A look at how a large student team took on an industry standard project. Presented at the University of Chester Staff Conference, September 2017.

1. “Working together, they get
the job done”
A look at how a large student team took on an
industry standard project

2. Who we are
Ralph Ferneyhough
Senior Lecturer
Games Development
Lee Beever
Lecturer
Games Development

3. Introduction
 Last Year
 A New Challenge
 The Setup
 Back to Herding Cats
 The Result
 Problems… and insights
 Conclusion

4. Last Year
 Why we did group work
 What problems we encountered
 Strategies for fitting group work into University
 Is it worth it? A definite Yes.
 Slides are still available:
https://www.slideshare.net/
RalphFerneyhough/
herding-cats-65831116

5. A New Challenge
 CO5019 – Experiential Learning for Computing
 Designed to provide a Work Based Learning equivalent
 Games students already experienced in group work
 Needed to do something different for them
 Overhaul of next year’s Level 5 group work imminent
 Decided to try a “dummy run” concept…
 Fifteen students. One group project. Fifteen students. One survivor.

6. The Setup
 Brief:
“Develop a mobile/web game prototype which could
promote the Games Development course, and the University
of Chester as a whole.”
 One team – three sub-teams
 Design and Production
 Programming
 Art and Content creation

7. Back to Herding Cats
 How to manage this process:
 Academically
 Assessment by portfolio
 Team/Sub-team mentors
 Professionally
 Kanban and Scrum – especially with a larger team
 Set standards and expectations high (i.e. industry level)

8. Industry Tools
 Hack’n’Plan & Trello
 Schedule and Planning tools
 Band
 Communication Tool
 Source Control (SVN)
 Very specific to software development
 Collaborative documentation
 E.g. Google Docs

9. Tools Screenshots

10. The Result
 A very competent prototype:

11. Screenshots

12. Problems…
 Different enthusiasm levels
 Very dynamic leader with high standards
 Art of delegation and trust
 Can be an issue with peers and friends / respect
 Fast start… not sustained
 Workload became excessive leading to burnout in some
 Freeloaders – but not as much as last year –strong leader?
 Source control was hard to use
 Reflective reports are still not handled well

13. …and Insights…
 Students can produce some excellent work!
 Our decision to set the project was effective
 However, it isn’t all about outcome, but the process
 Management (Tutors) needs to be hands on at times
 “Sticks” – penalties, warnings (marking criteria essential)
 “Carrots” – Prototype taken to MRA
 Marking always needs to reflect the individual
 Students need space to fail and learn

14. …more Insights
 For subjects like this, can be a more effective experience than a
WBL placement
 The output of this single team was at least as good as three
separate teams from the previous year
 Occasionally some students were isolated from the group
 Atmosphere was better – team generally had fun
 Work was focused into correct sub-teams and therefore more
distributed
 Each “specialist” had more support and backup
 Friendly competitiveness

15. Conclusion
 All the problems and insights are typical of working life
 Excellent experience for the students
 They get to understand things aren’t always perfect
 Helps beat the “snowflake” culture – students learn their
opinion isn’t always right, and have to compromise
 Building student resilience
 This kind of project is ideal for portfolios

16. Thanks
 With thanks to:
Adam Hughes, Informatics Centre Manager
Matt Griffiths, Games Team Mentor
James, Kate and Neil in the IC