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

and future plans for this research.3. Experimental SurveyTo collect feedback regarding the HPML approach, an informal experiment wasconducted using surveys with 95 undergraduate students at the University of CentralFlorida. The students were asked if they prefer such an approach, and if they think thatthis is a better approach to learning Software Engineering. The results were grouped into4 categories (shown in Figure 6) based on the students answers.Category A: Students who think that the approach is good, but prefer to be conservativein their answer until they know more about HPML, and observe an actual course taughtusing its structure.Category B: Students who valued the idea very much and hope to register for a classstructured using

Conference Session

Software Engineering Outreach: Industry, K-12

Collection

2013 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Massood Towhidnejad, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical Univ., Daytona Beach; Thomas B Hilburn, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical Univ., Daytona Beach; Richard E Fairley, Software and Systems Engineering Associates (S2EA)

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

Paper ID #7783Software and System Engineering Education: Commonalities and Differ-encesDr. Massood Towhidnejad, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical Univ., Daytona Beach Massood Towhidnejad is the director of NExtGeneration Applied Research Laboratory (NEAR), and a tenure full professor of software engineering in the department of Electrical, Computer, Software and System Engineering at Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University. His research and teaching interests include autonomous systems, and software and systems engineering with emphasis on software quality assurance and testing.Dr. Thomas B Hilburn, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical Univ

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

directives to the RMU team members: 1. Establish a mode of communications with the SPSU team member (email, Text, phone, Skype, etc.). 2. Study your team’s requirements in detail. 3. Communicate with your SPSU counterparts on your requirements for: a. Ambiguity b. Inconsistency c. Clarification 4. If necessary rewrite the requirement using the KISS (Keep It Simple) principle. 5. Understand and appreciate work carried out by your team.b. SRS ReviewPrior to SPSU writing their project requirements (SRS) they were given a lecture onrequirements engineering. The review process was iterative and was initiated as soon as SPSUhad prepared a SRS version 1 (V1). This SRS was

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

Assurance; and DataStructures and Algorithms to name a few. A visual representation of the hierarchy of courses, amongwhich SE4485 sits towards the top, is presented in Figure 1. In the figure, an arrow going from course Ato course B indicates that A is a pre-requisite for B. Page 23.742.6 Figure 1: SE4485 in the undergraduate SE curriculumBased on the relative position of SE4485 in the hierarchy we observe that it essentially integrates theknowledge that is learned and accumulated by students in their prior courses and gives them anopportunity to apply that knowledge collectively. This also implies that students

Conference Session

Software Engineering Outreach: Industry, K-12

Collection

2013 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Clare McInerney, Lero - the Irish Software Engineering Research Centre; Mike Hinchey, Lero-the Irish Software Engineering Reseaach Centre

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

number of schools starting September2014. We are very excited about the future of computing in schools in our country.Acknowledgements This work was supported by Science Foundation Ireland grant 03/CE2/I303_1 and 10/CE/I1855 toLero – the Irish Software Engineering Research Centre (www.lero.ie). Page 23.452.12Bibliography1. Carnegie Mellon University, UCLA & University of Washington. Computer Science for High School. Retrieved November 23, 2012 from http://www.cs4hs.com/.2. Bruckman, A, Biggers, M, Ericson, B et al. 2009 "Georgia computes!": improving the computing education pipeline, SIGCSE Bull., 41, 86-90.3. Bell, T

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

learning concepts byproviding tangible representations of common software engineering idioms and activities asevents within the game, such as when a piece of string snapping is equated to an interrupted ordropped network connection—this engages students in the game without resulting in loss ofacademic rigor in the treatment of the subject matter. This game-centric approach: (a) deeplyadopts insights from active learning, making students an integral part of the learning process, (b)provides a dynamic, simulation-like context that is well suited to the dynamic nature of software,and (c) is modular and easily adoptable within existing curricular structures.Initial evaluation efforts examine student attitudes and perceptions about the game by using

Conference Session

Software Engineering Outreach: Industry, K-12

Collection

2013 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Sushil Acharya, Robert Morris University

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

softwareengineering publicity. Page 23.282.13References [1] Ladd, B. and Harcourt, E. (2005), Student Competitions and Bots in an Introductory Programming Course, Journal of Computing Sciences in Colleges, Volume 20 Issue 5, May 2005, Pages 274-284 [2] Bowering, J. (2008), A new paradigm for Programming Competitions, Proceedings of the 39th SIGCSE technical symposium on computer science education, pages 87-91 [3] Schuster, P., Davol, A. and Mello, J. (2006), Student Competition – the Benefits ad Challenges, American Society for Engineering Education 2006. [4] Rusczyk, R., (2005), Pros and Cons of Math Contests

Conference Session

Software Engineering Pedagogical Approaches

Collection

2013 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Joanna F. DeFranco, Pennsylvania State University; Colin J. Neill, Pennsylvania State University

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

Paper ID #5980Improving Individual Learning in Software Engineering Team ProjectsDr. Joanna F. DeFranco, Pennsylvania State University Joanna F. DeFranco is Assistant Professor of Software Engineering and a member of the Graduate Faculty at The Pennsylvania State University. Prior to joining Penn State, she held faculty positions at Cabrini College and the New Jersey Institute of Technology. She also held a number of positions in industry and government including an Electronics Engineer for the Naval Air Development Center in Warminster, PA and a Software Engineer at Motorola in Horsham, Pa. Dr. DeFranco received her B.S