Conference Session

Pedagogical Approaches for Software Engineering

Collection

2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Colin J. Neill, Pennsylvania State University; Joanna F. DeFranco, Pennsylvania State University, Great Valley; Raghvinder S. Sangwan, Pennsylvania State University, Great Valley

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

(or team) mental model convergence4. While we have established thatthe collaborative model aids a team in achieving its purpose, we still wanted to test whetherimproved team outcomes also implied improved individual learning for each student. That is tosay, do the team outcomes reflect individual learning in the team members?The implications of this, if not the case, are broad. Grades assigned to individuals based upon ateam project would be inaccurate representations of those students’ true attainment and the roleof team projects would be questioned. Of course, one could still argue that provided a teamdelivered a successful product or project, one that is analogous to ‘real world’ software projects,the goal of the educational program is

Conference Session

Pedagogical Approaches for Software Engineering

Collection

2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Clifton L. Kussmaul, Muhlenberg College

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

Techniques(s)Students Improve learning outcomes. Average grades. Qualitative assessment of selected assignments. Improve affective outcomes. Current (e.g. SIR-II4), existing (e.g. TDS22), & custom instruments. Improve recruiting & retention. Course enrollments & major/minor counts.PIs & Develop & refine PAs. Quarterly activity reports, peer review, interviews.Project Improve faculty affective outcomes. Reflection, interviews.Team Enhance PAs (e.g. with Quarterly activity reports, peer review, interviews

Conference Session

Software Engineering Constituent Committee Division Technical Session 2

Collection

2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Gustavo Lopez, Universidad de Costa Rica; Alexandra Martinez, Universidad de Costa Rica

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

a staged approach from software engineering is applicableto software testing, and shows that incremental development is not well supported on severalcurriculums. Martinez et al.11 present their experience with two reflection mechanisms: alearning journal used in a Software Testing course, and a two-part reflection questionnaireused in a Software Quality Assurance course. Smith et al.19 explain how they used peer re-views to teach software testing within a Data Structures course, by encouraging collabora-tion and competition among students.The rest of the paper is organized as follows. Section 2 describes the context of the courses.Section 3 presents the labware used in the course. Section 4 mentions the implementationand assessment

Conference Session

Software Engineering Constituent Committee Technical Session 2

Collection

2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Heidi J. C. Ellis, Western New England University; Gregory W Hislop, Drexel University (Eng. & Eng. Tech.); Sarah Monisha Pulimood, The College of New Jersey; Becka Morgan, Western Oregon University; Ben Coleman, Moravian College

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

study. Note that Likert scale items allow for both agreement and disagreement.Table 3 below contains sample survey items for the three aspects under study. The “H6” itemrelates to student motivation (aspect 1), the “SE2” item relates to perceived software engineeringlearning (aspect 2) and the “G2” item relates to impact on major and career plans (aspect 3). Thesurvey items are worded so that the positive outcome, Ha, will be reflected by student agreement(“agree” or “strongly agree”) with each statement. ID Item H6 Working with an H-FOSS community to develop a project has increased my interest in computing. SE2 I am comfortable that I could participate in the planning and development of a real-world software project. G2

Conference Session

Software Engineering Topics

Collection

2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Walter W. Schilling Jr., Milwaukee School of Engineering; Eric Durant, Milwaukee School of Engineering

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

of these courses isoften similar, the content is often vastly different, reflecting the large domain of softwaresecurity. Certain aspects of security appeal to practitioners, certain aspects appeal toComputer Scientists, and certain aspects apply MIS personnel.In order to provide a holistic view of computer security, software engineering students need tohave exposure to all three aspects. Thus, for software engineering students, a single course insecurity can be inadequate. To combat this problem, the Milwaukee School of Engineering hasdeveloped a three course sequence in software security targeting the multi-disciplinary problemof security. While each of the three courses addresses software security, each course targets adifferent aspect

Conference Session

Software Engineering Topics

Collection

2007 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Mark Sebern, Milwaukee School of Engineering; Mark Hornick, Milwaukee School of Engineering

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

estimates (in minutes) foreach assigned team member, as shown in Figure 2. Each task is then assigned a starting andending week, relative to the current development cycle; this permits the system to generate aworkload summary by week and team member, to facilitate load balancing within the team andacross the cycle. The development schedule can take into account external dependencies; inFigure 2, for example, weeks 3 and 4 correspond to a holiday break period when no work isplanned (though some may actually be done). Figure 2. LEIA Schedule PlanLEIA supports tracking of team and individual progress, as shown in the effort report of Figure3. The time values reflect only “task time”, not total time spent on the

Conference Session

Software Engineering Teaching Techniques

Collection

2009 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Janusz Zalewski, Florida Gulf Coast University; Andrew Kornecki, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University; Jerzy Nogiec, Fermi National Accelerator Lab

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

the teaching methods, which were relativelyadvanced a decade ago, are no longer sufficient to educate graduates who would be competitiveenough on the job market after graduation. Therefore a new significant step in education of real-time software engineers is proposed in this paper: introducing in the classroom environmentsuch projects that would reflect current situation in professional software development. Two platforms used in real-time embedded data acquisition and control systems have beenintroduced in senior design project courses: VxWorks and Windows CE for respective singleboard computers. Both projects were developed with a typical waterfall process model in mind,with four phases of development, including requirements

Conference Session

Software Engineering Teaching Methods and Practice

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Bruce Maxim, University of Michigan

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

game AI techniques using criteria discussed in class. Each student prepares awritten report summarizing the findings of his or her review and makes an oral presentation ofthe review to the class using MS PowerPoint. The intent of this assignment is to help studentsdetermine the feasibility of incorporating specific types of game AI in the next releases of theirevolving game products.Project 5 (CIS 488): Beta Release Prototype and Design Document (4 weeks)Teams develop the requirements for an intelligent agent or NPC (non-playing character) to addto their game. The implementation of the intelligent agent becomes part of an incremental releaseof the game product. Revision of design document reflects this change and regression testingoccurs to

Conference Session

Software Engineering Constituent Committee Division Technical Session 1

Collection

2016 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Walter W Schilling Jr., Milwaukee School of Engineering

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

in other disciplines. Moststudents in the computing fields can be classified as reflective sensing sequential visual learners1.In the classroom, instructors adapt to this. Courses taught in computer science encourage activelearning and interactive exercises. In class, concepts are explained visually through diagramsand pictures, even though the ultimate solutions manifest themselves in textual form as sourcecode. However, when it comes to feedback in the computing field, the variety received is not as great.This is unfortunate, for feedback has overwhelmingly been shown to be the single most powerfulinfluence on student success2. Hounsell states:“It has long been recognized, by researchers and practitioners alike, that feedback plays

Conference Session

Software Engineering Technical Session 2

Collection

2016 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Massood Towhidnejad, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, Daytona Beach; Alexandria Spradlin, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University; Thomas Rogers Bassa, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

-weekly meeting, the customer introduced some additionalrequirements either as a replacement for the ones that the interns wanted to eliminate, or just the fact that “hehas forgotten to mentioned them during the initial requirement phase”. Again, this was intentionallyincorporated to the project, to reflect what can happen in the real world, and also introduce the concept ofchange control.C. Team OrganizationGiven the the nature of the project, the development team required expertise in both hardware and software.There were number of students who had higher level of interest in one of these areas, and the rest did nothave a strong preference, this allowed us to divide the interns to two groups of five. The two groupsremained fluid throughout

Conference Session

Software Engineering Projects

Collection

2011 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Massood Towhidnejad, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, Daytona Beach; Thomas B. Hilburn, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, Daytona Beach; Joseph E. Urban, Texas Tech University; Gregory W. Hislop, Drexel University; Richard Stansbury, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, Daytona Beach

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

. CNS-0939059, CNS-0939088, and CNS-0939028. Any opinions, findings, andconclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do notnecessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.References1. [CRA 2009] Computing Research Association, Computing Degree and Enrollment Trends, Computing Research Association Washington, DC, 2009.2. [NSF 2008] Science and Engineering Degrees: 1966–2006, Detailed Statistical Tables NSF 08-321, National Science Foundation, Division of Science Resources Statistics, Arlington, VA, 2008.3. [DOL 2010] U.S. Department of Labor, Occupational Outlook Handbook – Occupational Projections and Training Data, 2010-2011 Edition, U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau

Conference Session

Software Engineering Constituent Committee Division Technical Session 3

Collection

2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Robert W. Hasker, Milwaukee School of Engineering; Yan Shi, University of Wisconsin - Platteville

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

solutions in cases where the problem is tightly constrained enough that astudent can be expected to match a target diagram.UMLGrader uses an iterative approach to matching diagrams. It starts by matching classes andthen proceeds to matching associations, attributes, and methods. This reflects the nounidentification technique for constructing models. More specifically, it applies the following rules: • Classes are matched by name. The entire name must be matched exactly, though spaces, underscores, and capitalization are ignored. Requiring an exact name match helps catch the common error of using a plural noun when the class represents a singular item. To allow some variation in naming, the instructor can specify alternative

Conference Session

Software Engineering Projects

Collection

2011 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

James N. Long, Oregon Institute of Technology; Linda Sue Young, Oregon Institute of Technology

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

a student’s project. e. Productive feedback or thoughtful reflection about the course and process. f. Any other tasks that the instructor deems worthy. 5. KG may be lost by: a. Coming in late to class. b. Showing up late for or missing scheduled presentations. c. Being rude. d. Any other thing the instructor deems worthy of penalizing with a loss. 6. KG can be traded to other members of the class. All trade must be accompanied by a formal contract, signed by both parties, and then a copy given to the instructor. Examples exchanges include: a. Tasks such as programming or other project based help. b. Use of tools not possessed by the individual or group

Conference Session

Software Engineering Pedagogical Approaches

Collection

2013 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

John C. Georgas, Northern Arizona University

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

architectural styles is that they go beyond simple narratives of designexperiences, and capture design expertise that has been refined through careful reflection in aneffort to codify important lessons. By providing students with a solid foundation inunderstanding the applicability, key characteristics, advantages, and disadvantages ofarchitectural styles, educators can provide learners with valuable starting points for their owndesign activities as well as build expertise in identifying critical design trade-offs.The instruction of architectural styles, however, remains challenging, primarily due to afundamental disconnect between the dynamic nature of the software compositions thatarchitectural styles model and the static artifacts most commonly used

Conference Session

SE Curriculum and Course Management

Collection

2009 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Francis Lutz, Monmouth University; James McDonald, Monmouth University

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

in the US is growing. In 2007, therewere almost 2,000 students enrolled in software engineering programs and approximately 625bachelor’s degrees were awarded.Concomitantly, bachelor degree programs in Information Technology (IT) and InformationSciences (IS) are expanding more rapidly. The graduates of these programs will be an increasingproportion of the technical, professional labor force. Their backgrounds will be different fromthose hired with degrees in either computer science or engineering. They will seek out differentcontinuing professional development opportunities and aspire to different target positions. Theincreasing popularity of accredited IT, IS and SE programs is reflected in the data of Figure 1.Many influences affect the

Conference Session

Software Engineering Teaching Methods and Practice

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Yung-Hsiang Lu, Purdue University; Mark C Johnson, Purdue University

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

course.AcknowledgmentsProf. Lu is supported in part by National Science Foundation CAREER CNS-0347466. Anyopinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are thoseof the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the sponsors.”References [1] J. Armarego. Advanced Software Design: A Case in Problem-based Learning. In Conference on Software Engineering Education and Training, pages 44–54, 2002. [2] E. A. Billard. Introducing Software Engineering Developments to a Classical Operating Sys- tems Course. IEEE Transactions on Education, 48(1):118–126, February 2005. [3] B. Boehm and D. Port. Educating Software Engineering Students to Manage Risk. In Inter- national Conference on Software Engineering, pages 591–600

Conference Session

Software Engineering Constituent Committee Division Technical Session 3

Collection

2016 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Sally Sue Richmond, Pennsylvania State University, Great Valley; Kailasam Satyamurthy, Penn State University; Joanna F. DeFranco, Pennsylvania State University, Great Valley

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

scale ranges from 1-10 and thereforeeach scale value reflects a 10% change). The data are also not ratio data, since zero is not a possible rating(a student would only receive a zero if they did not present their work, in which case there would be nopeer evaluation). This restricts the types of analysis that can be applied to the data, and reduces thesensitivity of any conclusions (Trochim, 2006). Nonetheless, interesting conclusions regarding bias andpotential cronyism can be drawn when we organized the ratings into ranges and looked at the frequencyof ratings in each range, as discussed below.Given the small amount of data and that reliability has been studied extensively, we chose to investigateto what extent students used the entire range

Conference Session

Software Engineering Curriculum Support

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Sheryl Duggins, Southern Polytechnic State University

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

the course as well as student performance for specific programoutcomes that are identified as being supported by that course. Additionally it containsmodifications made to the course, instructor reflections about the effectiveness of the course, andsuggestions for future improvement. Thirdly, it assists in program outcome assessment byincorporating the raw data in the FCARs, which are then grouped together by program outcomesand the relevant sections can be evaluated. This allows program-level assessment to be done byevaluating relevant sections of groups of FCARS rather than processing raw student performancedata. Fourthly, it gives immediate feedback to the next professor teaching a particular courseabout prior offerings of the course and

Conference Session

Software Engineering Pedagogical Approaches

Collection

2013 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Feras A. Batarseh, University of Central Florida

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

intelligent behavior through local communication between theobjects (i.e. ants/birds)2.Knowledge-based systems (expert systems): are intelligent systems that reflect theknowledge of a proficient person. Knowledge-based systems are a specific kind ofintelligent system that makes extensive use of knowledge. They use heuristic rather thanalgorithmic approaches for decision making7.Reinforcement learning: is part of machine learning, and how a machine ought to takedecisions and actions based on continuous feedback on its previous actions (inspired bypsychology)5.This paper aims to use AI for educational purposes (i.e. establish an educational processthat is inspired by human physiology) The rest of this paper is structured as follows, nextsection

Conference Session

Software Engineering Topics

Collection

2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

W. Eric Wong, University of Texas, Dallas

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this paper are those ofthe author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.References:1. Janzen, D. and Saiedian, H., “Test-driven Development: Concepts, Taxonomy, and Future Direction,” IEEE Computer, 38(9): 43–50, September 2005.2. Myers, G. J., Sandler, C. (revised by), Badgett, T. (revised by), and Thomas, T. M. (revised by), The Art of Software Testing, 2nd Edition, John Wiley & Sons, June 20043. National Institute of Standards and Technology, “The Economic Impacts of Inadequate Infrastructure for Software Testing,” NIST Planning Report 02-3, May 20024. Leblanc, R., Sobel, A., Diaz-Herrera, J. L., and Hilburn, T. B., “Software

Conference Session

SE Tools and Techniques

Collection

2011 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Robert W. Hasker, University of Wisconsin, Platteville; Mike Rowe, University of Wisconsin, Platteville

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

itsusefulness.As part of our preliminary evaluation, we requested written feedback from students using thetool in a sophomore/junior-level course. A number of comments reflect the need for additionalwork on the tool: making it more robust when syntactic errors are found in input files,improving the identification of defects in diagrams, and the need to include illustrations of theerror types. Comments about the effectiveness of the tool include • “Fixed numerous errors that [the instructor] did not address in class such as using ∗ instead of 0..∗. Also found errors in the syntax of the classes. attributes, operations, and the documentation of them.” • “The tool helps with discovering some errors, for example in the Associations. We found a

Conference Session

Software Engineering Curricula

Collection

2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Susan Darling Urban, Texas Tech University; Joseph E Urban, Texas Tech University; Susan A. Mengel, Texas Tech University; William M. Marcy P.E., Texas Tech University; Patrick E. Patterson, Texas Tech University

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

under revision to better reflect the impact that the Internet hashad on software development over the last ten years.A committee was established in 2007 through Stevens Institute of Technology to develop theGSwERC as a new reference curriculum for graduate software engineering. As part of thedevelopment of GSwERC, the committee conducted a survey of 28 software engineeringprograms2. The survey indicates that 25% of the programs are housed in stand-alone softwareengineering departments, 50% are in computer science departments, and the other 25% are invarious other departments. The M.S. in Software Engineering at the University of Texas Austin,for example, is housed in the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, while thesoftware

Conference Session

Software Engineering Pedagogical Approaches

Collection

2013 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Jon A Preston, Southern Polytechnic State University; Sushil Acharya, Robert Morris University

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

reflects that student learning in these areas was better.Table 4: Pre-test at RMU (in %) Table 5: Post-test at RMU (in %)Responsesè ResponsesèQuestions ê a b c d Questions ê a b c d Q1 25 25 50 0 Q1 13 38 50 0 Q2 100 0 0 0 Q2 100 0 0 0 Q3 50 50 0 - Q3 0 100 0 - Q4 88 13 0 - Q4 25 75 0 - Q5 63 38 - - Q5 100

Conference Session

Software Engineering Outreach: Industry, K-12

Collection

2013 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

W Eric Wong, University of Texas, Dallas

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

used in industry.One of the challenges to teach a capstone project course is to provide students with sufficient motivationand get them invested in the outcome. To achieve this, Horgan, Smith and Thomas in their 2005 ACEpaper5 suggested a problem domain that accurately reflects the concerns and priorities of a real industryclient. They also proposed a Real World Software Process with four different phases: (1) Phase Zero –developing a project proposal which addresses the client‟s needs and clearly identifies goals and successcriteria, (2) Phase One – requirements gathering, release planning, and the initial development, (3) PhaseN – the generic, repeatable cycle in which the functionality of the system is incrementally extended andthe

Conference Session

Accreditation and Assessment in SE Programs

Collection

2011 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Nan Niu, Mississippi State University; Donna Reese, Mississippi State University; Kui Xie, Mississippi State University; Chris Smith, Mississippi State University

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

other to achieve the common goal. • Face-to-face interaction: Team members do most of the work together. They provide assistance, encouragement, and feedback to the other team members. • Individual accountability and personal responsibility: Each team member is responsible for doing his/her share of the work, and is expected to master all necessary material. • Interpersonal and small-group skills: Team members use effective communication and conflict-management skills. Page 22.1254.6 • Group processing: Team members set common goals, reflect on team accomplishments, and make adjustments as

Conference Session

Software Engineering Constituent Committee Division Technical Session 3

Collection

2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Peter J. Clarke, Florida International Univeristy; Debra Lee Davis, Florida International University; Raymond Chang Lau, Florida International University; Tariq M. King, Ultimate Software Group, Inc.

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

described. Many of the testing tools only consistently provide statement andbranch coverage.26 From the results shown in Table 2, second to last row, labeled Average, thevalue in the branch coverage column was consistently lower than the values for statement cover-age. The results of the study support the claim that branch coverage subsumes statement coverage.In future studies we plan to investigate other subsumes relations, e.g., multiple condition coverage(MCC) subsumes branch coverage. One limitation of extending the study is that most freely avail-able tools only provide statement and branch coverage, which is two of the less efficient white-boxtesting techniques as reflected in the subsume hierarchy

Conference Session

Tools and Support for Software Education

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Yung-Hsiang Lu, Purdue University; Evan Zelkowitz, Purdue University; Mark C Johnson, Purdue University

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

Conference Session

Software Engineering Constituent Committee Division Technical Session 1

Collection

2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Raymond Scott Pettit, Abilene Christian University; John D. Homer, Abilene Christian University ; Kayla Michelle McMurry, Abilene Christian University; Nevan Simone, Abilene Christian University; Susan A. Mengel, Texas Tech University

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

grading.In 2005, Higgins distributed a survey programming students who tested the tool CourseMarkerafter a transition away from Ceilidh.69 The surveys showed that over 75% of students appreciatedfeatures only AATs could provide such as multiple attempts. Specifically, most students felt thatmultiple available submissions encouraged them to work for a higher grade.In 2007, Nordquist wrote on the tool Autograder, used for a beginning programming section andthree secondary sections.3 Twenty-five out of 47 students volunteered to answer an anonymousonline survey. This survey used a 1 to 5 Likert scale, and the responses reflected an overallpositive response to the automatic grading tool. When asked, “Other things being equal, giventhe choice between

Conference Session

Accreditation and Assessment in SE Programs

Collection

2011 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Janet E. Burge, Miami University; Paul V. Anderson, Miami University, Ohio; Michael Carter, North Carolina State University; Gerald C. Gannod, Miami University; Mladen A. Vouk, North Carolina State University

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee