| 1. |
- Burden, Håkan, 1976
(författare)
-
A Scholarship Approach to Model-Driven Engineering
- 2014
-
Doktorsavhandling (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- Model-Driven Engineering is a paradigm for software engineering where software models are the primary artefacts throughout the software life-cycle. The aim is to define suitable representations and processes that enable precise and efficient specification, development and analysis of software. Our contributions to Model-Driven Engineering are structured according to Boyer's four functions of academic activity - the scholarships of teaching, discovery, application and integration. The scholarships share a systematic approach towards seeking new insights and promoting progressive change. Even if the scholarships have their differences they are compatible so that theory, practice and teaching can strengthen each other. Scholarship of Teaching: While teaching Model-Driven Engineering to under-graduate students we introduced two changes to our course. The first change was to introduce a new modelling tool that enabled the execution of software models while the second change was to adapt pair lecturing to encourage the students to actively participate in developing models during lectures. Scholarship of Discovery: By using an existing technology for transforming models into source code we translated class diagrams and high-level action languages into natural language texts. The benefit of our approach is that the translations are applicable to a family of models while the texts are reusable across different low-level representations of the same model. Scholarship of Application: Raising the level of abstraction through models might seem a technical issue but our collaboration with industry details how the success of adopting Model-Driven Engineering depends on organisational and social factors as well as technical. Scholarship of Integration: Building on our insights from the scholarships above and a study at three large companies we show how Model-Driven Engineering empowers new user groups to become software developers but also how engineers can feel isolated due to poor tool support. Our contributions also detail how modelling enables a more agile development process as well as how the validation of models can be facilitated through text generation. The four scholarships allow for different possibilities for insights and explore Model-Driven Engineering from diverse perspectives. As a consequence, we investigate the social, organisational and technological factors of Model-Driven Engineering but also examine the possibilities and challenges of Model-Driven Engineering across disciplines and scholarships.
|
|
| 2. |
- Burden, Håkan, 1976, et al.
(författare)
-
An Evaluation of Post-processing Google Translations with Microsoft® Word
- 2012
-
Ingår i: SLTC 2012 The Fourth Swedish Language Technology Conference. ; , s. 13-14
-
Konferensbidrag (refereegranskat)abstract
- We decided to evaluate the performance of Google Translate and the possible improvements on grammatical fluency through post-processing the candidate translations by Microsoft Word.
|
|
| 3. |
- Burden, Håkan, 1976, et al.
(författare)
-
Assessing individuals in team projects: A case study from computer science
- 2011
-
Ingår i: Conference on Teaching and Learning - KUL.
-
Konferensbidrag (refereegranskat)abstract
- In this paper we describe an ongoing action research (Kember & Gow, 1992) project to improve teaching and learning in the course “Model-driven software development” given by Computer Science and Engineering. It is a project-based course and after taking the course the students should be better able to analyse and specify software through models. There were two drivers for the course reform. Before the reform in 2009, the software models were used in an informal way and therefore it was hard to validate the correctness of the system from them. The students were instead assessed through a final written exam even if most of the work was done in the team project. But from contacts with industry, we got hold of a tool that enables testing and verification of model behaviour. So it was now possible to assess the teams by testing their models. The second driver for the reform was John Biggs’ idea of constructive alignment (Biggs, 1996). The idea is that there should be a consistency between the learning objectives, the teaching methods and the assessment methods. If the assessment methods, in particular, do not match the learning objectives students tend to take a surface approach to learning. Since this was a project course we wanted our assessments to be more focused on the project, so we dropped the written exam. The question then became: How can we assign fair grades to individual members of the teams? We introduced a variety of new assessment methods in order to better judge the contribution of each student and what they had learned during the course. These methods comprised: voluntary written exams, peer assessment (grading and ranking of team members, and mid-course review of a report by another team), self assessment and an oral group exam at the end of the course. By introducing these new assessment methods, the purpose of assessment in the course shifted from being only summative (i.e. assigning a grade at the end of the course) to also being formative (i.e. helping the students to learn during the whole course). From the course evaluations we could draw several conclusions. Overall, the students were satisfied with the new assessment package. Only a few of them wanted a written exam at the end. This is encouraging since it was the first time the reformed course was given and many things were new both to the students and the teachers. Most of the students found the voluntary exams to be helpful, but the peer assessment part turned out to be more controversial. The mid-course review of reports by other teams was only mentioned in positive terms, while all the comments on peer grading/ranking were negative. The students did not mind criticizing each other face-to-face but found it disturbing to grade each other anonymously. In general, they also found it difficult to evaluate team members and the reports by other teams. And most of them believed that they were doing the job of the teacher when grading/ranking the team members. From a teacher's point of view, the new assessment package is more efficient. We are now more confident in the grades we are giving. Moreover, it did not take more time to use the new assessment methods compared to using the written exam. Finally, the work we put into assessment is now done during the course, not after. Action research consists of a spiral of cycles, where each cycle involves a new process of problem solving, generated by the previous cycle. We have only completed the first cycle. A key lesson from the first cycle is the importance of making the assessment process and criteria clear to the students at the beginning of the course. In the next cycle, we will address the following questions: What models have other teachers used for assigning grades to individual students in team projects? Is it possible to improve the peer assessment part? How can we give more rapid feedback on the voluntary exams? How can we make the most of the oral group exam? The review by Segers et al. (2003) will provide us with a starting point for a more extensive exploration of the literature in the area. References Biggs (1996). Enhancing teaching through constructive alignment. Higher Education, 32, 347-364. Kember & Gow (1992). Action research as a form of staff development in higher education. Higher Education, 23, 297-310. Segers, Dochy & Cascallar (2003). Optimising new modes of assessment. Kluwer Academic Publishers.
|
|
| 4. |
- Burden, Håkan, 1976, et al.
(författare)
-
Assessing individuals in team projects: A case study from computer science
- 2011
-
Ingår i: Conference on Teaching and Learning - KUL.
-
Konferensbidrag (refereegranskat)abstract
- In this paper we describe an ongoing action research (Kember & Gow, 1992) project to improve teaching andlearning in the course “Model-driven software development” given by Computer Science and Engineering. It isa project-based course and after taking the course the students should be better able to analyse and specifysoftware through models.There were two drivers for the course reform. Before the reform in 2009, the software models were used in aninformal way and therefore it was hard to validate the correctness of the system from them. The students wereinstead assessed through a final written exam even if most of the work was done in the team project. But fromcontacts with industry, we got hold of a tool that enables testing and verification of model behaviour. So it wasnow possible to assess the teams by testing their models. The second driver for the reform was John Biggs’ ideaof constructive alignment (Biggs, 1996). The idea is that there should be a consistency between the learningobjectives, the teaching methods and the assessment methods. If the assessment methods, in particular, donot match the learning objectives students tend to take a surface approach to learning. Since this was a projectcourse we wanted our assessments to be more focused on the project, so we dropped the written exam.The question then became: How can we assign fair grades to individual members of the teams? We introduceda variety of new assessment methods in order to better judge the contribution of each student and what theyhad learned during the course. These methods comprised: voluntary written exams, peer assessment (gradingand ranking of team members, and mid-course review of a report by another team), self assessment and anoral group exam at the end of the course. By introducing these new assessment methods, the purpose ofassessment in the course shifted from being only summative (i.e. assigning a grade at the end of the course) toalso being formative (i.e. helping the students to learn during the whole course).From the course evaluations we could draw several conclusions. Overall, the students were satisfied with thenew assessment package. Only a few of them wanted a written exam at the end. This is encouraging since itwas the first time the reformed course was given and many things were new both to the students and theteachers. Most of the students found the voluntary exams to be helpful, but the peer assessment part turnedout to be more controversial. The mid-course review of reports by other teams was only mentioned in positiveterms, while all the comments on peer grading/ranking were negative. The students did not mind criticizingeach other face-to-face but found it disturbing to grade each other anonymously. In general, they also found itdifficult to evaluate team members and the reports by other teams. And most of them believed that they weredoing the job of the teacher when grading/ranking the team members.From a teacher's point of view, the new assessment package is more efficient. We are now more confident inthe grades we are giving. Moreover, it did not take more time to use the new assessment methods comparedto using the written exam. Finally, the work we put into assessment is now done during the course, not after.Action research consists of a spiral of cycles, where each cycle involves a new process of problem solving,generated by the previous cycle. We have only completed the first cycle. A key lesson from the first cycle is theimportance of making the assessment process and criteria clear to the students at the beginning of the course.In the next cycle, we will address the following questions: What models have other teachers used for assigninggrades to individual students in team projects? Is it possible to improve the peer assessment part? How can wegive more rapid feedback on the voluntary exams? How can we make the most of the oral group exam? Thereview by Segers et al. (2003) will provide us with a starting point for a more extensive exploration of theliterature in the area.ReferencesBiggs (1996). Enhancing teaching through constructive alignment. Higher Education, 32, 347-364.Kember & Gow (1992). Action research as a form of staff development in higher education. Higher Education, 23, 297-310.Segers, Dochy & Cascallar (2003). Optimising new modes of assessment. Kluwer Academic Publishers.
|
|
| 5. |
- Burden, Håkan, 1976, et al.
(författare)
-
Comparing and Contrasting Model-Driven Engineering at Three Large Companies
- 2014
-
Ingår i: Proceedings of the 8th ACM/IEEE International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement. - New York, NY, USA : Association for Computing Machinery (ACM). - 1949-3789 .- 1949-3770. - 9781450327749
-
Konferensbidrag (refereegranskat)abstract
- Hutchinson et al. conducted an interview-based study of how model-driven engineering, MDE, is practiced in 17 companies. Their results include that successful MDE companies develop domain-specific languages; are motivated by a clear business case; and are committed at all levels of the organization. Goal: Whilst the results are useful, the study is a very broad one, with one or two interviewees per company. This paper supplements Hutchinson's study by focusing on three large companies that are applying MDE and undergoing a parallel transition to agile methods. Method: Formal data collection strategies -- 25 semi-structured interviews, observations and progress meetings -- were combined with informal interaction. The data was analysed both inductively for new insights and deductively for comparison with the results of Hutchinson et al. Results: Our findings show how MDE can include domain experts in software development and how agile development and MDE can coexist. In general our results validate the findings of Hutchinson et al. There are two areas where our results differ -- the engineers' sense of control and the appropriateness of their skills and training. Conclusions: Using a combination of data collection strategies and analysis techniques our study casts new light on earlier research as well as contributes with novel insights regarding the adoption of MDE.
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
- Burden, Håkan, 1976, et al.
(författare)
-
Executable and Translatable UML - How Difficult Can It Be?
- 2011
-
Ingår i: 18th Asia Pacific Software Engineering Conference, APSEC 2011; Ho Chi Minh; Viet Nam; 5 December 2011 through 8 December 2011. - 1530-1362. - 9781457721991 ; , s. 114-121
-
Konferensbidrag (refereegranskat)abstract
- Executable and Translatable UML enables Model-Driven Architecture by specifying Platform-Independent Models that can be automatically transformed into Platform-Specific Models through model compilation. Previous research shows that the transformations result in both efficient code and consistency between the models. However, there are neither results for the effort of introducing the technology in a new context nor on the level of expertise needed for designing the Platform-Independent Models. We wanted to know if teams of novice software developers could design Executable and Translatable UML models without prior experiences of software modelling. As part of a new university course we conducted an exploratory case study with two data collections over two years. Bachelor students were given the task to design a hotel reservation system and the necessary test cases for verifying the functionality and structure of the models within 300 hours, using Executable and Translatable UML. In total, 43 out of 50 teams succeeded in delivering verified and consistent models within the time frame. During the second data collection the students were given limited tool training. This gave a raise in the quality of the models. Due to the executable feature of the models the students were given constant feedback on their design until the models behaved as expected, with the required level of detail and structure. Our results show that using Executable and Translatable UML does not require more expertise than a bachelor program in computer science. All in all, Executable and Translatable UML could play an important role in future software development.
|
|
| 8. |
- Burden, Håkan, 1976, et al.
(författare)
-
How MAD are we? Empirical Evidence for Model-driven Agile Development.
- 2014
-
Ingår i: Proceedings of the 3rd Workshop on Extreme Modeling co-located with ACM/IEEE 17th International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages & Systems (MoDELS 2014). - 1613-0073. ; 1239, s. 2-11
-
Konferensbidrag (refereegranskat)abstract
- Since the launch of the Agile Manifesto there has been numerous propositions in how to combine agile practices with Model-driven Development. Ideally the combination would give the benefits of agile (e.g. rapid response to changes and shorter lead times) with the promises of Model-driven development (such as high-level designs and automation). A commonality among the proposals is that they lack in empirical evaluation. Our contribution is a systematic literature review to find out to what experiences there are of Model-driven Agile Development, MAD, from an empirical context. Among our conslusions is that MAD is sitll an immature research area and that more experience reports from industry are needed before we can claim to have understood the possibilities and drawbacks of MAD.
|
|
| 9. |
- Burden, Håkan, 1976, et al.
(författare)
-
Industrial Experiences from Multi-Paradigmatic Modelling of Signal Processing
- 2012
-
Ingår i: 6th International Workshop on Multi-Paradigm Modeling, MPM 2012; Innsbruck; Austria; 1 October 2012 through 1 October 2012. - New York, NY, USA : ACM. - 9781450318051 ; , s. 7-12
-
Konferensbidrag (refereegranskat)abstract
- Embedded software is often composed of interacting domains. A common problem is that the implementation intertwines the different domain solutions with each other and the platform-specific details. The result is a code mass that is hard to understand, maintain and reuse. We report on an effort to overcome these problems by using a domain-specific executable modelling language for each included domain. The application was delivered for the Ericsson LTE-A uplink test bed as part of the 4G telecommunications system that was presented at the Mobile World Congress in Barcelona, February 2011. The requirements for the delivered software included efficient real-time performance for signal processing on new hardware as well as a firm non-negotiable delivery deadline. Our results show that the chosen modelling languages allowed independent implementation and validation of each domain. Neither did the integration of the separate solutions imply additional problems.
|
|
| 10. |
- Burden, Håkan, 1976, et al.
(författare)
-
Mastering model-driven engineering
- 2014
-
Ingår i: 2014 Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education Conference, ITICSE 2014; Uppsala; Sweden; 21 June 2014 through 25 June 2014. - New York, New York, USA : Association for Computing Machinery (ACM). - 9781450328333
-
Konferensbidrag (refereegranskat)abstract
- The challenge of transforming the understanding of a problem into a validated solution is not a trivial task. Using the conceptual framework of cognitive apprenticeship we show two ways to guide novices towards becoming masters in model-driven engineering.
|
|
