Carlos Luz
Igor Steinmacher
ABSTRACT
Throughout controlled experimentation, it is possible to provide evidence of the software being developed. In the academic environment, Experimentation in Software Engineering (ESE) is essential to understanding cause-effect relations, enabling a vision of the development process, and taking action on actual events in the software industry. As much as the experimentation processes have been used in industry and academia, there is a lack of formalization of the principles of ESE teaching and artifacts that can be useful to support it in higher education. One of the means to contribute to such a topic would be the design of a conceptual model, which is widely discussed in the literature, thus applying empirical methods for a better understanding of the context and representation of ESE teaching. Thus, in this paper, we developed a conceptual model to support the teaching of controlled experiments and quasi-experiments. To design the conceptual model, we carried out an analysis of metadata from controlled experiments and quasi-experiments in the literature and conducted a survey to collect data from instructors who teach ESE. We evaluated the model with the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM). Results consist of a feasible conceptual model aiming to standardize the basic concepts of ESE and further support the production and reuse of ESE materials.
- L. M. Alves, R. J. Machado, and P. Ribeiro. 2012. Experimental Software Engineering in Educational Context. 2012 Eighth International Conference on the Quality of Information and Communications Technology (2012), 336–341.Google Scholar
- Alex Baker, Emily Oh Navarro, and Andre Van Der Hoek. 2005. An experimental card game for teaching software engineering processes. Journal of Systems and Software 75, 1-2 (2005), 3–16.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Victor R Basili, Forrest Shull, and Filippo Lanubile. 1999. Building knowledge through families of experiments. IEEE Trans. Soft. Eng. 25, 4 (1999), 456–473.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Nergiz Ercil Cagiltay. 2007. Teaching software engineering by means of computer-game development: Challenges and opportunities. British Journal of Educational Technology 38, 3 (2007), 405–415.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Deepak Dahiya. 2010. Teaching software engineering: A practical approach. ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes 35, 2 (2010), 1–5.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Fred D Davis. 1989. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS quarterly (1989), 319–340.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Davide Falessi, Natalia Juristo, Claes Wohlin, Burak Turhan, Jürgen Münch, Andreas Jedlitschka, and Markku Oivo. 2018. Empirical Software Engineering Experts on the Use of Students and Professionals in Experiments. Empirical Software Engineering 23 (02 2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10664-017-9523-3Google ScholarDigital Library
- David Forsyth. 2018. Probability and Statistics for Computer Science. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-64410-3Google ScholarCross Ref
- Viviane Furtado, Edson OliveiraJr, and Marcos Kalinowski. 2021. Guidelines for Promoting Software Product Line Experiments. In Brazilian Symposium on Software Components, Architectures, and Reuse. 31–40. https://doi.org/10.1145/3483899.3483909Google ScholarDigital Library
- Michael Gnatz, Leonid Kof, Franz Prilmeier, and Tilman Seifert. 2003. A practical approach of teaching software engineering. In CSEET. IEEE, 120–128.Google Scholar
- Thomas B Hilburn and Massood Towhidnejad. 2007. A case for software engineering. In 20th Conference on Software Engineering Education and Training (CSEET’07). IEEE, 107–114.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Martin Host. 2002. Introducing empirical software engineering methods in education. In Proceedings 15th Conference on Software Engineering Education and Training (CSEET 2002). IEEE, 170–179.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Jan Hylén. 2006. Open educational resources: Opportunities and challenges. Open Education 2006: Community, Culture, and Content (2006), 49–63.Google Scholar
- David S. Janzen, Clark S. Turner, and Hossein Saiedian. 2007. Empirical Software Engineering in Industry Short Courses. In Conference on Software Engineering Education and Training. 89–96. https://doi.org/10.1109/CSEET.2007.20Google ScholarDigital Library
- Natalia Juristo and Ana M Moreno. 2010. Basics of Software Engineering Experimentation. Springer Publishing Company.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Barbara Ann Kitchenham, David Budgen, and Pearl Brereton. 2015. Evidence-based software engineering and systematic reviews. Vol. 4. CRC press.Google Scholar
- Marco Kuhrmann. 2017. Teaching Empirical Software Engineering Using Expert Teams.. In SEUH. 20–31.Google Scholar
- Marco Kuhrmann and Jürgen Münch. 2018. Enhancing software engineering education through experimentation: an experience report. In 2018 IEEE International Conference on Engineering, Technology and Innovation (ICE/ITMC). IEEE, 1–9.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Carlos Danilo Luz, Edson OliveiraJr, and Igor F Steinmacher. 2022. How Experimentation in Software Engineering has been taught? Survey and Research Agenda. In International Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering. 299–304.Google Scholar
- Edson OliveiraJr, Viviane Furtado, Henrique Vignando, Carlos Luz, André Cordeiro, Igor Steinmacher, and Avelino Zorzo. 2021. Towards Improving Experimentation in Software Engineering. In SBES. ACM, 335–340. https://doi.org/10.1145/3474624.3477073Google ScholarDigital Library
- Mary Prentice and Gail Robinson. 2010. Improving student learning outcomes with service learning. American Association of Community Colleges. Washington, DC (2010).Google Scholar
- Rodrigo Pereira Santos, Paulo Ségio Medeiros Santos, Cláudia Maria Lima Werner, and Guilherme Horta Travassos. 2008. Using experimentation to support research and education of software engineering in Brazil. Fórum de Educação em Engenharia de Software (in Portuguese) (2008), 55.Google Scholar
- Graeme Shanks, Elizabeth Tansley, and Ron Weber. 2003. Using ontology to validate conceptual models. Commun. ACM 46, 10 (2003), 85–89.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Walter F Tichy. 1998. Should Computer Scientists Experiment More?Computer 31 (1998), 32–40.Google Scholar
- G. H. Travassos, P. S. M. d. Santos, P. G. Mian, A. C. D. Neto, and J. Biolchini. 2008. An Environment to Support Large Scale Experimentation in Software Engineering. IEEE International Conference on Engineering of Complex Computer Systems (ICECCS 2008) 13, 6 (2008), 193–202.Google Scholar
- Henrique Vignando, Viviane Furtado, Lucas Teixeira, and Edson OliveiraJr. 2020. OntoExper-SPL: An Ontology for Software Product Line Experiments. In ICEIS. 401–408. https://doi.org/10.5220/0009575404010408Google ScholarCross Ref
- Claes Wohlin. 2007. Empirical Software Engineering: Teaching Methods and Conducting Studies. In Empirical Software Engineering Issues: Critical Assessment and Future Directions, Victor R. Basili, Dieter Rombach, Kurt Schneider, Barbara Kitchenham, Dietmar Pfahl, and Richard W. Selby (Eds.). Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 135–142.Google Scholar
- Claes Wohlin. 2007. Empirical software engineering: Teaching methods and conducting studies. In Empirical Software Engineering Issues. Critical Assessment and Future Directions. Springer, 135–142.Google Scholar
- Claes Wohlin, Per Runeson, Martin Höst, Magnus C Ohlsson, Björn Regnell, and Anders Wesslén. 2012. Experimentation in software engineering. Springer Science and Business Media.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Claes Wohlin, Per Runeson, Martin Ohlsson Host, Magnus C, Bjoorn Regnell, and Anders Wessl. 2012. An Environment to Support Large Scale Experimentation in Software Engineering. Verlag Berlin Heidelberg (2012).Google Scholar
Index Terms
- A Conceptual Model to Support Teaching of Software Engineering Controlled (Quasi-)Experiments
Recommendations
A Survey of Controlled Experiments in Software Engineering
The classical method for identifying cause-effect relationships is to conduct controlled experiments. This paper reports upon the present state of how controlled experiments in software engineering are conducted and the extent to which relevant ...
A web-based support environment for software engineering experiments
The software engineering communities frequently propose new software engineering technologies, such as new development techniques, programming languages and tools, without rigorous scientific evaluation. One way to evaluate software engineering ...
Building an infrastructure to support experimentation with software testing techniques
Experimentation is necessary to provide advances in research on software testing, but without infrastructure to support that experimentation, progress cannot occur. To help with this problem, we have been designing and constructing infrastructure to ...
Comments