Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Tues m3 johannes_magenheim

548 views

Published on

Talk given at: WCC2010 in Brisbane (KCKS2010), Title: "Informatics Systems and Modeling- Case Studies of Expert Interviews"

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Tues m3 johannes_magenheim

  1. 1. Informatics Systems and Modeling - Case Studies of Expert Interviews Johannes Magenheim (presenter) Leopold Lehner, Wolfgang Nelles, Thomas Rhode, Niclas Schaper, Sigrid Schubert and Peer Stechert University of Paderborn Computer Science Education Group University of Siegen Department of Computer Science and E-Learning 1
  2. 2. Outline Informatics Systems and Modeling - Case Studies of Expert Interviews •  Theoretically derived Competence Model •  Objectives and Research Methodology •  Achieved research Results: - Empirically refined Competence Model - Differences in Experts Views on Scenarios and Competence Components •  Further Research Tasks SES PS JSM TR LL NIS WN Sigrid Schubert Johannes Magenheim Niclas Schaper Peer Stechert Leopold Lehner Wolfgang Nelles Thomas Rhode Electrical Engineering & Informatics Informatics, CSE Organizational Psychology University of Siegen University of Paderborn University of Paderborn 2 Johannes Magenheim, University of Paderborn
  3. 3. Theoretical Relations Modelling, System Comprehension System Competences Properties Informatics System CS Curricula System System Development Application 3 Johannes Magenheim, University of Paderborn
  4. 4. Theoretically derived Competence Model 4 Johannes Magenheim, University of Paderborn
  5. 5. CSE: Objectives and Research Methodology 1a. Traditional: 1b. New since 2006: 5. Improving learning environments System Development System Comprehension since 2011 Evaluation of learning Analysis of international environments by syllabi and curricula competence measurement Development of competence stimuli (authentic and complex) 2. Theoretically derived 4. Instruments to competence model measure competence 4/2008 4/2010 30 expert interviews (Critical Incident Technique) Development of test items 6. Competence and observation of learner- Level Model centred approaches 2011 Qualitative content analysis (meaning units) 3. Empirically refined 7. Competence Expert Rating competence Model Development Model 2/2010 2012 5 Johannes Magenheim, University of Paderborn
  6. 6. Research Methodology •  30 Expert Interviews •  3 Groups of Experts - Experts of Informatics - Experts of Didactics of Informatics - Expert Informatics Teachers •  Interviews on Use Cases (Critical Incident Technique) •  Content Analysis (Mayring) 6 Johannes Magenheim, University of Paderborn
  7. 7. Prof. Dr. Johannes Magenheim University of Paderborn – Computer Science Education Group 2 Examples for Use Cases (Scenarios) Two complex hypothetic scenarios were content analyzed: (1) “Merchandise Management System” which especially deals with system development requirements and (2) “Testing of Unknown Software” which deals with system comprehension requirements in particular 7 Johannes Magenheim, University of Paderborn
  8. 8. Scenario “Merchandise Management System” Scenario “Merchandise Management System”: “You are asked to develop a software based merchandise management system for a small school kiosk.” Question 1: “What is your course of action to solve this task? Which software engineering workflows do you have to process?” Question 2: “Which graphical models would you apply?” Question 2.1: “Which informatics views are important for this task?” Question 2.2: “Which complexity would you assign to this task?” Question 3: “Which cognitive skills are required to develop such a software system?” Question 4: “Could you imagine a potential pupil’s procedure to solve this problem?” Question 5: “Which attitudes, social communicative skills and motivational aspects are necessary to solve this problem?” 8 Johannes Magenheim, University of Paderborn
  9. 9. Empirically refined Competence Model 9 Johannes Magenheim, University of Paderborn
  10. 10. Example K4 Non-Cognitive Skills Theoretically derived competence model Empirically refined competence model 10 Johannes Magenheim, University of Paderborn
  11. 11. Further Research Questions   In which respect do the experts differ in their competence-relevant statements?   How can these different contributions be explained with reference to different expert perspectives, backgrounds and attitudes towards the topic? 11 Johannes Magenheim, University of Paderborn
  12. 12. Further Outcomes   Experts of all groups contributed to the refinement of the competence model and the appropriateness of the theoretically derived categories of the competence model of informatics modelling and comprehension were confirmed   Especially, the relevant competence dimension K1 (BASIC COMPETENCIES) with its categories K1.2 (SYSTEM COMPREHENSION) and K1.3 (SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT) and their sub-categories could be confirmed by the descriptions of the experts.   Furthermore, the experts´ answers on questions concerning social competence requirements provided valuable and confirming clues to the fourth dimension Non-Cognitive Skills.   The closer the experts´ relationship to school, the more differentiated the non-cognitive skills are described. 12 Johannes Magenheim, University of Paderborn
  13. 13. Further Outcomes •  Furthermore: especially experts of informatics felt uncomfortable with scenarios, which covered parts of informatics, that were not in their research field. •  The expert of informatics expressed not a negative but a positive attitude towards the appropriateness of the scenario for informatics secondary education – in contrast to the expert of didactics and the expert teacher, which were more critical concerning the appropriateness of the scenario •  We have to be careful to generalize that experts of informatics are more critical concerning the school-appropriateness of informatics learning contents. Such appraisals might also depend on the personal experiences or other background characteristics of an expert 13 Johannes Magenheim, University of Paderborn
  14. 14. Further work to do......... •  It is necessary to conduct additional empirical research steps to proof the content and criteria validity of the developed competence model: The evaluation of the content validity of the model should be accomplished by an expert rating. •  The different informatics experts have to rate the extracted competence descriptions concerning their relevance, difficulty, representativeness and degree of differentiation. •  The evaluation of the criteria validity of the competence model should be accomplished by developing instruments to measure the different facets of the competence model and the criteria behaviour •  The resulting correlations between both can be interpreted as indicators for criteria validity of the competence model. 14 Johannes Magenheim, University of Paderborn
  15. 15. Further work to do....... 1a. Traditional: 1b. New since 2006: 5. Improving learning environments System Development System Comprehension since 2011 Evaluation of learning Analysis of international environments by syllabi and curricula competence measurement Development of competence stimuli (authentic and complex) 2. Theoretically derived 4. Instruments to competence model measure competence 4/2008 4/2010 30 expert interviews (Critical Incident Technique) Development of test items 6. Competence and observation of learner- Level Model centred approaches 2011 Qualitative content analysis (meaning units) 3. Empirically refined 7. Competence Expert Rating competence Model Development Model 2/2010 2012 15 Johannes Magenheim, University of Paderborn
  16. 16. Thank you Prof. Dr. J. Magenheim University of Paderborn Computer Science Education Group Fuerstenallee 11 33102 Paderborn (Germany) jsm@uni-paderborn.de http://ddi.upb.de 16

×