 107 and 108:
References Stahl, G. (2002). "Build
Page 109 and 110:
Glossary B Boundary object - artifa
Page 111 and 112:
Glossary maintaining the system aft
Page 113 and 114:
Appendix A: Research papers P1 P2 P
Page 115 and 116:
Research paper P1 Title: Cross-Comm
Page 117 and 118:
Cross-Community Collaboration and L
Page 119 and 120:
the course staff may improve the co
Page 121 and 122:
4: Case findings: students’ view
Page 123 and 124:
own account of why each artifact is
Page 125 and 126:
Research paper P2 Title: Power Thro
Page 127 and 128:
Power Through Brokering: Open Sourc
Page 129 and 130:
Due to the openness of OSS communit
Page 131 and 132:
5.1.2 Second phase (February-May):
Page 133 and 134:
Getting from the second to the thir
Page 135 and 136:
6.2.1 Benefits for SE student proje
Page 137 and 138:
Research paper P3 Title: Do’s and
Page 139 and 140:
DO‟S AND DON‟TS OF INSTANT MESS
Page 141 and 142:
a chat window is opened. As soon as
Page 143 and 144:
three examples in the form of excer
Page 145 and 146:
Example 2. Excerpt from an IM log s
Page 147 and 148:
Example 3. Excerpt from an IM log s
Page 149 and 150:
immediate feedback in the heated di
Page 151 and 152:
Acknowledgements Thanks to Monica D
Page 153 and 154:
Research paper P4 Title: The wiki a
Page 155 and 156:
The wiki as an integrative tool in
Page 157 and 158:
type of use can be seen as an examp
Page 159 and 160:
ecome integration, and we identifie
Page 161 and 162:
project. Typically, a clean-up was
Page 163 and 164:
5.1 The wiki as a knowledge reposit
Page 165 and 166:
6. Conclusion We have shown how pro
Page 167 and 168:
Research paper P5 Title: Using Proj
Page 169 and 170:
Proceedings of the 42nd Hawaii Inte
Page 171 and 172: Proceedings of the 42nd Hawaii Inte
Page 179 and 180: Research paper P6 Title: Shared tim
Page 181 and 182: Shared timeline and individual expe
Page 183 and 184: presentation. In 2008, there were 1
Page 185 and 186: congruent’ to sets that seem to o
Page 187 and 188: team members and the co-constructiv
Page 189 and 190: Research paper P7 Title: A Model of
Page 191 and 192: A Model of Retrospective Reflection
Page 193 and 194: 420 B.R. Krogstie Fig. 1. Shared ti
Page 195 and 196: 422 B.R. Krogstie information about
Page 197 and 198: 424 B.R. Krogstie and to express ho
Page 199 and 200: 426 B.R. Krogstie 4.2 The Temporal
Page 201 and 202: 428 B.R. Krogstie in combining them
Page 203 and 204: 430 B.R. Krogstie Fig. 3. A model o
Page 205 and 206: 432 B.R. Krogstie 20. Hutchins, E.:
Page 207 and 208: Research paper P8 Title: Supporting
Page 209 and 210: Supporting Reflection in Software D
Page 211 and 212: 2 Background In this section we bri
Page 213 and 214: There are 3-5 students in the teams
Page 215 and 216: 4 Research Method The research repo
Page 217 and 218: 5 Findings In this section we draw
Page 219 and 220: As a consequence, ‘startup coding
Page 221: The type of data involved included
Page 225 and 226: unfolded may shed light on the proc
Page 227 and 228: 5. Lyytinen, K. and D. Robey, Learn
Page 229 and 230: Appendix B: Other research publicat
show all

The work-reflection-learning cycle - Department of Computer and ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?