17 Nov, 2006Melbourne Conventicle Hard problems, 3.5 small steps in Computer Science Education Judy...

17 Nov, 2006 Melbourne Conventicle

Hard problems, 3.5 small steps in Computer Science Education

Judy Kay

School of Information Technologies

University of Sydney, Australia


1. Groups and software projects

• Challenges in group learning• A theoretical framework from small team

research – Big Five• Group activity mirrors• Experiences

Judy KayNicolas Maisonneuve

Kalina YacefPeter Reimann


Problems for groups

• Establishing common ground• Social loafing (free-riding)• Increased rudeness/aggression• Tend to focus on task/production at the cost of

catering to psychological needs• Tend to focus on action at the cost of reflectionFrustration with quality of interactionFeel collaboration overhead too high-> Groups producing solutions very quickly are

often the least stable


Visualisations - mirroring

• Identify traces of learner activity

• Capture them in a meaningful form

• Refine them to a useful form

• Present a visualisation of the learner activity as a basis for reflection

• Simple uses of trace data available


TRAC• open source tool for supporting software development

projects

Wiki page editorTicket ManagerSVN source repository

• Not a learning system but used in a learning context.


Underlying theory

Big Five of Team Effectiveness(Salas, Sims & Burke, 2005)


Back-upBehavior

MutualPerformanceMonitoring

Adaptibility

TeamEffectiveness

TeamLeadership

TeamOrientation

Mutual Trust

Shared MentalModels

Closed LoopCommunication

Support


ww

w.abc.net.au


“Wattle Tree”

Time\(e.g. days)

Users

Wiki contri-bution

Version management system

Task ticket closed

Task ticketopened


Wattle trees – group use of shared media

•Each student is one tree•One day per point

•time starts at bottom, •Numbered on vertical axis

•Leaves•Left leaves are dark green•Right leaves are light green•Length of leaves shows size

•Flowers•Left yellow flowers•Right orange flowers•Size of flower indicates size


Activity radar

• Erickson reflection of group chat

• Adapted to overall contributions of group members for an activity


•Each student has consistent colour, clock position•Closer to centre is more work•Logarithmic scale


Interaction diagram

• Same location of people as in activity diagram

• Black is source - blue is sink


Links with the theory

• Mirroring gives simple feedback

• Interpretation intended for group members

• Role as formative evaluation

• Role for teacher meetings

• Big-5 as driver and evaluation


Step 1 Summary

• Big 5 Theory

• Mirroring

• Activity Radar

• Interaction Diagram

• Wattle


2. Programming –Reflect formerly Assess

• Programming is hard• Reflection, shared goals, student

responsibility seems promising• Learning to think like a computer scientist and

a programmer

Judy KayLichao Li

Jessica PrestonHopefully many others soon


Motivations

• Involve students in identifying standards .. criteria to apply to their work

• And making judgments about the extent to which they have met these criteria and standards.

• Schön: reflection-in-action, reflection-on-action, reflection-on-reflection

Boud, D. (1991). Implementing Student Self-Assessment: Higher Education Research and Development Society of Australasia. HERDSA Green Guide, 5 Boud, D., Keogh, R., & Walker, D. (1985). Promoting reflection in learning: A model. In D. Boud & R. Keogh & D. Walker (Eds.), Reflection: Turning Experience into Learning (pp. 18-40). London: Kogan Page.Schön, D. A. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.


Reflect – student view 1

1. Read programming task – synthesis2. Reflect on knowledge of required concepts3. ||: Create own solution, testing etc… submit4. Self-assess your solution according to

teacher’s criteria5. View results of testing by teacher :||6. ||: Read supplied “solution” and assess it

according to teacher’s criteria and see how your assessment matches teachers :||

7. See how you are doing all course concepts


1. Read programming task – synthesis

Example:

Write a program which reads a number, N, and prints the least significant digit of the N-th Fibonacci number


2. Reflect on knowledge of required concepts

Example concepts:• Loops• Good style

Example ratings:• Know very well .. No idea

Note: concepts may differ for same task depending on context


3. ||: Create own solution, testing etc… submit

4. Self-assess your solution according to teacher’s criteria

5. View results of testing by teacher :||

Classic automated grading + reflection:• Repeats the correct number of times• Consistent indentation• Works correctly for large numbers


3. ||: Create own solution, testing etc… submit

4. Self-assess your solution according to teacher’s criteria

5. View results of testing by teacher :||

Classic automated grading + reflection:• Repeats the correct number of times (loops)• Consistent indentation (style)• Works correctly for large numbers (design)


Self-assess


Comparison


6. ||: Read supplied “solution” and assess it according to teacher’s criteria and see how

your assessment matches teachers :||

• Example answer that has out by one error and that has overflow

• Example answer that does plodder solution and has slips in indentation


7. See how you are doing all course concepts


Profile


Teacher Views

• Authoring environment

• Statistics– Attempts at each task– Testing– Reading, assessing

• View individual student work


Experiences, evaluation

• Long evolution• Student perception?

– Reflect on concepts for task– Reflect on own solution as submitted– View automated testing– Read our solutions– Assess our solutions– View the overall model of progress

• Analysis – overall – famous forty conscientious


Step 2 Summary

• Reflection on concepts for a task

• Reflection on qualities of own solution

• Reflections on the results of teacher’s testing

• Reading code and assessing it and reflecting on match with teacher’s assessment of it

• Reflections on overall progress


3. Large learner models

• Collect lots of data from learning traces• And from assessments• Make it available as an overview of

progressTrent Apted

Judy KayAndrew Lum

William NiuJames Uther


SIVLots of green means

learner doing well

Weak aspects visible as red

Overviewvisualisation


3.5. Collaboration interfaces..


AcknowledgmentsTrent Apted

Mark Assad

Michael Avery

David Carmichael

Dan Cutting

Marek Czarkowski

Sam Holden

Adam Hudson

Judy Kay

Irena Koprinska

Bob Kummerfeld

Geoff Langdale

Daren Ler

Bruce Li

Andrew Lum

William Niu

Josiah Poon

Jeremy Pu

David Storey

David Symonds

Kalina Yacef

Patrick Burns

Anthony Collins

Dean Cummins

Mark Hingston

Glen Tregoning

Glen Whitaker

Alan Fekete

Sam Holden

Raymond Lister

Eric McCreath

Aaron Quigley


ww

w.abc.net.au


Teamwork Definition Behavioural Markers

Team leadership

Ability to direct and coordinate the activities of other team members, assess team performance, assign tasks, develop team knowledge, skills, and abilities, motivate team members, plan and organize, and establish a positive atmosphere.

•Facilitate team problem solving.

A(TW-) I(TW-)

•Provide performance expectations and acceptable interaction patterns

. A(TW-) I(TW-)

•Synchronize and combine individual team member contributions.

A(TW-) I(TW-)

•Seek and evaluate information that affects team functioning.

•Clarify team member roles.

•Engage in preparatory meetings and feedback sessions with the team.



Mutual performance monitoring

The ability to develop common understandings of the team environment and apply appropriate task strategies to accurately monitor team mate performance.

•Identifying mistakes and lapses in other team members’ actions

A(- - -) I(TWS)

•Providing feedback regarding team member actions to facilitate self-correction.



Backup behaviour

Ability to anticipate other team members’ needs through accurate knowledge about their responsibilities. This includes the ability to shift workload among members to achieve balance during high periods of workload or pressure.

•Recognition by potential backup providers that there is a workload distribution problem in their team

A(TWS) I(T - -)

•Shifting of work responsibilities to underutilized team members.

A(TWS) I(T - -)

•Completion of the whole task or parts of tasks by other team members.



Adaptability Ability to adjust strategies based on information gathered from the environment through the use of backup behaviour and reallocation of intra-team resources. Altering a course of action or team repertoire in response to changing conditions (internal or external).

•Identify cues that a change has occurred, assign meaning to that change, and develop a new plan to deal with the changes.

A(TWS) I(TWS)

•Identify opportunities for improvement and innovation for habitual or routine practices.

•Remain vigilant to changes in the internal and external environment of the team.



Team orientation

Propensity to take other’s behaviour into account during group interaction and the belief in the importance of team goal’s over individual members’ goals.

•Taking into account alternative solutions provided by teammates and appraising that input to determine what is most correct.

•Increased task involvement, information sharing, strategizing, and participatory goal setting.

A(TWS) I(TWS)


Three Support Elements



Shared mental models

An organizing knowledge structure of the relationships among the task the team is engaged in and how the team members will interact.

•Anticipating and predicting each other’s needs. •Identify changes in the team, task or teammates and implicitly adjusting strategies as needed.



Mutual trust The shared belief that team members will perform their roles and protect the interests of their teammates.

•Information sharing.

•Willingness to admit mistakes and accept feedback.



Closed-loop communication

The exchange of information between a sender and a receiver irrespective of the medium.

•Following up with team members to ensure message was received.

•Acknowledging that a message was received.

•Clarifying with the sender of the message that the message received is the same as the intended message.


Experiences

• Two semesters– First summative– Second formative

• Student reflective reports• Student-teacher meetings• Points to good leadership• Highlights problems

– Social loafing– Isolation– Uneven work

• Adoption into other courses

17 Nov, 2006Melbourne Conventicle Hard problems, 3.5 small steps in Computer Science Education Judy...

Documents

Transcript of 17 Nov, 2006Melbourne Conventicle Hard problems, 3.5 small steps in Computer Science Education Judy...