Experiences of a Software Engineering Course based on Interactive Learning

Experiences of a Software Engineering Course based on Interactive Learning

15. Workshop für Software Engineering im Unterricht der Hochschulen, 22-23. Februar 2017, Hannover

https://www1.in.tum.de/seuh17

7cbae0b6c3348182a2a6968f52b21b89?s=128

Stephan Krusche

February 22, 2017
Tweet

Transcript

  1. 1.

    s.krusche@tum.de - www.skrusche.de - @skrusche SEUH 2017 Stephan Krusche, Nadine

    von Frankenberg, Sami Afifi (February 22, 2017) Experiences of a Software Engineering Course 
 based on Interactive Learning
  2. 2.

    Stephan Krusche, Nadine von Frankenberg, Sami Afifi: Experiences of a

    Software Engineering Course based on Interactive Learning Traditional courses with large classes 2 Educator Lecture Exercise Student Delay (week)
  3. 3.

    Stephan Krusche, Nadine von Frankenberg, Sami Afifi: Experiences of a

    Software Engineering Course based on Interactive Learning 3 Lecture Educator Exercise Student Computer based and experiential learning Delay (day)
  4. 4.

    Stephan Krusche, Nadine von Frankenberg, Sami Afifi: Experiences of a

    Software Engineering Course based on Interactive Learning Interactive learning 4 delay (min) Delay (min) Educator Theory Student Exercise Interactive class ➡ Multiple iterations in one class
  5. 5.

    Stephan Krusche, Nadine von Frankenberg, Sami Afifi: Experiences of a

    Software Engineering Course based on Interactive Learning Interactive learning 5 “Tell me and I will forget. Show me and I will remember. Involve me and I will understand. Step back and I will act.” — Chinese Proverb Immediate feedback Definition: Educators teach and exercise small chunks of content in short cycles. 
 They provide immediate feedback so that learners can reflect on the content and increase their knowledge incrementally. Important: Guidance Exercise Example Solution Reflection Theory Student
  6. 6.

    Stephan Krusche, Nadine von Frankenberg, Sami Afifi: Experiences of a

    Software Engineering Course based on Interactive Learning Exercise Types Individual exercises • E1 Quizzes with multiple choice questions • E2 Tutorials with step by step instructions • E3 Coding challenges to solve programming assignments • E4 Modeling exercises Team exercises • E5 Project team work (including communication and collaboration aspects) ➡ (Semi-) automatic correction reduces the effort of the instructor 6
  7. 7.

    Stephan Krusche, Nadine von Frankenberg, Sami Afifi: Experiences of a

    Software Engineering Course based on Interactive Learning Example E1: quiz with drag and drop exercise 7
  8. 8.

    Stephan Krusche, Nadine von Frankenberg, Sami Afifi: Experiences of a

    Software Engineering Course based on Interactive Learning Example E2: tutorials with step by step instructions 8
  9. 9.

    Stephan Krusche, Nadine von Frankenberg, Sami Afifi: Experiences of a

    Software Engineering Course based on Interactive Learning Example E3: coding challenge 9
  10. 10.

    Stephan Krusche, Nadine von Frankenberg, Sami Afifi: Experiences of a

    Software Engineering Course based on Interactive Learning Example E4: project team work 10
  11. 11.

    Stephan Krusche, Nadine von Frankenberg, Sami Afifi: Experiences of a

    Software Engineering Course based on Interactive Learning Informal communication increases the interaction 11
  12. 12.

    Stephan Krusche, Nadine von Frankenberg, Sami Afifi: Experiences of a

    Software Engineering Course based on Interactive Learning • H1 Participation: interactive in-class exercises increase the participation. • H2 Improved Learning: the mix of theory and exercises in class leads to an improved learning experience. Hypotheses 12
  13. 13.

    Stephan Krusche, Nadine von Frankenberg, Sami Afifi: Experiences of a

    Software Engineering Course based on Interactive Learning Case study Software Engineering II: Project Organization and Management (POM) • April - July 2016 • 9 teaching assistants • 272 students • Computer science master • Information system bachelor • Exercises • E1: Quizzes • E2: Tutorials • E5: Project work 13
  14. 14.

    Stephan Krusche, Nadine von Frankenberg, Sami Afifi: Experiences of a

    Software Engineering Course based on Interactive Learning Evaluation Qualitative • Anonymous online survey in July 2016 (directly after the course) • Goal: Find out if interactive learning improves the students’ learning experience • Response rate: 190 out of 272 (70%) Quantitative • Data analysis: • Measure participation • Compare exercise participation and final exam results • Goal: Find a correlation between exercise participation and final exam grade 14
  15. 15.

    Stephan Krusche, Nadine von Frankenberg, Sami Afifi: Experiences of a

    Software Engineering Course based on Interactive Learning Finding 1: perceived improved learning 15 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 9% 11% 24% 10% 13% 7% 26% 24% 23% 14% 16% 13% 65% 65% 53% 76% 71% 80% Agree Neutral Disagree The mix of theory and exercises in 
 class contributed to my learning success The mix of theory and exercises 
 improved my understanding during class In-class exercises motivated me to attend the lecture Quizzes motivated me during class to actively listen Interactive tutorials were particularly helpful 
 to understand concepts that I did not know before Team exercises helped me to apply a concept in a different setting to deepen my knowledge and understanding
  16. 16.

    Stephan Krusche, Nadine von Frankenberg, Sami Afifi: Experiences of a

    Software Engineering Course based on Interactive Learning 16 0 70 140 210 280 350 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 63 71 62 44 87 109 123 222 104 199 103 149 192 125 199 Participants per class (POM 2014) Total participants: 345 58% 36% 56% 43% 30% 58% 30% 64% 36% 32% 25% 13% 18% 21% 18% Finding 2: higher participation 2014 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 154 142 149 153 175 168 192 185 186 217 211 221 203 Participants per class (POM 2016) Total Participants: 272 75% 81% 78% 80% 68% 68% 71% 62% 64% 56% 55% 52% 57% (traditional teaching) 2016 (interactive learning)
  17. 17.

    Stephan Krusche, Nadine von Frankenberg, Sami Afifi: Experiences of a

    Software Engineering Course based on Interactive Learning Finding 3: correlation between participation and grade 17 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 2.4 2.5 2.9 3.6 3.9 GPA in POM (lower grade = better) Exercise participation 20 % 40 % 60 % 80 % 100 % 0 % χ2 = 82.53 (p < 0.0001)
  18. 18.

    Stephan Krusche, Nadine von Frankenberg, Sami Afifi: Experiences of a

    Software Engineering Course based on Interactive Learning Conclusion about interactive learning ✓Tighter integration of lectures and exercises leads to interactive classes ✓Higher participation in classes than in traditional courses ✓Highly significant correlation between exercise participation and final exam grade ✓Scalable and applicable to large classes without increasing teaching effort significantly ➡ Want to adopt this approach? Talk to me or send me a mail: s.krusche@tum.de ➡ More information on www.interactive-learning.org 18
  19. 19.

    Stephan Krusche, Nadine von Frankenberg, Sami Afifi: Experiences of a

    Software Engineering Course based on Interactive Learning Future work: empirical evaluation in the field in POM 2017 19 Experimental group Control group Pretest Pretest Interactive learning Intervention Posttest Posttest Traditional approach No intervention ? Clustering Analysis
  20. 20.

    s.krusche@tum.de - www.skrusche.de - @skrusche SEUH 2017 Stephan Krusche, Nadine

    von Frankenberg, Sami Afifi (February 22, 2017) Experiences of a Software Engineering Course 
 based on Interactive Learning