User Centred Requirements Processes in MATURE: The Big Picture

971 views
889 views

Published on

Presentation at the MATURE Workshop on User Centred Requirements Processes for E-Learning and Knowledge Management – A European-Wide Perspective, London, July 2009

Published in: Education, Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
971
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
9
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
16
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

User Centred Requirements Processes in MATURE: The Big Picture

  1. 1. MATURE Continuous Social Learning in Knowledge Networks MATURE Approach to Requirements Engineering Andrew Ravenscroft, John Cook (LTRI) Andreas Schmidt (FZI) http://mature-ip.eu London, July 2, 2009
  2. 2. Outline  Methodological outline  Year 1 Design Studies  Formative evaluation  Use Case Development & Initial Requirements  Year 2 Demonstrator Planning MATURE - Continuous Social Learning in Knowledge Networks 2 2
  3. 3. Design-based research (DBR) “The challenge of design-based research is in flexibly developing research trajectories that meet our dual goals of refining locally valuable innovations and developing more globally usable knowledge for the field.” (Design-based research collective, 2002, Educational Researcher) “The design-science paradigm seeks to extend boundaries of human and organizational capabilities by creating new and innovative artefacts” (Hevner et. al., 2009), MIS Quarterly) MATURE - Continuous Social Learning in Knowledge Networks 3 3
  4. 4. Design Study Approach in Year 1 MATURE - Continuous Social Learning in Knowledge Networks
  5. 5. Design Studies  8 critical experiments in design • explored key aspects that needed to be validated prior to embarking on a full-scale draft requirements specification  Characteristics • Exploratory not confirmatory • Focussed and time limited • Based on existing tools with limited further developments • Incorporated both conceptual and software development foci • Application partner involvement (consortium/associate) o Inspired by real user needs o Developed in close interaction with end user representatives o Collected feedback on the end result • Evaluated o Cover key aspects and phases of knowledge maturing? MATURE - Continuous Social Learning in Knowledge Networks 5 5
  6. 6. Design Studies in the project organization MATURE - Continuous Social Learning in Knowledge Networks 6 6
  7. 7. Evaluation and coordination: DS Grids  DS grids linked design activities to conceptions and activities consistent with knowledge maturing (KM), through 12 questions • What aspects? (conceptual, technical, user) • Specified whether PLME, OLME, both  Provided an aggregated picture of design activities  KM: phases covered? commonalities? gaps? candidates for integration? …advance organisers to get design teams thinking in terms of KM, ‘user requirements in context’ 7 7
  8. 8. Use Case Development & Requirements Definition Use Case Development & Requirements Specification MATURE - Continuous Social Learning in Knowledge Networks
  9. 9. Overview of activities MATURE - Continuous Social Learning in Knowledge Networks 9 9
  10. 10. SER Model by Fischer MATURE - Continuous Social Learning in Knowledge Networks 10 10
  11. 11. SER applied to the use case process MATURE - Continuous Social Learning in Knowledge Networks 11 11
  12. 12. Coverage: Use cases with focus on maturing phases MATURE - Continuous Social Learning in Knowledge Networks 12 12
  13. 13. On to Year 2: from Use Cases to Demonstrators
  14. 14. Prioritizing use cases: where should focus on first?  Useful and user-driven: Solving a real problem of application partners  Focussed: Adressing a key knowledge maturing issue, yielding a distinctive solution  Relevant to TEL research: Adressing a key challenge for technology-enhanced learning research (using the PROLEARN TEL priorities)  Feasible: Feasible within the project timeframe and resource constraints MATURE - Continuous Social Learning in Knowledge Networks 14 14
  15. 15. How did we approach it?  Collecting priorities from application partners and scientific partners  Aggregating high priority use cases into groups  Development of demonstrator definitions • Scenario • Relevance for knowledge maturing • Benefit for application partners • Research challenges  Cross-checking demonstrator definitions with TEL priorities from the PROLEARN Roadmap  Concrete planning (time, resources, involvement) MATURE - Continuous Social Learning in Knowledge Networks 15 15
  16. 16. Demonstrators  Demonstrators covering groups of use cases • Implementing a coherent scenario • Feasible within one year • Can be evaluated within the next year • Clearly illustrate the added value of MATURE in an example  Will evolve into the “MATURE solution” (OLME/PLME/Maturing Services) • built on a shared infrastructure • Key architectural issues will be solved across demonstrators  The other use cases will be added or redefined at a later stage MATURE - Continuous Social Learning in Knowledge Networks 16 16
  17. 17. Overview of Demonstrators  Demonstrator 1 Co n Assuring Quality for Social Learning in Content ten t Networks  Demonstrator 2 Sem Developing Collaborative Understanding an t ics  Demonstrator 3 People Tagging for Organizational Peo ple Development  Demonstrator 4 P ro Maturing Process Knowledge and Learning Support cesses in Business Processes MATURE - Continuous Social Learning in Knowledge Networks 17 17
  18. 18. Summary  Design-based research as an underlying methodology  First year activities were 8 focused design studies • early and critical experiments in design that informed further design activities prior to Use Case process (year 1)  Use case definition as a moderated bottom-up process  4 Demonstrators covering groups of use cases with high priority and a coherent theme for year 2 • will constitute the 1st Prototype after year 2 MATURE - Continuous Social Learning in Knowledge Networks 18 18

×