sharbani bhattacharya kazan russia

Sharbani BhattacharyaAssociate Professor( Department of Information Technology)

IEC- College of Engineering & Technology, Greater NoidaMahamaya Technical University, Noida, India

Cooperative Learning & Website in Software Project Management Pedagogy

ICL-IGIP 201325th September 2013

At Kazan , Russia

Topics• Cooperative Learning & SPM Pedagogy• Cooperative Learning• Website & SPM Pedagogy• Assessment• Conclusion• Acknowledgement• References

Cooperative Learning & SPM Pedagogy

1.Positive Interdependence2. Face-To-Face Interaction3. Individual Accountability4. Social Skills5. Group Processing

Cooperative Learning & SPM Pedagogy

• For Assignments• In Lab• Project- based-Learning• Case Studies

Cooperative LearningIn Cooperative Learning groups work face-to-face and

learn to work as a team.There are rules forA. Team Formation• Appointing in group• Quitting from groupB. Team Evaluation• Peer Reviews• Teacher’s Evaluation

Team Formation The group formation is done by teacher and

there are rules for quitting and firing from the group.

AppointingTeam members were assigned roles that rotated

from assignment to assignment. The coordinator organized working sessions and made sure that all team members understood their responsibilities. The recorder prepared the final solution set. A checker proofread the final solution set. A reporter who makes final report with consent of all.

Quitting Both the student who gets fired and the one

who quits have the responsibility of finding a team of three willing to take them on as a fourth member. The one who quits won’t have any trouble—in fact, she’s probably got her new team lined up before the second memo goes out.

Team Evaluation• Assessment is done in group as well as

individually.• It needs to be accepted by both student and

teacher.• Peer reviews and teacher’s view are taken

together for final grading.• Individual efforts are required to be

appreciated keeping team spirit.

Peer Reviews• Peers have to give their views for each group

member.• This is included in their final grading• Thus, in order get good reviews they have to

be manipulative and diplomatic.• Things have to run with good relation with

peers.

Website in SPM Pedagogy

Website is maintained for the benefit of students for syllabus, lecture notes, assignments, question bank, case study, standards, attendance and marks.

Role of Website in SPM Pedagogy

Students are given the facility to give feedback in the website. They were also having assignments for home work individually and case studies at class work to submit in group.

Roles & ResponsibilityEach role is well defined i.e. • Coordinator• Recorder• Reporter • CheckerResponsibilities needed to fulfilled.

S

Assessment• A. Assessment In Theory• Assessment is done in four Parts in Theory

(Maximum out of 150)• 1)Class Tests(Out of 60 slashed down to 30)• 2) Attendance(10)• 3) Assignments ,Quizzes, & Case Studies(out of 30

slashed down to 10)• 4)Close Book Examination at University(out of 100)

Assessment• B. Assessment In Laboratory• Assessment is done in four part for Lab (Maximum

Marks 50)• 1)Peer Review(out of 25)• 2)File Work(out of 15)• 3)Team Evaluation(out of 10)• 4)Lab work and Viva- By External Examiner(out of 25)• Total marks accumulated is out of 75 which is slash

down to 50.

Over all Lab Work Grading of 47 Students

Remark No. of Students

Excellent 2

Very Good 35

Good 6

Satisfactory 2

Ordinary 2

No show 0

Overall Students Performance

Student Grades

ExcellentVery GoodGoodSatisfactoryOrdinaryNo show

Questionaire1. How much you need to use internet for SPM ? • 1 2 3 4 5 2. How much Cooperative Learning is useful for SPM?• 1 2 3 4 53. How much Peer Review is useful for SPM assignments?• 1 2 3 4 54. How much teacher’s site is important for SPM activities?

• 1 2 3 4 55. How much Case Studies are important for concepts of SPM?• 1 2 3 4 5

Grading------> 5 4 3 2 1

Internet Usage 18% 77.2% 13.6% 0 0Cooperative learning 45.5% 31.8% 27.2% 0 0

Peer Review 63.6% 27.2% 4.5% 0 0

Teacher's site 31.8% 45.5% 18.1% 0 0

Case study 59% 9% 31.8% 0 0

Internet Usage

Cooperative learning

Peer Review Teacher's site Case study0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

54321

Conclusion This method of cooperative learning, teacher’s

website and comparison of class room teaching evolved some interesting results like peer review shows that students try to give good grades to other in lieu of getting good remark from others. This initiated team building, looking forward for friendship as well assessing the peer with teacher.

Acknowledgement• Stephanie Farrel , Director, Rowan University,

USA ,Workshop “Essentials of Learner- Centered Teaching”

• Wipro Mission 10X• IEEE Education Society

References• Stephanie Farrel , Director, Rowan University, USA ,Workshop Handbook of “Essentials of Learner-

Centered Teaching” by on 26th September 2012 at Villach, Austria.• Bin-Shyan Jong , Lai, yen-The Hsia, Tsong-Wuu Lin and Cheng-Yu Lu, “Using Game-Based Cooperative

learning to improve Learning Motivation: A Study of Online Game Use in an Operating Systems Course”, IEEE Transactions on Education, Vol.56, No.2,May 2013 page 183

• Richard M. Felder, Rebecca Brent, North Carolina State University ,”Effective Strategies for Cooperative Learning”, J. Cooperation & Collaboration in College Teaching, 10(2), 69–75 (2001).

• Cynthia R. Haller, Department of English Victoria J. Gallagher, Department of Communication Tracey L. Weldon, Department of English Richard M. Felder, Department of Chemical Engineering, North Carolina State University,“ Dynamics of Peer Education in Cooperative Learning Workgroups”, J. Engr. Education, 89(3), 285–293 (2000)

• Richard M. Felder1, and Rebecca Brent, Department of Chemical Engineering N.C. State University, Raleigh, NC 27695-79052Education Designs, Inc., Cary, NC 27518, “Cooperative Learning”.

• Deborah B. Kaufman and Richard M. Felder, “Accounting for Individual Effort In cooperative Learning Teams”, Department of Chemical Engineering, Hugh Fuller, College of Engineering, North Carolina State University, J. Engr. Education, 89(2), 133–140 (2000)

• Richard M. Felder, and Rebecca Brent, Department of Chemical Engineering, N.C. State University, “Designing and Teaching Courses to Satisfy the ABET Engineering Criteria”, Journal of Engineering Education January 2003, Page No 8

Thank you