Teaching Agile: Project Content vs. Method Content

Last year, we have started an initiative to better align teaching of agile methodologies at Chalmers | University of Gothenburg in various courses on the undergraduate and graduate level. During this work, we found that we are facing very similar challenges. Our discussions have lead to two publications, first at XP 2015 Conference where we received great feedback and encouragement and then at ICSE 2016 conference, where the paper attached to this post was very well received by the program board. We hope that you can join our discussion and our striving for excellence in agile methods education, either at ICSE next month in Austin, Texas or any time by contacting us directly.

This is joint work by Jan-Philipp Steghöfer, Eric Knauss, Emil Alégroth, Imed HammoudaHåkan Burden, and Morgan Ericsson.

Title: Teaching Agile – Addressing the Conflict Between Project Delivery and Application of Agile Methods

Abstract: This paper analyses the changes we have made in teaching agile methodologies, practices, and principles in four courses in order to address a specific dilemma: students need to apply agile methods in order to learn them, but when complementing our courses with applied content, we face the problem that students perceive the learning and application of agile methods as less important than delivering a finished product at the end of the course. This causes students to not apply theoretical process knowledge and therefore to not develop necessary skills associated with working with defined processes in the industry. Concretely, we report on our experience with teaching Scrum with Lego, removing formal grading requirements on the delivered product, emphasising process application in post-mortem reports, and organisational changes to support the process during supervision. These changes are analysed in the context of student satisfaction, teacher observations, and achievements of learning outcomes. We also provide an overview of the lessons learnt to help guide the design of courses on agile methodologies.

Pre-print: SKA+2016 Continue reading

Advertisements

Call for Part.: REFSQ’16 Conference

Early Bird Deadline approaching: Feb-26!

Call for Participation

REFSQ’16 will take place from March 14 -17, 2016 in Gothenburg, Sweden!
The REFSQ’16 special theme is:

Understanding an ever changing world through the right requirements.

Keynote Speakers

  • Magne Jørgenssen, Simula Norway
  • Roel Wieringa, University of Twente, the Netherlands

Scientific Program

21 papers will be intensively discussed in the REFSQ typical discussion sessions.

3 workshops featuring the topics of:

Doctoral Symposium

Posters & Demos Session

Industry Track

Keynote: Sarah Gregory, Intel, USA

7 Industrial Talks and a Discussion Panel

Research Methodology Track

This track features lively discussions giving you the opportunity to learn about research methods used in RE research.

Social Event

Join us for join us for an unforgettable social Event on March 16, including a guided tour in Universeum, Gothenburg’s famous science park, and a delicious conference dinner in its aquarium.

The detailed program is available at: https://refsq.org/2016/conference-program/

The online registration service is available at: https://refsq.org/2016/event-information/registration/


 

This Post was also posted at https://seecgot.wordpress.com/2016/02/19/refsq-conference/

How does the AUTOSAR Ecosystem Impact Requirement Engineering?

AUTOSAR aims at facilitating reuse of standardized software components in automotive software development. For this, it defines three layers: the application components (with standardized interfaces between components), the (standardized) runtime environment, and the basic software (which abstracts the hardware and contains the driver modules). Despite this standardization, the combination of application components, runtime and basic software should still offer differentiating functionality for cars. In an exploratory study, we found this situation challenging for Requirements Engineering practice, where standard requirements implied by the AUTOSAR standard should be treated differently from OEM specific requirements targeted towards differentiation or innovation features.

We will discuss our preliminary findings at the 23rd IEEE International Requirements Conference 2015 in Ottawa, Canada during the poster and tool demo session as well as our method in the 5th IEEE International Workshop on Empirical Requirements Engineering.

Continue reading

Survey on daily pains with requirements

What are your daily pains with requirements? A survey on problems with Requirements Engineering in the automotive domain

We, a group of researchers from Chalmers | University of Gothenburg in Sweden, are currently studying problems that occur in automotive Requirements Engineering. This means both during the elicitation of requirements and later on when using requirements for development, validation, etc.

In this context we are looking for people working at automotive companies (OEMs, Suppliers, Consultancies) who get into contact with requirements of any form. This could be requirements engineers, who are actually eliciting requirements, but also software or verification engineers, who implement or test based on requirements.

We will use the data to validate challenges previously extracted from qualitative interview data and complement them with quantitative data. The results will be compiled into a scientific publication.

The survey should not take more than 20 minutes to answer. It would be incredibly valuable for the scientific community if you could share your experiences with us! The survey starts on 7th July 2015 and ends on 7th September 2015.

Survey Link: https://www.soscisurvey.de/challRE15

If you have any questions, feedback, or concerns, please feel free to contact:
Grischa Liebel, Matthias Tichy, or Eric Knauss
Software Engineering Division, Computer Science and Engineering
Chalmers & University of Gothenburg, Sweden

Supporting Requirements Feedback Flows in Iterative System Development

Complex, inter-connected systems make it hard to do upfront requirements analysis, as many requirements only surface when the system is used in its intended context. Does this mean that engineers cannot rely on systematic requirements approaches? Based on a case study at Volvo Cars we say “no”.

Agility does not have to contradict systematic RE!

Iterative development and field tests with early versions of the system are a great chance for requirements engineering! We will discuss our findings at REFSQ conference in Essen:

Knauss, E.; Andersson, A.; Rybacki, M. & Israelsson, E. Research Preview: Supporting Requirements Feedback Flows in Iterative System Development. Proceedings of 21st International Working Conference on Requirements Engineering: Foundation for Software Quality (REFSQ’ 15), 2015 Continue reading