Understanding Non-functional Requirements for Precollege Engineering Technologies

The design of accessible learning technologies for precollege engineering education is a multi-faceted problem that must take into account a multitude of physical, social, and environmental factors. Using literature reviews and assessment by a participant observer during an 18-hour intervention with a local middle school, we propose that the elicitation of non-functional requirements for precollege learning technologies can be better understood by dividing schools in clusters which share similar resources and constraints. Developers can utilize the proposed scheme as a means to establish minimal criteria that learning technologies must satisfice to be viable for adoption by a wider range of users and better meet the needs and priorities of students and educators.

[1]  J. Star.  On the Relationship Between Knowing and Doing in Procedural Learning , 2020, Proceedings of the Twenty First Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society.

[2]  M. Prensky.  Do They Really Think Differently , 2001 .

[3]  Oscar Mauricio Serrano Jaimes,et al.  EVALUACION DE LA USABILIDAD EN SITIOS WEB, BASADA EN EL ESTANDAR ISO 9241-11 (International Standard (1998) Ergonomic requirements For office work with visual display terminals (VDTs)-Parts II: Guidance on usability , 2012 .

[4]  L. Katehi,et al.  Engineering in K-12 Education: Understanding the Status and Improving the Prospects. , 2009 .

[5]  Darrell L. Butler,et al.  Barriers to Adopting Technology for Teaching and Learning , 2002 .

[6]  Bashar Nuseibeh,et al.  Requirements engineering: a roadmap , 2000, ICSE '00.

[7]  Melissa M. Groves,et al.  Instructional Technology Adoption in Higher Education: An Action Research Case Study , 2000 .

[8]  Tina N. Hohlfeld,et al.  Examining the digital divide in K-12 public schools: Four-year trends for supporting ICT literacy in Florida , 2008, Comput. Educ..

[9]  Darrell L. Butler,et al.  Barriers to Adopting Technology By , 2002 .

[10]  Charles Kenny,et al.  A short review of information and communication technologies and basic education in LDCs—what is useful, what is sustainable? , 2003 .

[11]  Deborah Loewenberg Ball,et al.  EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION AND THE PROBLEM OF SCALE * , 2006 .

[12]  Philip M. Sadler,et al.  Engineering Competitions in the Middle School Classroom: Key Elements in Developing Effective Design Challenges , 2000 .

[13]  Effie Lai-Chong Law,et al.  The measurability and predictability of user experience , 2011, EICS '11.

[14]  Seymour Papert,et al.  Mindstorms: Children, Computers, and Powerful Ideas , 1981 .

[15]  Sheri Sheppard,et al.  What is Engineering Practice , 2006 .

[16]  D. Jorgensen.  Participant Observation: A Methodology for Human Studies , 1989 .

[17]  E. Soloway,et al.  Creating a Framework for Research on Systemic Technology Innovations , 2004 .

[18]  Eugene S. Ferguson,et al.  Engineering and the Mind's Eye , 1994 .

[19]  Carolyn B. Seaman,et al.  Qualitative Methods in Empirical Studies of Software Engineering , 1999, IEEE Trans. Software Eng..

[20]  M. Prensky.  Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants Part 1 , 2001 .

[21]  Larry Cuban,et al.  High Access and Low Use of Technologies in High School Classrooms: Explaining an Apparent Paradox , 2001 .

[22]  R. Earle.  The Integration of Instructional Technology into Public Education: Promises and Challenges , 2002 .

[23]  Peter C. Wright,et al.  Empathy and experience in HCI , 2008, CHI.

[24]  Mohammad Kazem Akbari,et al.  Customizing ISO 9126 quality model for evaluation of B2B applications , 2009, Inf. Softw. Technol..

[25]  David A. Gillam,et al.  A Framework for K-12 Science Education: Practices, Crosscutting Concepts, and Core Ideas , 2012 .

[26]  K. Frank,et al.  Factors Affecting Technology Uses in Schools: An Ecological Perspective , 2003 .

[27]  Thomas A. Beggs.  Influences and Barriers to the Adoption of Instructional Technology , 2000 .

[28]  Thomas A. Keenan.  Computers and education , 1964, CACM.

[29]  Sue Bennett,et al.  The 'digital natives' debate: A critical review of the evidence , 2008, Br. J. Educ. Technol..

[30]  Helen R. Quinn,et al.  A Framework for K-12 Science Education: Practices, Crosscutting Concepts, and Core Ideas , 2013 .

[31]  Susan Lysecky,et al.  Educational Technologies for Precollege Engineering Education , 2012, IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies.

[32]  John W. Creswell,et al.  Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research , 2006 .

[33]  M. Prensky.  Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants , 2001 .

[34]  James T. Miller,et al.  An Empirical Evaluation of the System Usability Scale , 2008, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact..

[35]  Scott C. Douglas,et al.  Designing Pre-College Engineering Curricula and Technology: Lessons Learned From the Infinity Project , 2008, Proceedings of the IEEE.

[36]  Jared Keengwe,et al.  Computer Technology Integration and Student Learning: Barriers and Promise , 2008 .

[37]  Peggy A. Ertmer,et al.  Teacher Technology Change , 2010 .

[38]  Nigel Bevan,et al.  Measuring usability as quality of use , 1995, Software Quality Journal.

[39]  Harry M. Sneed,et al.  Software Engineering Management , 1989 .

[40]  William W. Gaver.  Technology affordances , 1991, CHI.

[41]  Kati Haycock,et al.  Teaching Inequality: How Poor and Minority Students Are Shortchanged on Teacher Quality: A Report and Recommendations by the Education Trust. , 2006 .

[42]  J. B. Brooke,et al.  SUS: A 'Quick and Dirty' Usability Scale , 1996 .

[43]  Martin Glinz,et al.  On Non-Functional Requirements , 2007, 15th IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE 2007).

[44]  Susan Lysecky,et al.  Adapting the eBlock Platform for Middle School STEM Projects: Initial Platform Usability Testing , 2010, IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies.

[45]  Nigel Bevan,et al.  Quality in use: Meeting user needs for quality , 1999, J. Syst. Softw..

[46]  Stephen C.-Y. Lu.  Collective rationality of group decisions in collaborative engineering , 2009 .

[47]  R. Kay,et al.  Exploring Teachers Perceptions of Web-Based Learning Tools , 2009 .

[48]  Thomas A. Brush,et al.  Integrating technology into K-12 teaching and learning: current knowledge gaps and recommendations for future research , 2007 .

[49]  Axel van Lamsweerde,et al.  Goal-Oriented Requirements Engineering: A Guided Tour , 2001, RE.

[50]  R. Estrella,et al.  Stuck in the Shallow End Education , Race , and Computing , 2008 .

[51]  Eric Rosenbaum,et al.  Scratch: programming for all , 2009, Commun. ACM.

[52]  E. Soloway,et al.  Creating Usable Innovations in Systemic Reform: Scaling Up Technology-Embedded Project-Based Science in Urban Schools , 2000 .

[53]  Patricia Rogers.  Barriers to Adopting Emerging Technologies in Education , 2000 .

[54]  Anton E. Lawson,et al.  Teaching Inquiry Science in Middle and Secondary Schools , 2009 .

[55]  Kasper Hornbæk,et al.  Current practice in measuring usability: Challenges to usability studies and research , 2006, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[56]  Bee Bee Chua,et al.  Applying the ISO9126 Model to the evaluation of an e-learning system , 2004 .

[57]  L. Lewis,et al.  Educational Technology in U.S. Public Schools: Fall 2008 , 2010 .

[58]  Patrick N. Foster.  The Relationship Among Science, Technology and Engineering in K-12 Education , 2005 .