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

a survey of related research.65 He proposedcriteria for evaluating these tools, including whether the system “does what it is supposed to do,”“is liked by its users” (instructors and students), and “helps students become more proficient atprogramming.” We draw on Douce’s work to derive our categories for analyzing the practicalvalue of an AAT. In 2010, Ihantola built on Ala-Mutka’s analysis with a review of AAT-relatedpublications from 2006–2010, focusing on identifying variance in design aspects among thetools.66 In addition to providing substantive research and results, these articles present a wide-ranging collection of tools that we included among those we reviewed in our own study.3. MethodologyTo answer our four supporting research