The work-reflection-learning cycle - Department of Computer and ...
The work-reflection-learning cycle - Department of Computer and ... The work-reflection-learning cycle - Department of Computer and ...
The work-reflection-learning cycle in SE student projects: Use of collaboration tools important role in the version of the reflection workshop which is aided by historical data in a computerized collaboration tool (P7-P8). For practitioners within SE education and PBL more generally, knowledge about the typical and recommended use of collaboration tools in student projects is an aid to understanding the challenges of specific projects and project courses. This understanding is essential for course staff seeking to provide project students with the appropriate scaffolding for learning. While recognizing the skills with which students currently handle a variety of collaboration tools for work and social purposes, course staff can make some recommendations and help the students be more conscious of their tool use in different collaborative settings. The research on lightweight collaboration tool use in student projects presented in the thesis can also serve as a basis for the identification of issues for educational practitioners‟ own pedagogical research and development of practice (e.g. addressing the role of a particular collaboration tool in student projects or how a particular aspect of project work is supported by the use of collaboration tools). The research methods as well as the results presented in the thesis can inform this type of research. For the organization of small scale SE project work in educational and other settings, the findings on how a project wiki may support project management (P5) can aid the decision of whether, and how, to use a project wiki as a lightweight project management tool in a specific project. These findings can also be useful to project teams who are already using project wikis and who may benefit from utilizing the tool in different ways. The thesis research on issue trackers (P7 and P8) can inform considerations on the choice of lightweight project management tool for a project and the comparison of project wikis and issue trackers based on their qualities for day-to-day work and retrospective reflection. The thesis contribution on the use of project wikis and their potential integrative role in small-scale projects adds to the knowledge within CSCW on tool support for project work as well as the usage of wiki technology. For organizers of small-scale projects the contribution can inform decisions about whether and how to make use of wiki technology for lightweight project management. For the TEL research field, the contribution adds to the body of literature on the use of collaboration tools (e.g. wikis) in educational settings, offering a perspective that views the tools primarily as aids to daily work practice (i.e. as tools for work rather than learning technology) and indirectly supporting learning in the context of PBL. Further, for the research communities in which the research papers have been published, the thesis provides concrete examples of how daily work and tool use in a team can be 56
Contributions and implications investigated retrospectively by the researcher. Specifically, the retrospective use of project wikis (P5) and issue trackers (P7-P8) exemplifies how the researcher can gain insights about daily work in a team with the aid of historical data contextualized through participants‟ retrospective accounts of the process. 6.3 Supporting retrospective reflection Contribution 3 of the thesis comprises new knowledge about how retrospective reflection, seen as a part of the collaborative work practice, can be supported in SE student projects and project work more generally. It also includes tools for supporting such reflection. A concrete and empirically tested design for retrospective reflection workshops, adapted from current SE industry practice to the educational setting of SE student projects, is offered (P6). A new and dual use of existing collaboration tools in SE projects is proposed, extending the current role of the tools in daily work to that of supporting participants‟ reflection on the project process. Post-mortem interviews (P5) and retrospective workshops (P8) are shown to be possible ways of integrating participants‟ examination of historical data into a systematic reconstruction of the project process with the aim of identifying lessons learned. For purposes of examining historical data, relevant tool features have been identified along with important elements in the organization of the retrospective reflection effort. Finally, the thesis offers a set of guiding questions for assessing the potential of specific collaboration tools to aid retrospective reflection in project work (P8). In the case of project wikis, the PhD work contributes with a tool (the Wiki Walkthrough tool) extending current wiki functionality to address identified shortcomings of wikis with respect to their use in retrospective reflection (P5). The tool 57
- Page 24 and 25: The work-reflection-learning cycle
- Page 26 and 27: The work-reflection-learning cycle
- Page 28 and 29: The work-reflection-learning cycle
- Page 30 and 31: The work-reflection-learning cycle
- Page 32 and 33: The work-reflection-learning cycle
- Page 34 and 35: The work-reflection-learning cycle
- Page 37 and 38: 3 Software Engineering student proj
- Page 39 and 40: Software Engineering student projec
- Page 41 and 42: Software Engineering student projec
- Page 43 and 44: Software Engineering student projec
- Page 45: Software Engineering student projec
- Page 48 and 49: The work-reflection-learning cycle
- Page 50 and 51: The work-reflection-learning cycle
- Page 52 and 53: The work-reflection-learning cycle
- 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: The work-reflection-learning cycle
- Page 76 and 77: The work-reflection-learning cycle
- Page 78 and 79: The work-reflection-learning cycle
- 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
Contributions <strong>and</strong> implications<br />
investigated retrospectively by the researcher. Specifically, the retrospective use <strong>of</strong><br />
project wikis (P5) <strong>and</strong> issue trackers (P7-P8) exemplifies how the researcher can gain<br />
insights about daily <strong>work</strong> in a team with the aid <strong>of</strong> historical data contextualized<br />
through participants‟ retrospective accounts <strong>of</strong> the process.<br />
6.3 Supporting retrospective <strong>reflection</strong><br />
Contribution 3 <strong>of</strong> the thesis comprises new knowledge about how retrospective<br />
<strong>reflection</strong>, seen as a part <strong>of</strong> the collaborative <strong>work</strong> practice, can be supported in SE<br />
student projects <strong>and</strong> project <strong>work</strong> more generally. It also includes tools for supporting<br />
such <strong>reflection</strong>.<br />
A concrete <strong>and</strong> empirically tested design for retrospective <strong>reflection</strong> <strong>work</strong>shops, adapted<br />
from current SE industry practice to the educational setting <strong>of</strong> SE student projects, is<br />
<strong>of</strong>fered (P6).<br />
A new <strong>and</strong> dual use <strong>of</strong> existing collaboration tools in SE projects is proposed, extending<br />
the current role <strong>of</strong> the tools in daily <strong>work</strong> to that <strong>of</strong> supporting participants‟ <strong>reflection</strong> on<br />
the project process. Post-mortem interviews (P5) <strong>and</strong> retrospective <strong>work</strong>shops (P8) are<br />
shown to be possible ways <strong>of</strong> integrating participants‟ examination <strong>of</strong> historical data<br />
into a systematic reconstruction <strong>of</strong> the project process with the aim <strong>of</strong> identifying<br />
lessons learned. For purposes <strong>of</strong> examining historical data, relevant tool features have<br />
been identified along with important elements in the organization <strong>of</strong> the retrospective<br />
<strong>reflection</strong> effort. Finally, the thesis <strong>of</strong>fers a set <strong>of</strong> guiding questions for assessing the<br />
potential <strong>of</strong> specific collaboration tools to aid retrospective <strong>reflection</strong> in project <strong>work</strong><br />
(P8).<br />
In the case <strong>of</strong> project wikis, the PhD <strong>work</strong> contributes with a tool (the Wiki<br />
Walkthrough tool) extending current wiki functionality to address identified<br />
shortcomings <strong>of</strong> wikis with respect to their use in retrospective <strong>reflection</strong> (P5). <strong>The</strong> tool<br />
57
Change language