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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

The work-reflection-learning cycle in SE student projects: Use of collaboration tools the theoretical framework of DCog and the model of the reflective process proposed by Boud et al. (1985a) and highlights the construction and transformation of representations as a core mechanism in retrospective reflection on a project process. Also, the model is inspired by the approach to retrospective reflection applied in student teams in the studies described in P6 and P8. The model explicitly includes steps of individual and collective reflection as well as resulting representations of the project process. Essential to the model, although not heavily explored in the empirical work of the thesis, is the feedback loop in which lessons learned from the project (in the form of various representations of the project process) are fed back into the project work practice, which could be in the same project or in another one Another important point made in the paper is that the dual role of a collaboration tool (in day-to-day work and retrospective reflection) might impact on both aspects of the practice through participants‟ awareness that historical data will be re-examined at a later stage. This awareness might lead to better information sharing as well as to information hoarding. 5.8 P8: Supporting Reflection in Software Development with Everyday Working Tools Authors: Krogstie, Birgit and Divitini, Monica I was the first author of this paper and main responsible for setting up the study and collecting and analyzing the data. The second author has provided feedback and comments throughout the process. To appear in: Proceedings of COOP 2010 Through their day-to-day usage collaboration tools collect data on the work process. These data can be used to aid participants’ retrospective reflection on the process. The paper shows how this can be done in software development project work. Through a case study we demonstrate how retrospective reflection was conducted by use of an industry approach to project retrospectives combined with the examination of historical data in Trac, an issue tracker. The data helped the team reconstruct the project trajectory by aiding the recall of significant events, leading to a shift in the team’s perspective on the project. The success of the tool-aided retrospective reflection is attributed to its organization as well as the type of historical data examined through the tool and the tool features for navigating the data. These insights can be used to help project teams determine the potential of their tools to aid retrospective reflection. The work presented in this paper took as its starting point the previous findings (P5) about the potential usefulness of historical data in wikis to aid retrospective reflection. In the spring semester of 2008, project wikis were no longer the popular choice for project management in the teams of our project course. Instead, many student teams used Trac – an issue tracking tool built on top of the file versioning system Subversion 48
Results (SVN). Trac provides lightweight project management functionality closely integrated with the software development work, and fits well for projects with a strong focus on the latter. For this reason, the course staff (including the author) decided to offer an infrastructure with SVN and Trac to the 2008 project teams, accompanied by a brief introductory lecture. Several teams choose to use Trac. The research presented in P8 results from a case study of one of these teams: team F. Figure 14: Examination of historical data in Trac. From P8. After following team F in a longitudinal study throughout the semester, we conducted a three day workshop at the end of the semester to investigate the possibility of improving the SD retrospective technique of constructing individual and shared timelines and drawing experience curves (used in the other projects in the course as described in P6). The workshop design was expanded to incorporate steps of exploring historical data in 49
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 37 and 38: 3 Software Engineering student proj
Page 39 and 40: Software Engineering student projec
Page 45: Software Engineering student projec
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: Results archives are found to conta
Page 69: Results Figure 15: A model outlinin
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:
Page 173 and 174:
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177 and 178:
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 and 222:
The type of data involved included
Page 223 and 224:
potentially negative effects is if
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 ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?