skip to main content
10.1145/3059009.3059039acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesiticseConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Specification by Example for Educational Purposes

Published:28 June 2017Publication History

ABSTRACT

The Specification By Example (SBE) is a guideline for building the right software, a software that meets customer requirements. It is based on seven process patterns and enhances communication and collaboration and it usually is used in agile software development. The connection between education and agile software development sounds actually as an emergent topic. In this paper, we propose to structure a teaching approach in analogy to an agile software developement by transposing each process pattern of SBE to a corresponding one in the teaching domain. Moreover, we show that thanks to the emergence of a collective intelligence process, the students are more confident and more responsible. Such a course offers the opportunity to learn not only technical skills, but also some values in a new mindset.

References

  1. G. Adzic. Specification by Example: How Successful Teams Deliver the Right Software. Manning Publications Co., Greenwich, CT, USA, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. G. Adzic and M. Bisset. Impact Mapping. Provoking Thoughts, 2012.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. B. S. Bloom, M. B. Engelhart, E. J. Furst, W. H. Hill, and D. R. Krathwohl. Taxonomy of educational objectives. The classification of educational goals. Longmans Green, 1956.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. S. Chandrasekaran, A. Stojcevski, G. Littlefair, and M. Joordens. Learning through projects in engineering education. In Proceedings of SEFI Conference, 2012.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. S. Covey and R. Merrill. The SPEED of Trust: The One Thing that Changes Everything. Free Press, 2008.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. E. Derby and D. Larsen. Agile Retrospectives: Making Good Teams Great. Pragmatic Bookshelf, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. B. Estácio, N. Valentim, L. Rivero, T. Conte, and R. Prikladnicki. Evaluating the use of pair programming and coding dojo in teaching mockups development: An empirical study. In HICSS, pages 5084--5093. IEEE Computer Society, 2015. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. R. M. Felder and L. K. Silverman. Learning and teaching styles in engineering education. engineering education, 78(7):674--681, 1988.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. D. Gray, S. Brown, and J. Macanufo. Gamestorming: A Playbook for Innovators, Rulebreakers, and Changemakers. O'Reilly Media, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. L. Hohmann. Innovation Games. Pearson Education, 2006.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. K. Kapp. The Gamification of Learning and Instruction: Game-based Methods and Strategies for Training and Education. Wiley, 2012. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. S. Kindon, R. Pain, and M. Kesby. Participatory Action Research Approaches and Methods: Connecting People, Participation and Place. Routledge Studies in Human Geography. Taylor & Francis, 2007.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. D. L. Kirkpatrick and J. D. Kirkpatrick. Evaluating training programs: the four levels. Berrett-Koehler Publishers, 2006.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. S. Kurkovsky. A lego-based approach to introducing test-driven development. In ACM Conference on ITiCSE, pages 246--247, New York, NY, USA, 2016. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. P. Lévy. From social computing to reflexive collective intelligence: The ieml research program. Information Sciences, 180(1):71--94, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. D. Mezick. The Culture Game: Tools for the Agile Manager. FreeStanding Press, 2012.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. E. D. Ragan, S. Frezza, and J. Cannell. Product-based learning in software engineering education. In IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, pages 1--6, 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. J. R. Savery. Overview of problem-based learning: definition and distinctions, the interdisciplinary. Journal of Problem-based Learning, pages 9--20, 2006.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. K. Smith, S. Sheppard, D. Johnson, and R. Johnson. Pedagogies of engagement: Classroom-based practices. Journal of Engineering Education, 94(1):87--100, 2005.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. C. G. von Wangenheim, R. Savi, and A. F. Borgatto. Deliver! - an educational game for teaching earned value management in computing courses. Inf. Softw. Technol., 54(3):286--298, 2012. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. C. G. von Wangenheim, R. Savi, and A. F. Borgatto. Scrumia: An educational game for teaching scrum in computing courses. Journal of Systems and Software, 86(10):2675--2687, 2013.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. Specification by Example for Educational Purposes

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in
      • Published in

        cover image ACM Conferences
        ITiCSE '17: Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education
        June 2017
        412 pages
        ISBN:9781450347044
        DOI:10.1145/3059009

        Copyright © 2017 ACM

        © 2017 Association for Computing Machinery. ACM acknowledges that this contribution was authored or co-authored by an employee, contractor or affiliate of a national government. As such, the Government retains a nonexclusive, royalty-free right to publish or reproduce this article, or to allow others to do so, for Government purposes only.

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 28 June 2017

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article

        Acceptance Rates

        ITiCSE '17 Paper Acceptance Rate56of175submissions,32%Overall Acceptance Rate552of1,613submissions,34%

        Upcoming Conference

        ITiCSE 2024
      • Article Metrics

        • Downloads (Last 12 months)6
        • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0

        Other Metrics

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader