motivate studentsto design game software products and use software engineering techniques to solve real-worldprogramming problems. The investigators included small group activities with the expectationthat students would provide written or oral summaries (either live in-person or virtually usingvideo) of the strategies used to complete their tasks and their lessons learned. We encouragedstudents to reflect on the lessons learned from game design exercises either in writing or orallyfor in-person classes. We shifted to authentic assessment techniques and introduced the use ofmore frequent, lower stakes graded activities in both courses.Gamification was introduced in our revised courses as a means of promoting rewards forcompleting tasks. Students
an Introductory Computing Course Stephanos Matsumoto smatsumoto@olin.edu Olin College of EngineeringAbstractIn this paper, we conduct a qualitative study to describe how focusing more on softwareengineering skills, code quality, and reflection on programming practices in an introductorycomputing course has led to improvements in students’ experience and learning outcomes. Ourwork took place during the summer and fall of 2020 at Olin College of Engineering, a small,undergraduate-only engineering college in Massachusetts. We describe how, motivated bydifficulties in developing and assessing code quality in students work, we
questions on the UI. Ask a maximum of 10 questions requiring The number of survey questions is at most 10 user input. [12,13]. Display a ranked list of recommended items A list of recommended products is generated based on initial user input. and displayed, and reflects the data acquired from the multiple-choice survey questions. The product type, skin type, and product highlights match the user input data in the output list. Display a maximum of 15 ranked
design and implementation course.Given the importance of security to Software Engineering, it is imperative that the programs continue toimprove teachings in this area. This review, while thorough in some regards, was also very limited inthat it only could look at catalog entries and curricula. In evaluating programs, evaluators review a morethorough self-study which may better reflect the teaching of security within the program. This may be apessimistic view of the situation, as the catalog entries may not be entirely current due to institutionalpolicies and individual instructors may include topics that are not explicitly called out in the catalog.What is concerning, however, is that these limitations do not appear to be present for other core