Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Enhancement of Experiential Learning in Software Factory Project-Based Course

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Balancing the Tension between Digital Technologies and Learning Sciences

Part of the book series: Cognition and Exploratory Learning in the Digital Age ((CELDA))

  • 348 Accesses

Abstract

To better prepare the next generation of software professional, it is important to provide opportunities for them to work on real software project along with real customer during their studies. This is the reason universities around the world offer project-based capstone course. Such courses help students to understand what they will face in the industry and experience real customer interaction and challenges in collaborative work. In regards, University of Oulu, Finland offers a software factory (SWF) course to enhance the learning and experience multicultural teamwork. This paper presents the design of the SWF course and student and teacher experiences. It discusses the importance of reflective learning diaries and serious games. Additionally, this paper examines factors in the SWF learning environment that affect student learning in the SWF course. Survey data were collected from the last 6 years of SWF projects. The results show that students consider the SWF to be a good collaborative learning environment that helps them achieve academic triumphs and enhances various professional skills. The learning diaries are effective for increasing students’ learning experiences as well as providing an opportunity for teaching staff to monitor students’ progress and offer better facilitation. These results are helpful for academic institutions and industry when developing such a learning environment.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Optima is a learning management system used at the University of Oulu, Finland. https://www.discendum.com/references/?q=optima

References

  • ACM Joint Task Force. (2014). Software engineering 2014—curriculum guidelines for undergraduate degree programs in software engineering. Retrieved from https://www.acm.org/binaries/content/assets/education/se2014.pdf

  • Ahmad, M. O., Liukkunen, K., & Markkula, J. (2014). Student perceptions and attitudes towards the software factory as a learning environment. In IEEE global engineering education conference, EDUCON.

    Google Scholar 

  • Al-Qahtani, M. F. (2012). Students’ perception and attitude towards computer laboratory learning environment. Educational Research, 3(4), 402–411.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, T. (2008). Theory and practice of online learning. Athabasca: Athabasca University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andreessen, M. (2011). Why software is eating the world. The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved from http://www.djreprints.com

  • Barg, M., & Barg, M. (1999). Problem based learning for foundation computer science courses. Basser Department of Computer Science, University of Sydney.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bell, S. (2010). Project-based learning for the 21st century: Skills for the future. The Clearing House, 83(2), 39–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cico, O., Jaccheri, L., Nguyen-Duc, A., & Zhang, H. (2020). Exploring the intersection between software industry and software engineering education—a systematic mapping of software engineering trends. Journal of Systems and Software, 172, 110736.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chao, J., & Randles, M. (2009). Agile software factory for student service learning. In 2009 22nd conference on software engineering education and training (pp. 34–40). IEEE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chang, J. C., Hsiao, Y. D., Chen, S. C., & Tsung-Ta, Y. (2018). Core entrepreneurial competencies of students in departments of electrical engineering and computer sciences (EECS) in universities. Education + Training, 60(7/8), 857–872.

    Google Scholar 

  • Erdogmus, H., & Peraire, C. (2017). Flipping a graduate-level software engineering foundations course. In 39th international conference on software engineering: Software engineering education and training track (pp. 23–32).

    Google Scholar 

  • Fagerholm, F., Oza, N., & Münch, J. (2013). A platform for teaching applied distributed software development: The ongoing journey of the Helsinki software factory. In 3rd international workshop on collaborative teaching of globally distributed software development (pp. 1–5).

    Google Scholar 

  • Fulwiler, T. (1986). Seeing with journals. The English Record, 32(3), 6–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glover, I., & Glover, I. (2013). Play as you learn: gamification as a technique for motivating learners. In Proceedings of EdMedia 2013—World Conference on Educational Media and Technology. EdMedia + Innovate Learning. Vol. 2013. AACE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Howe, S. (2010). Advances in engineering education where are we now? Statistics on Capstone Courses Nationwide. Advances in Engineering Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hung, C. M., Hwang, G. J., & Huang, I. (2012). A project-based digital storytelling approach for improving students’ learning motivation, problem-solving competence and learning achievement. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 15(4), 368–379.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hrivnak, G. A. (2013). CATME smarter teamwork (www.CATME.org). Academy of Management Learning Education, 12(4), 679–681.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burdett, J. (2003). Making groups work: University students’ perceptions. International Education Journal, 4(3), 177–191.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jabarullah, N. H., & Hussain, H. I. (2019). The effectiveness of problem-based learning in technical and vocational education in Malaysia. Education+Training, 61, 552.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaufman, D. B., Felder, R. M., & Fuller, H. (2000). Accounting for individual effort in cooperative learning teams. Journal of Engineering Education, 89(2), 133–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khine, M. S., & Lourdusamy, A. (2003). Blended learning approach in teacher education: Combining face-to-face instruction, multimedia viewing and online discussion. British Journal of Educational Technology, 34(5), 671–675.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kolb, A. Y., & Kolb, D. A. (2005). Learning styles and learning spaces: Enhancing experiential learning in higher education. Source: Academy of Management Learning & Education (vol. 4).

    Google Scholar 

  • Kolmos, A., & de Graaff, E. (2014). Problem-based and project-based learning in engineering education–merging models. In A. Johri & B. M. Olds (Eds.), Cambridge handbook of engineering education research (CHEER) (pp. 141–160). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Layton, R. A., & Ohland, M. W. (2001). Peer ratings revisited: focus on teamwork, not ability. In Proceedings of the 2001 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition.

    Google Scholar 

  • Land, S. M. (2004). The design and evaluation of a CSCL tool to support reflection and revision of design projects. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 16(1), 68–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, J. S., Blackwell, S., Drake, J., & Moran, K. A. (2014). Taking a leap of faith: Redefining teaching and learning in higher education through project-based learning. Inter-disciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 8(2), 2.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leenknecht, M., Wijnia, L., Köhlen, M., Fryer, L., Rikers, R., & Loyens, S. (2020). Formative assessment as practice: The role of students’ motivation. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 1–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Li, H., Xiong, Y., Hunter, C. V., Guo, X., & Tywoniw, R. (2020). Does peer assessment promote student learning? A meta-analysis. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 45(2), 193–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martyn, M. (2003). The hybrid online model: Good practice. Educause Quarterly, 26(1), 18–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mann, L., Chang, R., Chandrasekaran, S., Coddington, A., Daniel, S., Cook, E., … Dohaney, J. (2020). From problem-based learning to practice-based education: A framework for shaping future engineers. European Journal of Engineering Education, 1–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGourty, J., Dominick, P., & Reilly, R. R. (1998). Incorporating student peer review and feedback into the assessment process. In Frontiers in education conference. Moving from “teacher-centered” to “learner-centered” education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newby, M., & Fisher, D. (1997). An instrument for assessing the learning environment of a computer laboratory. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 16(2), 179–190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nicole, C., Pamela, D., & Rebecca, S. (2005). Self and peer assessment in software engineering projects. In Proceedings of the 7th Australasian conference on computing education (vol. 42, pp. 91–100). John Garratt Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ohland, M. W., & Layton, R. A. (2000). Comparing the reliability of two peer evaluation instruments the impact of integration on student’s persistence. View project optimizing student team skill development using evidence-based strategies view project comparing the reliability of two peer evaluation instruments.

    Google Scholar 

  • Palacin-Silva, M., Khakurel, J., Happonen, A., Hynninen, T., & Porras, J. (2017). Infusing design thinking into a software engineering capstone course. In 30th conference on software engineering education and training (pp. 212–221).

    Google Scholar 

  • Pyatt, K., & Sims, R. (2012). Virtual and physical experimentation in inquiry-based science labs: Attitudes, performance and access. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 21(1), 133–147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saadon, S., & Liong, C.-Y. (2012). Perception of students on services at the Computer Laboratory: A case study at the School of Mathematical Sciences, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 59, 117–124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sanders, D. (1984). Managing and evaluating students in a directed project course. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 16(1), 15–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sanmugam, M., Mohamed, H., Zaid, N. M., Abdullah, Z., Aris, B., & Suhadi, S. M. (2016). Gamification’s role as a learning and assessment tool in education. International Journal of Knowledge-Based Organizations (Vol. 6, p. 28).

    Google Scholar 

  • Sheth, S., Bell, J., & Kaiser, G. (2012). Increasing student engagement in software engineering with gamification.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taibi, D., Lenarduzzi, V., Liukkunen, K., Lunesu, I., Matta, M., Fagerholm, F. Ahmad, M. (2016). “Free” innovation environments: Lessons learned from the software factory initiatives.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tang, C. (2002). Reflective diaries as a means of facilitating and assessing reflection. In Proceedings of the 29th HERDSA annual conference (pp. 7–10).

    Google Scholar 

  • Tvedt, J. D., Tesoriero, R., & Gary, K. A. (2002). The software factory: An undergraduate computer science curriculum. Computer Science Education, 12(1–2), 91–117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walker, A. Andrew E. (2015). Essential readings in problem-based learning: Exploring and extending the legacy of Howard S. Barrows.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wijnia, L., Loyens, S. M. M., & Derous, E. (2011). Investigating effects of problem-based versus lecture-based learning environments on student motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 36(2), 101–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilkins, D. E., Lawhead, P. B., Wilkins, D. E., & Lawhead, P. B. (2000). Evaluating individuals in team projects. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 32(1), 172–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yilmaz, R., Yilmaz, F. G. K., & Keser, H. (2020). Vertical versus shared e-leadership approach in online project-based learning: A comparison of self-regulated learning skills, motivation and group collaboration processes. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 32, 628–654.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Mathematics and Computer Science, Karlstad University, Karlstad, Sweden

    Muhammad Ovais Ahmad

  2. Faculty of Electronics, Telecommunications and Informatics, Gdansk University of Technology, Gdańsk, Poland

    Muhammad Ovais Ahmad

  3. M3S Research Unit, University of Oulu, Oulu, Finland

    Muhammad Ovais Ahmad & Kari Liukkunen

Authors
  1. Muhammad Ovais Ahmad
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kari Liukkunen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Muhammad Ovais Ahmad .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Learning, Design and Technology, University of Mannheim, UNESCO Deputy Chair of Data Analytics in Higher Education Learning and Teaching Curtin University, Perth, Western Australia, Australia, Mannheim, Baden-Württemberg, Germany

    Dirk Ifenthaler

  2. Department of Digital Systems, University of Piraeus, Piraeus, Greece

    Demetrios G. Sampson

  3. School of Information Systems & Technology Management, UNSW Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia

    Pedro Isaías

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Ahmad, M.O., Liukkunen, K. (2021). Enhancement of Experiential Learning in Software Factory Project-Based Course. In: Ifenthaler, D., Sampson, D.G., Isaías, P. (eds) Balancing the Tension between Digital Technologies and Learning Sciences. Cognition and Exploratory Learning in the Digital Age. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-65657-7_13

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-65657-7_13

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-65656-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-65657-7

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation