A design for team peer code review

ABSTRACT

The software industry needs our graduates to have significant and meaningful experiences with teamwork. A new design has been developed for a teamwork exercise based on peer code review. This design uses the three Ss of building assignments for cooperative learning: Same problem, Specific choices, and Simultaneous report. Students perform peer code review individually, and within and between stable small groups. The code can be sanitized student work or may be altered by the instructor to meet specific course learning objectives. The review is done in three phases. First, individuals answer yes or no to questions that evaluate the quality of the design and code. Then each group answers the same set of questions. When the groups have completed their evaluation, the class joins together to reveal and discuss the answers. This design was successfully implemented during the 2003-2004 academic year in an introductory programming class. This design is applicable to more advanced classes with significant programming assignments. Future work includes extending this structure to give students experience with other software engineering artifacts early in their academic careers.

REFERENCES

• 1: Arnow, D., Barshay, O., "WebToTeach: A Web-based Automated Program Checker", Frontiers in Education (FIE99), San Juan, Puerto Rico, November 1999.
• 2: Bloom, B. S., Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. Handbook I: Cognitive Domain, David McKay Co., 1956.
• 3: Cohen, L., "Code Reviews", Linux Journal, Volume 2001, Issue 81, January 2001, Article 11.
• 4: Fink, L. D., Creating Significant Learning Experiences: An Integrated Approach to Designing College Courses, Jossey-Bass, 2003.
• 5: Fink, L. D., "Beyond Small Groups: Harnessing the Extraordinary Power of Learning Teams" in Team-Based Learning: A Transformative Use of Small Groups, Praeger, Michaelsen, L.K., Knight, A. B., and Fink, L.D. editors, 2002.
• 6: Michaelsen, L. K. and Knight, A. B., "Creating Effective Assignments: A Key Component of Team Based Learning" in Team-Based Learning: A Transformative Use of Small Groups, Praeger, Michaelsen, L.K., Knight, A. B., and Fink, L.D. editors, 2002.
• 7: Michaelsen, L. K., "Getting Started with Team Based Learning" in Team-Based Learning: A Transformative Use of Small Groups, Praeger, Michaelsen, L.K., Knight, A. B., and Fink, L.D. editors, 2002.
• 8: A. Trivedi , Dulal C. Kar , Holly Patterson-McNeill, Automatic assignment management and peer evaluation, Journal of Computing Sciences in Colleges, v.18 n.4, p.30-37, April 2003
• 9: Trytten, D. A., "Progressing from Small Group Work to Cooperative Learning: A Case Study from Computer Science, Journal of Engineering Education, Volume 90, No. 1, January, 2001, pp 85--92.
• 10: Trytten, D. A., "Progressing from Small Group Work to Cooperative Learning: A Case Study from Computer Science", Proceedings of the 1999 Frontiers in Education Conference, November 1999.

INDEX TERMS

Primary Classification:
  D. Software
  D.2 SOFTWARE ENGINEERING
      D.2.5 Testing and Debugging
          Subjects: Code inspections and walk-throughs

General Terms:
Design, Documentation, Management

Keywords:
cooperative learning, education, peer code review, software engineering, team work