What Support do Systematic Reviews Provide for Evidence-informed Teaching about Software Engineering Practice?

D. Budgen, P. Brereton, N. Williams, Sarah Drummond
{"title":"What Support do Systematic Reviews Provide for Evidence-informed Teaching about Software Engineering Practice?","authors":"D. Budgen, P. Brereton, N. Williams, Sarah Drummond","doi":"10.37190/e-inf200101","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: The adoption of the evidence-based research paradigm by software engineering researchers has created a growing knowledge base provided by the outcomes from systematic reviews. \n \nAim: We set out to identify and catalogue a sample of the knowledge provided by systematic reviews, to determine what support they can provide for an evidence-informed approach to teaching about software engineering practice. \n \nMethod: We undertook a tertiary study (a mapping study of systematic reviews) covering the period to the end of 2015. We identified and catalogued those reviews that had findings or made recommendations that were considered relevant to teaching about industry practice. \n \nResults: We examined a sample of 276 systematic reviews, selecting 49 for which we could clearly identify practice-oriented findings and recommendations that were supported by the data analysis provided in the review. We have classified these against established software engineering education knowledge categories and discuss the extent and forms of knowledge provided for each category. \n \nConclusion: While systematic reviews can provide knowledge that can inform teaching about practice, relatively few systematic reviews present the outcomes in a form suitable for this purpose. Using a suitable format for presenting a summary of outcomes could improve this. Additionally, the increasing number of published systematic reviews suggests that there is a need for greater coordination regarding the cataloguing of their findings and recommendations.","PeriodicalId":11452,"journal":{"name":"e Informatica Softw. Eng. J.","volume":"2 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-02-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"11","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"e Informatica Softw. Eng. J.","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.37190/e-inf200101","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 11

Abstract

Background: The adoption of the evidence-based research paradigm by software engineering researchers has created a growing knowledge base provided by the outcomes from systematic reviews. Aim: We set out to identify and catalogue a sample of the knowledge provided by systematic reviews, to determine what support they can provide for an evidence-informed approach to teaching about software engineering practice. Method: We undertook a tertiary study (a mapping study of systematic reviews) covering the period to the end of 2015. We identified and catalogued those reviews that had findings or made recommendations that were considered relevant to teaching about industry practice. Results: We examined a sample of 276 systematic reviews, selecting 49 for which we could clearly identify practice-oriented findings and recommendations that were supported by the data analysis provided in the review. We have classified these against established software engineering education knowledge categories and discuss the extent and forms of knowledge provided for each category. Conclusion: While systematic reviews can provide knowledge that can inform teaching about practice, relatively few systematic reviews present the outcomes in a form suitable for this purpose. Using a suitable format for presenting a summary of outcomes could improve this. Additionally, the increasing number of published systematic reviews suggests that there is a need for greater coordination regarding the cataloguing of their findings and recommendations.
系统评审为软件工程实践的循证教学提供了什么支持?
背景:软件工程研究人员采用基于证据的研究范式已经创建了一个不断增长的知识库,该知识库由系统综述的结果提供。目的:我们开始识别和编目一个由系统评审提供的知识样本,以确定它们能够为关于软件工程实践的教学提供什么支持。方法:我们进行了一项第三期研究(系统综述的图谱研究),时间为2015年底。我们确定并分类了那些有发现或提出建议的评论,这些评论被认为与行业实践的教学有关。结果:我们检查了276篇系统综述的样本,从中选择了49篇,我们可以清楚地确定以实践为导向的发现和建议,这些发现和建议得到了综述中提供的数据分析的支持。我们根据已建立的软件工程教育知识类别对它们进行了分类,并讨论了为每个类别提供的知识的范围和形式。结论:虽然系统评价可以提供知识,为教学实践提供信息,但相对较少的系统评价以适合这一目的的形式呈现结果。使用合适的格式来呈现结果摘要可以改善这一点。此外,已发表的系统评论越来越多,这表明有必要对其发现和建议的编目进行更大的协调。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信