LOGIN TO YOUR ACCOUNT

Username
Password
Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Or use your Academic/Social account:

Congratulations!

You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.

Important!

Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Name:
Username:
Password:
Verify Password:
E-mail:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Swigger, Kathleen; Alpaslan, Ferda Nur; Dafoulas, George; Serce, Fatma Cemile; Brazile, Robert; Lopez, Victor (2010)
Languages: English
Types: Unknown
Subjects:
A key factor in the success of global software development learning teams is the communication that occurs among the group. Various task characteristics, however, may affect the both the quality and quantity of the group communication. This study investigates the effects of task type on the communication behaviors of student teams engaged in a software development project. Two groups of teams completed assignments that varied in degree of task type and product. Content analysis was used to identify distinct patterns of interactions and examine how these patterns were associated with task type. Results indicate that differences in task context and product do not have large effects on the communication behaviors of global software teams. These findings will provide a basis for creating instruction that can help maximize successful communication among global software learning teams.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • 1. J. Andriessen, Collaboration in computer conferencing. In A. M. O'Donnell, C. E. HmeloSilver, & G. Erkens (Eds.). Collaborative learning, reasoning, and technology, 2006, 197- 232. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
    • 2. K. Agerup, M. Busser, A case-study on collaborative learning in distributed, cross-cultural teams, International Conference on Engineering Education, Gainesville, Fl., October 16-21, 2004.
    • 3. R. Bakeman, J. Gottman, Observing interaction: An introduction to sequential analysis, Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press, 1997.
    • 4. P. Bouillon, J. Krinke, S. Lukosch, Software engineering projects in distant teaching, Proceedings of Conference on Software Engineering & Training, 2005, 147-154.
    • 5. L. Burnell, J. Priest, J. Durrett, Teaching distributed multidisciplinary software development, IEEE Software, 29 (5) (2002) 86-93.
    • 6. E. Carmel, Global Software Development Teams: Collaborating Across Borders Time Zones. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ, 2002.
    • 7. K. Cho, D. Jonassen, The effects of argumentation scaffolds on argumentation and problem solving, Educational Technology: Research & Development, 50 (3) (2002) 5-22.
    • 8. C, Cramton, P. Hinds, Subgroup dynamics in internationally distributed teams: Ethnocentrism or cross-national learning? Research in Organizational Behavior, 26 (2005) 231-263.
    • 9. I Crnkovic, R. Land, Taking global software development from Industry University and back again, Proceedings of ICSE International Workshop on Global Software Development, Sjogren, 2003J, 2003.
    • 10. D. Curtis, M. Lawson, Exploring Collaborative On-line Learning, JALN 5 (1) (2001) 21-34.
    • 11. J. Cushing, K. Cunningham. G. Freeman, Towards best practices in software teamwork, Journal of Computing Sciences in Colleges 19 (2) (2004) 72 - 81.
    • 12. B. De Wever, T. Schellens, M. Valcke, H. Van Keer, Content analysis schemes to analyze transcripts of online asynchronous discussion groups: A review. Computers and Education, 46, (2006) 6-2
    • 13. H. Edwards, V. Sridhar, Analysis of the effectiveness of global virtual teams in software engineering projects, Proceedings of the 36th Hawaii International conference on systems sciences (HICSS03), hicss 19b, 2003.
    • 14. C. Fulford, S. Zhang, Perceptions of interaction: The critical predictor in distance education, The American Journal of Distance Education 7 (3), (1993) 8-21.
    • 15. D. Garrison, T. Anderson, W. Archer, Critical thinking, cognitive presence, and computer conferencing in distance education. American Journal of Distance Education 15(1) (2001) 7- 23.
    • 16. M. Guzdial, P. Ludovice, M. Realff, T. Morley, K. Carroll, When collaboration doesn't work, Proceedings of the International Conference of the Learning Sciences, 2002, 125-130.
    • 17. J. Herbsleb, A. Mockus, T. Finholt, R. Grinter, Distance, dependencies, and delay in a global collaboration, Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 2000, 319-328.
    • 18. P. Herder, E. Sjoer, Group-based learning in internationally distributed teams: An evaluation of a cross-Atlantic experiment, ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, Boulder, CO., S1F_7-S1F_12, 2003.
    • 19. J. Hewett, How habitual online practices affect the development of asynchronous discussion threads. Journal Education Computer Research 28 (2003) 31-45.
    • 20. A. Hollingshead, G. Wittenbaum, G. Jacobsohn, S. Faidin, Competitive members in cooperative groups, JACM Conference, 2005.
    • 21. A. Hollingshead, J. McGrath, K. O'Connor, Group task performance and communication technology, Small Group Research, 24 (3) (1993) 307-333.
    • 22. A. Jeong, Sequential analysis of group interaction and critical thinking in online threaded discussions, The American Journal of Distance Education, 17 (1) (2003) 25-43.
    • 23. D. Johnson, R. Johnson, Cooperation and the Use of Technology. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research for educational communications and technology, 1017-1043, 1996, New York: Macmillan.
    • 24. R. Jorczak, The effects of task characteristics on higher-order learning in online collaborative learning. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, 2008.
    • 25. R. Kraut, L. Streeter, Coordination in software development, Communication of the ACM, 38 (3) (1995) 69-81.
    • 26. P. Layzell, O. Brereton, A. French, Supporting collaboration in distributed software engineering teams, The Asia-Pacific Software Engineering Conference, December 5-8, 2000, 38-45.
    • 27. R. Marra, A review of research methods for assessing the content of computer-mediated discussion, Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 17 (3) (2006) 243-267.
    • 28. R. Marra, J. Moore, A. Klimczek, A Comparative analysis of content analysis protocols for online discussion forums, Educational Technology Research and Development 52 (2) (2004) 23 - 40.
    • 29. B. Meyer, The unspoken revolution is software engineer, IEEE Computer, 39 (1) (2006) 121-123.
    • 30. B. Munkvold, L. Line, Training students in distributed collaboration: Experiences from two pilot projects, Journal of Informatics Education and Research, 3 (2) (2005) 1-17.
    • 31. D. Newman, C. Johnson, C. Cochrane, B. Webb, An experiment in group learning technology, Interpersonal Computing and Technology, 4 (1) (1996) 57-74.
    • 32. M. Paasivaara, C. Lassenius, Collaboration practices in global inter-organizational software development projects, Journal Software Process: Improvement and Practice, 8(4) (2003) 183- 199.
    • 33. M. Purvis, S. Cranfield, Educational experiences from a global software engineering project, 6th Australasian Computing Education Conference (ACE2004), Dunedin, New Zealand, 269- 275, 2004.
    • 34. S. Sarker, S. Sahay, Understanding virtual team development: An interpretive study, Journal of Association Information Science, 4(1) (2003).
    • 35. V. Savicki, M. Kelley, D. Lingenfelter, Gender, group composition, and task type in small task groups using computer-mediated, Computers in Human Behavior, 12 (4) (1996) 549- 565.
    • 36. M. Scardamalia, C. Bereiter, Computer support for knowledge-building communities, The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 3 (3) 1994, 265-283.
    • 37. F. Serce, K. Swigger, F. Alpaslan, R. Brazile, G. Dafoulas, V. Lopez, Exploring the communication behavior among global software development learners, International journal of Computer Applications in Technology, (in press).
    • 38. A. Sherry, C. Fulford, S. Zhang, Assessing distance learners' satisfaction with instruction. The American Journal of Distance Education, 12 (3) (2004) 4-28.
    • 39. D. Smite, Requirements management in distribute projects, Journal Universal Knowledge Management, 1 (2) (2006) 69-76.
    • 40. T. Schümmer, GAMA - A Pattern Language for Computer Supported Dynamic Collaboration,” Proceedings of the 8th European conference on pattern languages of programs, 2004, 53-11, Konstanz: UK.
    • 41. J. Strijbos, P. Kirschner, R. Martens, What we know about CSCL: And implementing it in higher education, Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic/Spinger Verlag, 2004.
    • 42. A. Veerman, E. Veldhuis-Diermanse, Collaborative learning through electronic knowledge construction. In A. M. O'Donnel, C. E. Hmelo-Silver, & G. Erkens (Eds.). Collaborative learning, reasoning, and technology 323-354, 2006. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
    • 43. G. von Krogh, J. Ross, Kleine, Knowing in Firms: Understanding, Managing and Measuring Knowledge, Sage Press, London, 1998.
    • 44. J. Walther, Computer-mediated Communication: Impersonal, interpersonal, and hyperpersonal interaction, Communication Research, 23 (1) (1996) 3-43.
    • 45. J. Wiley, J. Bailey, (2006). Effects of collaboration and argumentation on learning from web pages. In A. M. O'Donnel, C. E. Hmelo-Silver, & G. Erkens (Eds.). Collaborative learning, reasoning, and technology, 2006, 297-322. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Funded by projects

  • NSF | HCC: Improving the Performa...

Cite this article