An Investigation into Computer Support for

Cooperative Work in Software Engineering Groups

Sarah DrummondSarah DrummondDept. Computer ScienceDept. Computer Science

University of Durham, UKUniversity of Durham, UKMSc ResearchMSc Research

Presentation contentPresentation content Approach to the MSc

– Research areas – literature survey– Criteria for success of the MSc

Environments used – groupware Case studies

– JTAP and SEG Collecting data Results obtained and evaluation Conclusion

Research Areas

Applying CSCW to SE Groupware is the

technological component of CSCW

SE education is a sub set of SE

Groupware support for SE studentsCSCW

Groupware

Supportfor

studentSE

groups

SoftwareEngineering

Literature survey

Software developed by teams Typical SE activities identified

– e.g.exchange ideas, meetings, designs, document preparation, config man

What groupware was available to support these activities – synchronous and asynchronous

Necessary to understand how people work as groups and interact with machines - HCI

Criteria for success

Investigate the areas of CSCW and to determine the appropriateness of existing groupware to SE education

Identify a set of requirements for collaborative working support for SE students

Formulate hypotheses on SE students use of groupware

Using case studies gather relevant data (qualitative and quantitative) to prove or disprove the hypotheses

Environments used

Synchronous– Desktop video conferencing (video and audio)

– Shared whiteboard

– Chat tool

– Telephone …..!

Asynchronous– Lotus Notes

– BSCW

– Email

Case Study 1

JTAP project - Geographically distributed final year SE students undertaking a collaborative project – 18 students (6 groups of 3) developing a database over a

seven week period, using synchronous (video conferencing) and asynchronous (BSCW and Lotus Notes) groupware

Met each other face to face on two occasions Data collection methods employed:

– Questionnaire– Focus groups (local students only)

General Results: Case Study 1 General Results: Case Study 1 JTAP projectJTAP project

5 of 6 projects were completed Groupware not SE specific therefore students

adapted the task to suit the functionality of the tool DVC not of sufficient quality and performance Essential to establish work protocols Face to face meetings essential To scale up distributed working with other HE

institutions would be difficult

Case Study 2Case Study 2 SEG project: Collocated second year SE students

undertaking a year long group project using asynchronous groupware– 19 week duration – Approx. 89 students = 14 groups of 6 or 7– One tutor/customer/consultant per group– Strict deadlines for group deliverables

Data collection methods employed:– Questionnaires (web based)– Activity log– Focus groups– Observations

Hypothesis 1Hypothesis 1 The introduction of a WWW based asynchronous

shared workspace into software engineering

groupworking will aid group members to

organise and coordinate their work

Results summary:

The workspace provided a formal setting for the practical side

of SE and was felt to be helpful and useful by providing a

hierarchical structure, simple configuration management and

awareness of other groups members’ activities

Hypothesis 2Hypothesis 2

Greater use of shared workspace functionality will be

made as the project progresses

Results summary:

The use of the workspace functions for SEG showed no

significant increase in their use but the functions were used

more appropriately. Not all functions were used – only the

“essential” ones!

Hypothesis 3

Students undertake more collaboration in the earlier stages of the software lifecycle

Results summary: Not possible to prove this as there is much interaction

between SEG members that was not captured. But from general observations it was felt that there was more collaboration as the groups are forming, understanding the tasks in hand and the potential of each group member.

Hypothesis 4

Synchronous communication has an important role to play in both collocated and distributed SE groupwork

Results summary: This hypothesis was in part proved to be correct. For

distributed students the benefits of components such as video and audio were minimal whilst chat and whiteboard proved to be useful. For collocated students synchronous communication was less important as face-to-face interaction was possible.

Conclusions The Criteria for success was fulfilled: investigations into

CSCW/SE were undertaken, hypotheses formulated and case studies done. Data collected. Data was evaluated to prove or disprove the hypotheses

Groupware is in the main generic and whilst offering some tailorability do not fully support SE processes e.g. code development

SE students gained an insight into the benefits these technologies can provide and the problems that can arise when using them

SE students require communication skills – need to understand both technological and sociological factors associated with developing and using groupware

Further informationFurther information

SEG publications:

http://www.dur.ac.uk/sarah.drummond/papers BSCW: http://bscw.gmd.de