Complete thesis - Murdoch University

More documents

Recommendations

Info

of the material. Learning objectives at this level include: recognise unstated assumptions,logical fallacies in reasoning, distinguish between facts and inferences, evaluaterelevance of data, analyse organisational structure of a worksynthesis - combining elements into something new, generalising from given knowledge,organising and relating knowledge from several areas, predicting, drawing conclusions.Learning outcomes stress creative behaviours with major emphasis on the formulationof new patterns or structureevaluation - exercise judgement about value, compare and discriminate between ideas, evaluatedata. Learning outcomes are the highest in the cognitive hierarchy because theycontain elements of all other categories plus conscious value judgements based on clearlydefined internal or external criteria.(Bloom et al, 1956; Carneson et al, 2000; McKenna and Bull, 1999)Research over the succeeding years has generally confirmed that the first four levels area true hierarchy, with the lowest three levels considered as foundational thinking (Ryanand Frangenheim, 2000), used as the basis for higher learning levels. However, research ismixed on the relationship of the highest two outcomes: they may be reversed or equallydifficult activities. One example of the former is the revision to the taxonomy undertaken byAnderson and Krathwohl (2001). This revision maps a specific verb tag to each level (so that‘Knowledge’ becomes ‘Remember’) and swaps the positions of levels five and six (so that‘Evaluate’ (formally Bloom’s level 6 ‘Evaluation’ precedes ‘Create’ (formally ‘Synthesis’).The argument presented for this is that evaluation is a necessary step which precedes anygenerative process.An alternative approach to Bloom’s Taxonomy proposes ‘Synthesis’ and ‘Evaluation’ as twotypes of thinking with much in common (Bloom’s lower four levels) but undertaken for adifferent purpose. Huitt (1998) summarises these as equating to creative (synthesis) andcritical (evaluation) thinking. This equivalent-but-different view does not subsume creativethinking under critical thinking (as Bloom’s original hierarchy does) but identifies them asseparate, with their own standards of excellence. Table 2.14 provides a comparison betweenthe most common competency taxonomies.While Bloom describes learning outcomes in a single dimension, other researchers acknowledgethe difference between to content and the actions that may be performed on it. This isaddresses either by the development of an alternate taxonomy (Merrill, 1973) or an extensionto an established one.65
Table 2.14: Levels of competenceJonassen Dreyfus Bloomintroductory novice knowledge(schema assembly) (apply rules)comprehensionadvanced beginner(apply maxims)applicationadvanced(domain & context dependent)competent(process-driven)analysisexpertise(experience & transfer)proficient(intuitive & decision-)making)expert(automatic, fine graineddiscrimination)synthesisevaluationmaster(develop style)Merrill (1973) classifies levels of content in terms of facts, concepts, procedures/rules andprinciples. Performance is at:remember - similar to Bloom’s ‘knowledge’, Merrill however distinguishes the type of contentbeing remembereduse - similar to Bloom’s ‘comprehension’ and ‘application’ levels, Merrill suggests facts cannotbe used or found, only rememberedfind - similar to Bloom’s ‘synthesis’, this level refers to the derivation, discovery or inventionof new concepts, principles or applications.Anderson and Krathwohl (2001) add a ‘knowledge dimension’ to Bloom’s categories to distinguishwhat is taught. This dimension encompassesfactual knowledge – the basic details of the content which students must know to makesense of the discipline, subdivided into knowledge of terminology and specific detailsand elements66
Page 1 and 2:
Educating Requirements Engineers in
Page 3 and 4:
2.5.2 Towards a REBoK . . . . . . .
Page 5 and 6:
5.4 The Murdoch context . . . . . .
Page 7 and 8:
A.1 Curriculum components . . . . .
Page 9 and 10:
5.5 Education for RE - Action Resea
Page 11 and 12:
8.24 RoLI results for Vaughn . . .
Page 13 and 14:
2.25 RE specific competencies for s
Page 15 and 16:
.AbstractIt is acknowledged within
Page 17 and 18:
.DeclarationI declare that this the
Page 19 and 20:
This leap, from one lecturer to all
Page 21 and 22:
on a positivist perspective - throu
Page 23 and 24:
ary process should also be regarded
Page 25 and 26:
(Kamsties et al, 1998; Morris et al
Page 27 and 28:
same items of knowledge to be prese
Page 29 and 30:
in RE education. In particular, ins
Page 31 and 32:
derived from these and other source
Page 33 and 34: this interpretation can never be co
Page 35 and 36: The outcome of this study is an und
Page 37 and 38: possibilities arise as outcomes of
Page 39 and 40: The first section examines the real
Page 41 and 42: 2.1 Practitioner perspectivesIn his
Page 43 and 44: themselves what they needed to know
Page 45 and 46: tencies are reinforced. He conclude
Page 47 and 48: Table 2.7: Lethbridge rankings: mos
Page 49 and 50: sonal and group attributes are cons
Page 51 and 52: eing able to apply a high level of
Page 53 and 54: on the perceived soft skills of the
Page 55 and 56: The first two items indicate a bi-p
Page 57 and 58: Table 2.12: Scott & Yates: top Engi
Page 59 and 60: Table 2.13: Scott & Wilson: top IS
Page 61 and 62: If marketing can tell you what they
Page 63 and 64: to technical problems that resemble
Page 65 and 66: positivism, situated along the cont
Page 67 and 68: and Scholes, 1990; Bulow, 1989). Th
Page 69 and 70: and to explore and describe require
Page 71 and 72: Figure 2.4: The catastrophe-cycle R
Page 73 and 74: meaning and a shared sense of parti
Page 75 and 76: assembled into a model bit by bit.
Page 77 and 78: 4 May ...I doubt that they’re str
Page 79 and 80: The characteristics noted above pos
Page 81 and 82: • the evolution of a discipline t
Page 83: expertise - intuitive situational r
Page 87 and 88: to undertake Requirements Engineeri
Page 89 and 90: equirements analysis - the process
Page 91 and 92: Table 2.16: SEEK topicsTopic Bloom
Page 93 and 94: Topic Bloom Category HoursRequireme
Page 95 and 96: 5. translate into natural language
Page 97 and 98: 2.5.1 RE in model curricula and tex
Page 99 and 100: Figure 2.8: The computing space occ
Page 101 and 102: Guideline 11 the underlying and end
Page 103 and 104: Table 2.20: SE component of CC-CSSE
Page 105 and 106: Table 2.22: IS 2002.7 analysis and
Page 107 and 108: Representative exit characteristics
Page 109 and 110: • focused on the needs of the wor
Page 111 and 112: trol and maintenance of available I
Page 113 and 114: overview of informatics, especially
Page 115 and 116: Improvement Collaboration). In 1996
Page 117 and 118: to undertake these activities. In g
Page 119 and 120: • problem-solving practice• cor
Page 121 and 122: Chapter 3A framework for learning R
Page 123 and 124: worldview do not align with the cha
Page 125 and 126: in order to eliminate deviations or
Page 127 and 128: egarding new information. Mental mo
Page 129 and 130: mental models and beliefs that the
Page 131 and 132: element of the definition of a prob
Page 133 and 134: hypothesis evaluation - testing and
Page 135 and 136:
equired by the task is required. Ab
Page 137 and 138:
An additional aspect of expertise r
Page 139 and 140:
• that a process of reflection (b
Page 141 and 142:
• preliminary assumptions and obs
Page 143 and 144:
answer, being evaluated; working un
Page 145 and 146:
inhibited by environments that enge
Page 147 and 148:
While behaviourism and cognitivism
Page 149 and 150:
• the importance of socialisation
Page 151 and 152:
Given these, a moderate level of tr
Page 153 and 154:
the activities: from a priority giv
Page 155 and 156:
The importance of dialogueLearning
Page 157 and 158:
(Gobet and Wood, 1999).learning pro
Page 159 and 160:
ticipating in communities of authen
Page 161 and 162:
Lave et al (1988) suggested that le
Page 163 and 164:
assumption is that a certain minimu
Page 165 and 166:
use knowledge as opposed to passive
Page 167 and 168:
in a domain may be attained through
Page 169 and 170:
chunks, poorly indexed (and therefo
Page 171 and 172:
If we summarise the findings on eac
Page 173 and 174:
The perspective that suggests that
Page 175 and 176:
• the evaluation of learning and
Page 177 and 178:
Level 5 (ages 17-19) metaknowledge
Page 179 and 180:
• support the learner in developi
Page 181 and 182:
student needs to do, or they passiv
Page 183 and 184:
taxonomy (Barrows and Tamblyn, 1980
Page 185 and 186:
students are seen to be able to art
Page 187 and 188:
development of abstract artefacts t
Page 189 and 190:
through the traversal of layers, co
Page 191 and 192:
• internal mental model - the acc
Page 193 and 194:
• opportunity to develop cognitiv
Page 195 and 196:
Chapter 4The research designThis ch
Page 197 and 198:
4.1 Research in Education and ITEdu
Page 199 and 200:
choice continue to be drawn from th
Page 201 and 202:
• the increased importance of the
Page 203 and 204:
intervene in some setting, or to en
Page 205 and 206:
Owen (1997, p 37) presents a genera
Page 207 and 208:
Design Research in ITThe new millen
Page 209 and 210:
(promoting more efficient and effec
Page 211 and 212:
Figure 4.1: Lewin’s spiral of Act
Page 213 and 214:
outcomes - an action outcome whereb
Page 215 and 216:
• it applies multiple techniques
Page 217 and 218:
In conclusion, Action Research, as
Page 219 and 220:
emphasise the importance of partici
Page 221 and 222:
4.2.2 Mixed methodsSome researchers
Page 223 and 224:
derived/validated measures that, in
Page 225 and 226:
Table 4.4: Reflection in the Schola
Page 227 and 228:
has recourse to in order to achieve
Page 229 and 230:
theory and user of that theory, the
Page 231 and 232:
Chapter 5Developing an Action Resea
Page 233 and 234:
a model of organisational culture T
Page 235 and 236:
context. Elliott (1982) refers to t
Page 237 and 238:
disciplines. The continuing challen
Page 239 and 240:
tionary cycles in 2002, 2003 and 20
Page 241 and 242:
Figure 5.5: Education for RE - Acti
Page 243 and 244:
Figure 5.6: Education for RE - Acti
Page 245 and 246:
Students enrolled in ENG260 during
Page 247 and 248:
year. This removed some inclination
Page 249 and 250:
5.3.1 Diagnostic devicesThese inclu
Page 251 and 252:
crete experience (CE) / abstract co
Page 253 and 254:
Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI)/
Page 255 and 256:
affects the individual: it is hard
Page 257 and 258:
personal learning ‘profile’. Al
Page 259 and 260:
also examined. Reports from this ac
Page 261 and 262:
Figure 5.9: Pedagogical dimensions
Page 263 and 264:
cultural sensitivity - allow for cu
Page 265 and 266:
esearch, others triggered by changi
Page 267 and 268:
discipline, at this point based pri
Page 269 and 270:
Sorter (Keirsey and Bates, 1984) wa
Page 271 and 272:
ing: they respond to information pr
Page 273 and 274:
Student example mind maps is shown
Page 275 and 276:
or with assistance from group peers
Page 277 and 278:
of the how do I do this? and what d
Page 279 and 280:
• the ‘correct solution’ to e
Page 281 and 282:
Table 6.2: Instruments applied to C
Page 283 and 284:
• they expect a fundamentally com
Page 285 and 286:
percentage of students were success
Page 287 and 288:
students were comfortable in taking
Page 289 and 290:
strategies on other units within SE
Page 291 and 292:
Chapter 7Implementing a model for c
Page 293 and 294:
This reflection on the outcomes of
Page 295 and 296:
The next section describes changes
Page 297 and 298:
visual where reading text is classe
Page 299 and 300:
Teacher characteristicsThe results
Page 301 and 302:
was well done. The implication of t
Page 303 and 304:
7.2.1 Decoding the disciplineMajor
Page 305 and 306:
necessary for the enhancement of cr
Page 307 and 308:
• outcomes such as the developmen
Page 309 and 310:
Figure 7.6: ENG260 learning objecti
Page 311 and 312:
Table 7.4: Positive influences for
Page 313 and 314:
• constraints are discovered that
Page 315 and 316:
changing shared understanding withi
Page 317 and 318:
Figure 7.9: Setting the scene MurSo
Page 319 and 320:
• identification of the learning
Page 321 and 322:
Figure 7.13: Self assessment suppor
Page 323 and 324:
in the context of implementing Crea
Page 325 and 326:
environment where the teacher was c
Page 327 and 328:
and return to the classroom for the
Page 329 and 330:
all the questions on the site (RM21
Page 331 and 332:
the course) required exploration, s
Page 333 and 334:
The formal assessment of the unit w
Page 335 and 336:
Figure 7.17: Things to add/change/d
Page 337 and 338:
Student E [best aspect]real world s
Page 339 and 340:
the 41% with same or higher MO, 28.
Page 341 and 342:
to set up meetings, discuss their a
Page 343 and 344:
WEAKNESSES of the paper:The results
Page 345 and 346:
paper!Software Engineers with an in
Page 347 and 348:
neous to the tasks undertaken.As we
Page 349 and 350:
ecome vital. Professional practitio
Page 351 and 352:
programmes within Engineering, albe
Page 353 and 354:
offerings at third and fourth year
Page 355 and 356:
Although the strategy discussed and
Page 357 and 358:
On reflectionA key component of the
Page 359 and 360:
Figure 8.4: Positive comments made
Page 361 and 362:
The profile of the student enrolled
Page 363 and 364:
What the summary chart (see Figure
Page 365 and 366:
Table 8.2 for a description of the
Page 367 and 368:
Murdoch’s graduate attributes, to
Page 369 and 370:
in effect a small collection of tex
Page 371 and 372:
expectationstoo much learning too q
Page 373 and 374:
Although the class sessions within
Page 375 and 376:
understanding of how our assignment
Page 377 and 378:
to ensure tasks were on schedule. T
Page 379 and 380:
future design studios. [...] While
Page 381 and 382:
eceived).Impact on student developm
Page 383 and 384:
Simon In my opinion I learn more co
Page 385 and 386:
Curriculum - changes to the RE comp
Page 387 and 388:
equired them to either consult with
Page 389 and 390:
‘whole of group’ work (which ma
Page 391 and 392:
Table 8.8: Tasks and keys applied i
Page 393 and 394:
Figure 8.19: Cumulative activity lo
Page 395 and 396:
Alaina is the most focussed member
Page 397 and 398:
interaction between students’ stu
Page 399 and 400:
approach to the unit• Student 2 (
Page 401 and 402:
As indicated previously (see Table
Page 403 and 404:
Students preconceptions predispose
Page 405 and 406:
cussed. When the unit is not aligne
Page 407 and 408:
Chapter 9Conclusions26 April 2006 -
Page 409 and 410:
The lack of alignment between the a
Page 411 and 412:
a learning dialogue (Laurillard, 19
Page 413 and 414:
and Intellectual Capability. Stance
Page 415 and 416:
These feedback cycles of interventi
Page 417 and 418:
socially through negotiation (Jonas
Page 419 and 420:
Figure 9.2: A conceptual framework
Page 421 and 422:
Table 9.4: Principles for the evalu
Page 423 and 424:
Credibility Guba and Lincoln (1994)
Page 425 and 426:
comment from the accreditation pane
Page 427 and 428:
as a skill to be continually adapte
Page 429 and 430:
for the landscape is SE 3 . As note
Page 431 and 432:
individual preferred learning style
Page 433 and 434:
in the learning theory behind the m
Page 435 and 436:
The Studio Learning model provides
Page 437 and 438:
BibliographyAdams-Price C E (ed) (1
Page 439 and 440:
Aurum A, Handzic M and Gardiner A (
Page 441 and 442:
Billett S (1996) “Towards a model
Page 443 and 444:
Budgen D (2004) “Computing Curric
Page 445 and 446:
Conklin J (2005) “Wicked problems
Page 447 and 448:
Diaz-Herrera J L and Hilburn T B (e
Page 449 and 450:
Ezzy D (2002) Qualitative Analysis:
Page 451 and 452:
Glass R L (1995) “A theory about
Page 453 and 454:
Hatten R A (1997) Guidelines for Ef
Page 455 and 456:
Jonassen D H (2000) “Towards a de
Page 457 and 458:
Lave J, Smith S and Butler M (1988)
Page 459 and 460:
Lubars M, Potts C and Richer C (199
Page 461 and 462:
Meyer J H F and Boulton-Lewis G M (
Page 463 and 464:
Norton L S, Owens T and Clark L (20
Page 465 and 466:
Reeves T C (1994) “Evaluating wha
Page 467 and 468:
Scott G and Wilson D N (2002) “Tr
Page 469 and 470:
Suwa M, Gero J and Purcell T (2000)
Page 471 and 472:
Watson H J, Young D, Miranda S, Rob
Page 473 and 474:
Appendix AThe Murdoch contextAs not
Page 475 and 476:
components.These are common to all
Page 477 and 478:
Table A.1: Kolb Learning Style Inve
Page 479 and 480:
a strong and important minority: th
Page 481 and 482:
sections. Once authenticated as a m
Page 483 and 484:
help and underlying manuals. The fo
Page 485 and 486:
Appendix BInstrumentsAlthough most
Page 487 and 488:
3. How useful have the details of t
Page 489 and 490:
B.2 School of Engineering Year Surv
Page 491 and 492:
B.3 Student Surveys of UnitsUnivers
Page 493 and 494:
B.4 Attachment 1: Educational Relev
Page 495 and 496:
Systems Theoryand PracticeRequireme
Page 497 and 498:
Fundamentals ofDesignHuman Computer
Page 499 and 500:
numbers (e.g. 2.5,4.5). The scales
Page 501 and 502:
Topics not specifiedabove:Topic:Top
Page 503 and 504:
Creativityinstead (eg RE Topicsinst
Page 505 and 506:
analysis,interpretation anddecision
Page 507 and 508:
following activities during the las
Page 509 and 510:
Non-profit associationOther, please
Page 511 and 512:
managementprocessquality andimprove
Page 513 and 514:
teststhroughRequirementsManagementc
Page 515 and 516:
Appendix CStudent Reflective Journa
Page 517 and 518:
Alaina Week 3What did I achieve thi
Page 519 and 520:
DermotWeek 10This week has been goo
show all

Complete thesis - Murdoch University

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?