Assessing individual contributions to software engineering projects: a replication study

IF 3 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Computer Science Education Pub Date : 2022-05-17 DOI:10.1080/08993408.2022.2071543
C. Hundhausen, Phill Conrad, A. S. Carter, Olusola O. Adesope
{"title":"Assessing individual contributions to software engineering projects: a replication study","authors":"C. Hundhausen, Phill Conrad, A. S. Carter, Olusola O. Adesope","doi":"10.1080/08993408.2022.2071543","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Background and Context Assessing team members’ indivdiual contributions to software development projects poses a key problem for computing instructors. While instructors typically rely on subjective assessments, objective assessments could provide a more robust picture. To explore this possibility, In a 2020 paper, Buffardi presented a correlational analysis of objective metrics and subjective metrics in an advanced software engineering project course (n= 41 students and 10 teams), finding only two significant correlations. Objective To explore the robustness of Buffardi’s findings and gain further insight, we conducted a larger scale replication of the Buffardi study (n = 118 students and 25 teams) in three courses at three institutions. Method We collected the same data as in the Buffardi study and computed the same measures from those data. We replicated Buffardi’s exploratory, correlational and regression analyses of objective and subjective measures. Findings While replicating four of Buffardi’s five significant correlational findings and partially replicating the findings of Buffardi’s regression analyses, our results go beyond those of Buffardi by identifying eight additional significant correlations. Implications In contrast to Buffardi’s study, our larger scale study suggests that subjective and objective measures of individual performance in team software development projects can be fruitfully combined to provide consistent and complementary assessments of individual performance.","PeriodicalId":45844,"journal":{"name":"Computer Science Education","volume":"32 1","pages":"335 - 354"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Computer Science Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/08993408.2022.2071543","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

ABSTRACT Background and Context Assessing team members’ indivdiual contributions to software development projects poses a key problem for computing instructors. While instructors typically rely on subjective assessments, objective assessments could provide a more robust picture. To explore this possibility, In a 2020 paper, Buffardi presented a correlational analysis of objective metrics and subjective metrics in an advanced software engineering project course (n= 41 students and 10 teams), finding only two significant correlations. Objective To explore the robustness of Buffardi’s findings and gain further insight, we conducted a larger scale replication of the Buffardi study (n = 118 students and 25 teams) in three courses at three institutions. Method We collected the same data as in the Buffardi study and computed the same measures from those data. We replicated Buffardi’s exploratory, correlational and regression analyses of objective and subjective measures. Findings While replicating four of Buffardi’s five significant correlational findings and partially replicating the findings of Buffardi’s regression analyses, our results go beyond those of Buffardi by identifying eight additional significant correlations. Implications In contrast to Buffardi’s study, our larger scale study suggests that subjective and objective measures of individual performance in team software development projects can be fruitfully combined to provide consistent and complementary assessments of individual performance.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
评估个人对软件工程项目的贡献:一项复制研究
评估团队成员对软件开发项目的个人贡献是计算机教师面临的一个关键问题。虽然教师通常依赖于主观评估,但客观评估可以提供更可靠的画面。为了探索这种可能性,在2020年的一篇论文中,Buffardi在一门高级软件工程项目课程(n= 41名学生和10个团队)中对客观度量和主观度量进行了相关分析,发现只有两个显著的相关性。为了探索Buffardi研究结果的稳健性并获得进一步的见解,我们在三所院校的三门课程中对Buffardi研究进行了更大规模的复制(n = 118名学生和25个团队)。方法收集与Buffardi研究相同的数据,并根据这些数据计算相同的测量值。我们重复了Buffardi对客观和主观测量的探索性、相关性和回归分析。在重复了Buffardi的5个重要相关发现中的4个,部分重复了Buffardi的回归分析结果的同时,我们的结果超越了Buffardi的结果,确定了另外8个重要的相关性。与Buffardi的研究相反,我们更大规模的研究表明,团队软件开发项目中个人绩效的主观和客观度量可以有效地结合起来,以提供一致和互补的个人绩效评估。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Computer Science Education
Computer Science Education EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
6.90
自引率
3.70%
发文量
23
期刊介绍: Computer Science Education publishes high-quality papers with a specific focus on teaching and learning within the computing discipline. The journal seeks novel contributions that are accessible and of interest to researchers and practitioners alike. We invite work with learners of all ages and across both classroom and out-of-classroom learning contexts.
期刊最新文献
“These two worlds are antithetical”: epistemic tensions in integrating computational thinking in K12 humanities and arts Exploring young people’s perceptions and discourses of technology occupations through descriptive drawings and a questionnaire A review of arts integration in K-12 CS education: gathering STEAM for inclusive learning Investigating the psychometric features of a locally designed computational thinking assessment for elementary students Integrating coding across the curriculum: a scoping review
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1