Modelling of CS Teaching and Learning in Large

In previous chapters (see Chaps. 1 and 2), I have outlined the most general issues of e-learning and CS teaching on the basis of the LO concept. The main focus was given to understanding of the issues through conceptual analysis of the domain literature at the level of LO concepts and their taxonomies. In Chap. 3, I have analysed all these with the emphasis on pedagogical reusability using the software reuse approaches. In this chapter, I provide more in-deep analysis of modelling CS learning and teaching using a systematic approach which is a synthetic product of some domain analysis methods well known in SWE as well as in e-learning domains. In general, the aim of modelling, as it is conceived in the large, for example, in software engineering, is to extract and represent artefacts and knowledge needed to build a software system. As a rule, the extracted artefacts from the domain to be modelled should be represented at a higher level of abstraction. Often we refer to those artefacts as a domain model. Modelling is a primary stage in developing systems.

[1]  Don S. Batory,et al.  Feature Models, Grammars, and Propositional Formulas , 2005, SPLC.

[2]  Paloma Díaz,et al.  The ComBLA method: The application of domain analysis to the development of e-learning systems , 2012 .

[3]  P. Brézillon,et al.  Contextual knowledge sharing and cooperation in intelligent assistant systems , 1999 .

[4]  Douglas C. Schmidt,et al.  Guest Editor's Introduction: Model-Driven Engineering , 2006, Computer.

[5]  Vytautas Štuikys,et al.  The LEGO NXT Robot-based e-Learning Environment to Teach Computer Science Topics , 2012 .

[6]  Krzysztof Czarnecki,et al.  Generative techniques for product lines , 2001, Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Software Engineering. ICSE 2001.

[7]  Emilia Mendes,et al.  Empirical Studies of Pair Programming for CS/SE Teaching in Higher Education: A Systematic Literature Review , 2011, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering.

[8]  Krzysztof Czarnecki,et al.  Feature models are views on ontologies , 2006 .

[9]  Klaus Schmid,et al.  A systematic approach to derive the scope of software product lines , 1999, Proceedings of the 1999 International Conference on Software Engineering (IEEE Cat. No.99CB37002).

[10]  M. Felisa Verdejo,et al.  Modeling Educational Content: The Cognitive Approach of the PALO Language , 2004, J. Educ. Technol. Soc..

[11]  Michael Derntl,et al.  A Classification Framework for Educational Modeling Languages in Instructional Design , 2006 .

[12]  Robertas Damasevicius,et al.  Specification and Generation of Learning Object Sequences for E-learning Using Sequence Feature Diagrams and Metaprogramming Techniques , 2009, 2009 Ninth IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies.

[13]  Matthew J. Koehler,et al.  Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) , 2009 .

[14]  Vytautas Štuikys,et al.  Exploration of Learning Object Ontologies Using Feature Diagrams , 2008 .

[15]  Bill Z. Manaris,et al.  Bloom's taxonomy revisited: specifying assessable learning objectives in computer science , 2008, SIGCSE '08.

[16]  Caitlin Kelleher,et al.  Lowering the barriers to programming: A taxonomy of programming environments and languages for novice programmers , 2005, CSUR.

[17]  Fernanda Campos,et al.  EasyT: Apoiando a Construção de Objetos de Aprendizagem para uma Linha de Produtos de Software , 2012 .

[18]  David S. Touretzky,et al.  Seven big ideas in robotics, and how to teach them , 2012, SIGCSE '12.

[19]  P. Heymans,et al.  Separating variability concerns in a product line re-engineering project , 2008, EA@AOSD.

[20]  Hassan Gomaa,et al.  Modeling variability in software product lines with the variation point model , 2004, Sci. Comput. Program..

[21]  Jan Bosch,et al.  Design and use of software architectures - adopting and evolving a product-line approach , 2000 .

[22]  Pierre-Yves Schobbens,et al.  Feature Diagrams: A Survey and a Formal Semantics , 2006, 14th IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE'06).

[23]  Krzysztof Czarnecki,et al.  Staged configuration through specialization and multilevel configuration of feature models , 2005, Softw. Process. Improv. Pract..

[24]  Krzysztof Czarnecki,et al.  Generative programming - methods, tools and applications , 2000 .

[25]  Sven Apel,et al.  An Overview of Feature-Oriented Software Development , 2009, J. Object Technol..

[26]  Mathieu Acher,et al.  FAMILIAR: A domain-specific language for large scale management of feature models , 2013, Sci. Comput. Program..

[27]  Kyo Chul Kang,et al.  Feature-Oriented Domain Analysis (FODA) Feasibility Study , 1990 .

[28]  Daniel Hoffman,et al.  Commonality and Variability in Software Engineering , 1998, IEEE Softw..

[29]  Victor C. S. Lee,et al.  Learning motivation in e-learning facilitated computer programming courses , 2010, Comput. Educ..

[30]  Krzysztof Czarnecki,et al.  Feature Diagrams and Logics: There and Back Again , 2007 .

[31]  Marco Sinnema,et al.  COVAMOF: A Framework for Modeling Variability in Software Product Families , 2004, SPLC.

[32]  Robertas Damasevicius,et al.  Teaching of Computer Science Topics Using Meta-Programming-Based GLOs and LEGO Robots , 2013, Informatics Educ..

[33]  Michel Léonard,et al.  Learning Design based on Graphical Knowledge-Modelling , 2006, J. Educ. Technol. Soc..

[34]  Thiemo Leonhardt,et al.  From boring to scoring – a collaborative serious game for learning and practicing mathematical logic for computer science education , 2013, Comput. Sci. Educ..

[35]  Robertas Damasevicius,et al.  Development of Generative Learning Objects Using Feature Diagrams and Generative Techniques , 2008, Informatics Educ..

[36]  Mohamed Hamada,et al.  A Learning System for a Computational Science Related Topic , 2012, ICCS.

[37]  Hewijin Christine Jiau,et al.  Enhancing Self-Motivation in Learning Programming Using Game-Based Simulation and Metrics , 2009, IEEE Transactions on Education.

[38]  Arnold N. Pears,et al.  Enhancing student engagement in an introductory programming course , 2010, 2010 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE).

[39]  Gregor Snelting,et al.  Reengineering of configurations based on mathematical concept analysis , 1996, TSEM.

[40]  Christophe Choquet,et al.  Next Step for Educational Modeling Languages: The Model Driven Engineering and Reengineering Approach , 2006 .

[41]  Gwo-Jen Hwang,et al.  A key step to understanding paradigm shifts in e-learning: towards context-aware ubiquitous learning , 2010, Br. J. Educ. Technol..

[42]  Stuart Kent,et al.  Model Driven Engineering , 2002, IFM.

[43]  Sergio Segura,et al.  Automated analysis of feature models 20 years later: A literature review , 2010, Inf. Syst..

[44]  José Manuel Marqués Corral,et al.  Feature Diagrams and their Transformations: An Extensible Meta-model , 2009, 2009 35th Euromicro Conference on Software Engineering and Advanced Applications.

[45]  D. L. Parnas,et al.  On the criteria to be used in decomposing systems into modules , 1972, Software Pioneers.

[46]  Robertas Damasevicius,et al.  Meta-Programming and Model-Driven Meta-Program Development , 2012, Advanced Information and Knowledge Processing.

[47]  Carlos J. Costa,et al.  A solution to support student learning of programming , 2012, OSDOC '12.

[48]  Pierre-Yves Schobbens,et al.  Generic semantics of feature diagrams , 2007, Comput. Networks.

[49]  Thomas Thüm,et al.  Reasoning about edits to feature models , 2009, 2009 IEEE 31st International Conference on Software Engineering.

[50]  M. Llamas-Nistal,et al.  A Separation of Concerns Approach to Educational Modeling Languages , 2006, Proceedings. Frontiers in Education. 36th Annual Conference.

[51]  Daniela Chudá.  Visualization in education of theoretical computer science , 2007, CompSysTech '07.