SCRUM-based group work and assessment: a case study (m.cubric)

Marija Cubric, Business School/LTI, 05-05-11

SCRUM (rugby) – the act or method of restarting play after an infringement when the two opposing packs of forwards group together with heads down and arms interlocked and push to gain ground while the scrum half throws the ball in and the hookers attempt to scoop it out to their own team (dictionnary.com)

Agenda

SCRUM =>

Product Development =>

Learning and Teaching

+

Case-study (groupwork assessment design & Students’ views)

“The relay race approach to product development may conflict with the goals of maximum speed and flexibility. Instead a holistic or rugby approach where a team tries to go the distance as a unit, passing the ball back and forth may better serve today¹s competitive requirements.” Takeuchi and Nonaka (1986)

Takeuchi H. and Nonaka I. (1986) "The New New Product Development Game”, Harvard Business Review

SCRUM – a Project Management Framework

Iteration planning Iteration

retrospective

Iterationreview

TeamProduct Owner

PROCESS

&

Roles &Acti-vities

Image adapted from: mountaingoatsoftware.com

SCRUM Principles

Cooperation amongst students

Evidence of active Learning

Student-staff contact

Prompt feedback & responding to feedback

Chickering & Gamson (1987)

Chickering A., Gamson Z.F. (1987) Seven Principles For Good Practice In Undergraduate EducationThe American Association For Higher Education Bulletin

Mapping SCRUM to L&T ContextPM Roles, Artifacts and Activities L&T Roles, Artifacts and ActivitiesProduct OwnerTeamScrum MasterProduct BacklogSprintPotentially shippable product incrementDaily SCRUM meetingsSprint PlanningSprint ReviewSprint RetrospectiveSCRUM of SCRUMsSoftware release platform

Mapping SCRUM to L&T ContextPM Roles, Artifacts and Activities L&T Roles, Artifacts and ActivitiesProduct Owner Module Leader/TeacherTeam Students’ groupScrum Master [Alternate role between team members]Product Backlog Coursework Sprint 1 or 2-weeks long coursework iterationPotentially shippable product increment

Coursework in progress submitted for feedback

Daily SCRUM meetings [10 minutes long group meeting]Sprint Planning Iteration planning meetingSprint Review Iteration review meetingSprint Retrospective Iteration reflection SCRUM of SCRUMs [Meeting between representatives of all groups]Software release platform Wiki

SCRUM - a L&T Framework

Weeklyplanning

Weeklyreview & reflection

Group

Coursework specification

Weekly assignments

Weekly group meeting

Final complete coursework submission

Teacher Image adapted from: mountaingoatsoftware.com

Case-study*Module: PG module on Agile Project Management** (“immersive learning”)

Programs:

MSc Project Management (Business School) ,

MSc in Business Computing (Computer Science)

Number of students: 24 (split into 6 groups of 4)

Sprint: 5*2 weeks long sprints

Feedback: Studynet online form (after each sprint)

Development platform: Wikispaces

_________

* Method tailored through three consecutive academic years (started in 2007-8)

** Method is generic

Project Specification

Project Specification (group work)

Sprint Planning

Marking Rubric

Group Report (example)GROUP: School Of Thought

NOTE: Input values are highlighted - everyting else are formulae that should not be changed

TOTALPER

ITERATIONR11 table 1st iter. 2nd iter. 3rd iter. 4th iter. 5th iter.a.     Number of new articles added to the “Agiloepedia” 2 1 2 2 1 0b.     Number of discussion posts 85 5 27 16 9 28c.     Number of edits See table belowd.     Sum of word counts of all articles owned by group 4468 886 1015 977 563 1027e.     (Numbered) list of recommendations from the feedback implemented in the iteration See belowf.      Agile principles and practices applied in the previous iteration See belowg.     Any problems preventing the group from delivering the work in the next iteration Noneh.     Turnitin similarity index for the articles owned by the group and attached turnitin report for all updated articles (new and existing) or as a minimum the URL of the turnitin report 4% 8% and 5%

10% CAS; Cohesion 4% 4% Pernding

i.       Min, max, mean and standard deviation (σ) values of group contribution of individual edits See table below

j.       Number of internal links included (total/since the last iteration) 52 4 23 6 6 13

Calculations for R11 EDITS PER ITERATIONmember total number of edits 1st iter. 2nd iter. 3rd iter. 4th iter. 5th iter.Member 1 176 50 47 27 8 44Member 2 158 33 39 11 29 46Member 3 127 7 21 2 54 43Member 4 83 26 14 4 14 25

min 83 7 14 2 8 25max 176 50 47 27 54 46mean 136 29 30.25 11 26.25 39.5stdev 35.26 15.41 13.29 9.82 17.75 8.44stedv% 6.48% 13.29% 10.99% 22.33% 16.91% 5.34%

Links to Theory …

Learning by writing …

Learning by making …

Learning by connecting …

Writing uniquely corresponds to some very powerful learning strategies such as: multi-representational and integrative re-enforcement, immediate self-provided feedback, establishment of systematic connections and relationships, analysis and synthesis (Emig, 1977)

Effective learning happens in the context where “the learner is consciously engaged in constructing a public entity, whether it's a sand castle on the beach or a theory of the universe” (Pappert, 1991)

Students engage in creating knowledge that can benefit others (students and teachers) (Holmes et al., 2001)

Learning occurs through pattern-recognition and connecting specialized information sets (Siemens, 2005)

Emig, J. (1977) Writing as a mode of learning. College Composition and Communication, 28, 122-127. National Council of Teachers of English

Papert, S. (Ed.). (1991). Situating Constructionism. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation

Holmes, B.et al (2001). Communal constructivism: Students constructing learning for as well as with others. Technology And Teacher Education Annual, 3, 3114-3119

Siemens G (2005) Connectivism: A Learning Theory For The Digital Age. Elearnspace [Online] http://bit.ly/hiPhtk

How students describe the method …

student views

Students value … tutor’s regular and prompt feedback … tutor’s interest and enthusiasm for the subject … links with practice and employability

So in this way you have to perform some kind of work each week, you end up reviewing what you just learned.

I think it’s the speed at which we had to engage … maybe in contrast to other modules where there wasn’t as participatory or as involved, with Agile, after a very short amount of time you are actually involved with doing things…..

I found that I had to deliver something every Sunday … And like you said the first couple of weeks it’s fairly intense in terms of energy levels, but you just learn to get something out on the Sunday.

Students’ learning was enhanced with constant review of the subject … early engagement with the module … tutor’s detailed feedback

…. A lecturer interested in a subject would have some current connection with it, it’s an energy that you can feel

We got feedback after three or four days from the time we submitted work and in other modules we submitted coursework and its like three or four weeks or even more before we get feedback. And sometimes when you get feedback, it’s not worth it because you don’t need it anymore.

I started working the other day for Motorola and they are working using agile environments, agile methodologies. I don’t know anything about agile before I took the course but right now I am realising that we are using exactly the same things as Motorola. So it was really practical, …

Are findings from the business field applicable to L&T ?E.g. Whitworth&Biddle (2007)- motivation and mohesion in agile teams influenced by:-Clear objectives, ease of interaction, frequent iterative delivery-“Agile planning was noted as especially valuable as a means of generating group agreement, and was seen to greatly reduce the tension and conflict”

How useful are group reports as evidence of group cohesion?

-useful for managing expectations (e.g. TurnitIn similarity index useful)-Statistical measures could be tweaked, and too much time spent on making them look good – perhaps measurements should be done by the tutor?

Feedback NOT ALWAYS used-feedback on iteration X used in iteration X+1, but improvements of iteration X sometimes delayed till the end

What are the main factors influencing group cohesion?Increased visibility of individual contributions?Explicit measurements of group cohesions (min, max, avg, stdev)?Cultural background (e.g. Hofstede, 2001) ?

my observations

Whitworth E. and Biddle R. (2007) motivation and Cohesion in agile teams; ProceedingXP'07; Springer-Verlag Berlin, Heidelberg

Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture's Consequences: comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nations (2nd ed.).

Evaluation

Encourag

es Stu

dent-Fac

ulty Contac

t

Encourag

es Stu

dents Cooperati

on

Encourag

es Acti

ve Le

arning

Gives P

rompt F

eedback

Emphasize

s Tim

e on Task

Communicates H

igh Exp

ectations

Respects

Diverse

Talents

0

5

10

15

20

25

AgreeNeither agree or disagreeDisagree