similar manner. We knowas educators that one way our students learn is by reading our feedback. In the language arts andother fields, it is common for faculty to provide purely constructive feedback on submissions, towhich the students make a second submission incorporating that feedback into a better product.This is not feasible in the lab environment, so the next best mechanism is to offer students asmall incentive to reflect on their project after receiving comments.The third issue with pure standards-based grading is that this the grading right now only appliesto lab assignments. The concepts documented are only those which apply to lab activities.There is currently no attempt to capture terminology and definitions, concepts which
proven to be great tools for controllingsoftware versions and organizing the code among multiple developers. Figure 3. GitHub Repository [9](3) Weekly ScrumUnder the spirit of daily Scrum [5], the faculty advisor met students weekly to discuss theprogress of the project and assign new tasks. Specifically, during weekly Scrum, students sharedtheir answers to three questions: “What did I accomplish since the last weekly Scrum? What do Iplan to work on by the next weekly Scrum? What are the obstacles or impediments that arepreventing me from making progress?” [5] After that, the advisor and students discussed how toovercome these obstacles. Since the advisor met students weekly, the advisor made sure that
) and Simposium Assessment in Barranquilla, Colombia Her bach- elor of chemical engineering is from Georgia Institute of Technology (Georgia Tech.) c American Society for Engineering Education, 2019 Teaching and assessing sustainability based on the Karlskrona ManifestoAbstractSustainability is not a new concept. Over the last few decades the Brundtland CommissionReport and the United Nations have emphasized the importance of sustainability and defined keyconcepts. Understanding and seeking sustainability is not only a must but also a challenge fortoday’s engineers. Incorporating sustainability into design helps students build their engineeringjudgement beyond the short-term, technical issues that they tend
Bell Laboratories, Siemens Corporate Research, and AVL, including microcode for a graphics processor, real-time medical image processing, and data acquisition and communications protocols for semiconductor process control. Since 1997, he has been a faculty member in Rochester Institute of Technology’s Department of Software En- gineering including the position of Department Chair. His professional interests are in the engineering of software for real-time and embedded systems. He was a recipient of RIT’s 2010 Eisenhart Award for Outstanding Teaching.Mr. Bryan Basham, Software Alchemy (with RIT) I am a Software Consultant, Developer, Application Architect and Educator with over 40 years of software development
commonplace and accessible at universities around the world,surges of undergraduate Computer Science and Software Engineering students can be foundattending these events to have real world development experiences. Meanwhile, faculty findthemselves continuously adapting themselves and their curriculum to prepare students to beadaptive experts, one who leverages prior or similar knowledge to solve new problems in newcontexts, when they enter the workforce. Capstones and culminating experiences test students’abilities to be adaptive experts, but students are not always prepared to meet the challenge.Hackathons present a unique but accessible opportunity to gain more adaptive experience priorto and during capstone experiences. In this work in progress
allows projects in EPICS toaddress complex and compelling needs in the local or global community. EPICS teams, or course sections, each consist of 8-25 students and are student led witha faculty or industry instructor, which we call an advisor. Graduate student teaching assistantssupport the advisors and each one supports 3-4 sections providing a mechanism for consistencyacross teams. Each team or course section comprises multiple sub-teams, each one of whichsupports a single design project. Once a project is delivered, a new project is then identified bystudents under the guidance of their faculty mentor(s) and community partner(s). Exampleprojects include designing assistive technology for people with disabilities, developing
to meet 7 outcomes.Outcome 4 states “Design appropriate solutions in one or more application domains usingsoftware engineering approaches that integrate ethical, social, legal, and economic concerns”. Itis through this outcome we expect students to design solutions that address ethical, social, legal,security, and economic concerns. The importance of security in the curriculum guidelines can benoted from the change in SE education Knowledge Areas. In the 2004 Curriculum Guidelines forUndergraduate Degree Programs in Software Engineering [4] security was listed as an area ofstudy. However in the 2014 Curriculum Guidelines for Undergraduate Degree Programs inSoftware Engineering [5] there is now an increase in the visibility of software
research, saying “you can see webdevelopment everywhere except in the curricula of the various computing programs.” [11](p. 1)One of the articles in that special issue looks at key concepts used in web development, like basicprogramming principles, decomposition, and abstraction [12]. They suggest that a webdevelopment course might be designed based more on these concepts than the latest methods andtechniques. While we are sympathetic to these concerns, we think you can use up-to-datemethods and techniques and still reinforce those concepts. Fundamentally, those are softwareengineering principles, and they are used in the design and development of all good software.Lui and Phelps also note the challenges of keeping up with the pace of change in
Engineering and Computing Systems, College of Engineering and Applied Science, at the University of Cincinnati and an affiliate faculty mem- ber in UC’s Department of Women’s, Gender, and Sexuality Studies. She received her Ph.D. in Math- ematics from the University of Illinois in 1975 and her PhD. in Computer Science from Texas A&M University in 1986. She is the head of UC’s B.S. in Computer Engineering Program and the coordina- tor of the Preparing Future Faculty in Engineering Program. Her research interests include embedded systems and VLSI, intelligent embedded systems, software and systems engineering, computational biol- ogy and synthetic biology, agent based modeling and simulation, mentoring, and diversity in
experiential learningthat guides many of today’s introductory CS curricula 5,6,7,8 .Our goal is to help settle this controversial debate with a systematic empirical study that exploresthe impact of introducing novices to code quality and its improvement. Although our study cannotfully resolve this contentious issue of introductory computing pedagogy, we gained new impor-tant insights. Specifically, we focused on evaluating the impact of automated tools on helpingbeginner Scratch programmers to learn how to refactor code duplication. Refactoring is a softwaredevelopment technique that transforms a program to improve its code quality while preservingits behavior 9 . Although industry practitioners have fully embraced this technique as part of
the same issues. Thisopportunity to connect with others seems beneficial for many reasons. Often students feelisolated and that they are the only ones struggling. Seeing others are struggling as well helpsthem normalize the struggle inherent in learning new material and may reduce the effects ofimposter syndrome.Sharing successes can be beneficial to both the person that has succeeded and the one who hearsof the success. Writing working code is inherently satisfying. Being able to tell someone elseabout it, increases the satisfaction. As other students see their classmate’s success, they are morelikely to anticipate their own success.Logic errors are often difficult to see. If the testing is limited, students may not even realize theyhave