{"title":"软件工程教学与教育理论:对话","authors":"Patricia A. Basili, V. Basili","doi":"10.1109/CSEET.2006.32","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Summary form only given. Some software engineering instructors have incorporated projects that either simulate product development for a corporate customer or have students work directly with corporate sponsors to solve a problem or produce an artifact. The rationale for the activity is to provide \"real world\" experience, a foretaste of what a professional in the field will be asked to do. Other instructors may forgo the project as taking too much time from an already full curriculum or due to the difficulty of making and maintaining corporate connections. They rely on the lecture format to convey the material. Are there other reasons for including \"project-type\" activities in software engineering instruction over and above the practical experience they provide? Are there reasons to try to incorporate strategies other than lecture into courses? This paper reviews those areas of educational theory that speak to practical strategies to enhance learning and remembering. Constructivism as a way to view the learning process will be highlighted. Vygotsky's social interaction theory, and scaffolding will be tied to group endeavors. Bloom's hierarchy of the cognitive domain will be viewed in terms of writing course learning outcomes. Also discussed is the importance of the congruence of learning outcomes and modes of assessment to insure learning has occurred and to provide assurances to the Higher Education community that we are doing what we claim to do","PeriodicalId":246045,"journal":{"name":"19th Conference on Software Engineering Education & Training (CSEET'06)","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2006-04-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Software Engineering Instruction and Education Theory: A Dialogue\",\"authors\":\"Patricia A. Basili, V. Basili\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/CSEET.2006.32\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Summary form only given. Some software engineering instructors have incorporated projects that either simulate product development for a corporate customer or have students work directly with corporate sponsors to solve a problem or produce an artifact. The rationale for the activity is to provide \\\"real world\\\" experience, a foretaste of what a professional in the field will be asked to do. Other instructors may forgo the project as taking too much time from an already full curriculum or due to the difficulty of making and maintaining corporate connections. They rely on the lecture format to convey the material. Are there other reasons for including \\\"project-type\\\" activities in software engineering instruction over and above the practical experience they provide? Are there reasons to try to incorporate strategies other than lecture into courses? This paper reviews those areas of educational theory that speak to practical strategies to enhance learning and remembering. Constructivism as a way to view the learning process will be highlighted. Vygotsky's social interaction theory, and scaffolding will be tied to group endeavors. Bloom's hierarchy of the cognitive domain will be viewed in terms of writing course learning outcomes. Also discussed is the importance of the congruence of learning outcomes and modes of assessment to insure learning has occurred and to provide assurances to the Higher Education community that we are doing what we claim to do\",\"PeriodicalId\":246045,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"19th Conference on Software Engineering Education & Training (CSEET'06)\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2006-04-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"19th Conference on Software Engineering Education & Training (CSEET'06)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/CSEET.2006.32\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"19th Conference on Software Engineering Education & Training (CSEET'06)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/CSEET.2006.32","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Software Engineering Instruction and Education Theory: A Dialogue
Summary form only given. Some software engineering instructors have incorporated projects that either simulate product development for a corporate customer or have students work directly with corporate sponsors to solve a problem or produce an artifact. The rationale for the activity is to provide "real world" experience, a foretaste of what a professional in the field will be asked to do. Other instructors may forgo the project as taking too much time from an already full curriculum or due to the difficulty of making and maintaining corporate connections. They rely on the lecture format to convey the material. Are there other reasons for including "project-type" activities in software engineering instruction over and above the practical experience they provide? Are there reasons to try to incorporate strategies other than lecture into courses? This paper reviews those areas of educational theory that speak to practical strategies to enhance learning and remembering. Constructivism as a way to view the learning process will be highlighted. Vygotsky's social interaction theory, and scaffolding will be tied to group endeavors. Bloom's hierarchy of the cognitive domain will be viewed in terms of writing course learning outcomes. Also discussed is the importance of the congruence of learning outcomes and modes of assessment to insure learning has occurred and to provide assurances to the Higher Education community that we are doing what we claim to do