Agile CS1 Labs: eXtreme Programming Practices in an Introductory Programming Course Dawn McKinney, Julie Froeseth, Jason Robertson, Leo F. Denton, David Ensminger School of Computer and Information Sciences, University of South Alabama, Mobile, AL 36688 Our presentation is about our experience with XP practices in a freshman computer science foundation programming course. This course is the second semester of a 2-semester introductory problem-solving and programming course using Java. The paper published in the proceedings is about our Fall 2003 experience. We implemented some changes in the Spring and will talk about both Fall and Spring including what we learned and will plan to do differently this coming Fall. I’m Dawn McKinney, these are my two graduate students who have graduate research and teaching assistantships and had the responsibilities of acting as my lab assistants in the lab portion of this course. This is Julie Froseth and this is Jason Robertson. The other two authors are Leo Denton, a colleage of mine with whom I have written papers about affective objectives and David Ensminger, who has left our school for Chicago. David’s role was to assist with the qualitative assessment of our study.

University of South Alabama State university 13,000 students Computer and Information Sciences Not part of a college Three specializations 500 students Masters Program Computer Science Information Systems Information Technology XPAU 2004 Calgary, Canada School of Computer and Information Sciences University of South Alabama, Mobile, Alabama USA

The Course Second semester of a 2-semester programming sequence Introductory Foundation for all three specializations Closed Lab Hands-on Integrated with lecture Taught by same instructor as lecture XPAU 2004 Calgary, Canada School of Computer and Information Sciences University of South Alabama, Mobile, Alabama USA

Course Objectives Problem-solving Testing OOP GUI File I/O Dynamic data structures Communication Commitment Work-ethic Adaptability Honesty/integrity http://www.cis.usouthal.edu/~mckinney/McKinneySyl121Sp2004.htm XPAU 2004 Calgary, Canada School of Computer and Information Sciences University of South Alabama, Mobile, Alabama USA

Why XP? Flexibility Promotes team skills Relevance Communication Cooperation Work-ethic Commitment Adaptability Relevance One of our authors, Leo Denton, was introduced to XP at OOPSLA. I then started reading one of the early books on XP and the two of us comentored a team of senior women, the Datababes, exposing them to some of the XP practices. Last summer, I then attended the XP conference in New Orleans where I became convinced that I would introduce XP to my Fall 2003 students. I was fortunate to get these two grad students for my assistants and they became interested in XP and agreed to coauthor a paper about the experience. Our focus was on team skills and using a real cutting edge methodology. XPAU 2004 Calgary, Canada School of Computer and Information Sciences University of South Alabama, Mobile, Alabama USA

CS1 Agile Labs Weekly 75-minute closed lab Hands-on Laptop policy Synergy of teams in same room XPAU 2004 Calgary, Canada School of Computer and Information Sciences University of South Alabama, Mobile, Alabama USA

Teams 7 +/- 2 members per team Same room Selected names Shared info Evaluated each member periodically Team spirit Jason, who along with Julie participated in both the Fall and Spring semesters and played the role of a project manager during the second semester experience, will now tell you some details about how these Agile labs were conducted. XPAU 2004 Calgary, Canada School of Computer and Information Sciences University of South Alabama, Mobile, Alabama USA

Project Semester-long Same project all teams Same room Shared info between First semester – Nutrition Management Second semester – Survey Builder Customer driven XPAU 2004 Calgary, Canada School of Computer and Information Sciences University of South Alabama, Mobile, Alabama USA

XP Practices Introduced Handouts Web sites Discussions Lectures XPAU 2004 Calgary, Canada School of Computer and Information Sciences University of South Alabama, Mobile, Alabama USA

XP Practices Planning Game Small Releases Metaphor Simple Design Continuous Integration Sustainable Pace Coding Standards XPAU 2004 Calgary, Canada School of Computer and Information Sciences University of South Alabama, Mobile, Alabama USA

XP Practices Planning Game Small Releases User Stories Estimated tasks on cards in minutes Small Releases 2-3 lab period schedule Demonstration after iteration cycle XPAU 2004 Calgary, Canada School of Computer and Information Sciences University of South Alabama, Mobile, Alabama USA

XP Practices Metaphor Simple Design Instructor was the customer Constant communication Simple Design Small Stories Focus XPAU 2004 Calgary, Canada School of Computer and Information Sciences University of South Alabama, Mobile, Alabama USA

XP Practices: Building Code Continuous Integration Team code stored on server Sustainable Pace No overtime Enthusiasm to continue working Too long of break between labs XPAU 2004 Calgary, Canada School of Computer and Information Sciences University of South Alabama, Mobile, Alabama USA

XP Practices Coding Standards Taught in CS1 Uniform standards for each team’s code XPAU 2004 Calgary, Canada School of Computer and Information Sciences University of South Alabama, Mobile, Alabama USA

XP Practices Pair programming Refactoring Collective code ownership On-site customer Stand-up meetings Testing XPAU 2004 Calgary, Canada School of Computer and Information Sciences University of South Alabama, Mobile, Alabama USA

XP Practices Pair Programming Highly emphasized Task cards Estimates vs. actual times Non-matching pairs XPAU 2004 Calgary, Canada School of Computer and Information Sciences University of South Alabama, Mobile, Alabama USA

XP Practices Refactoring Collective code ownership Pairs … Code on server Pair programming Testing Focus on testing and quality Highly valued in industry, often overlooked in classes Student resistance on testing first; tested after coding 2nd semester: JUnit Refactoring Some (rotating of pairs and collective code ownership) Not a focus: Time limitations Student inexperience; only try to get program working Pair programming Highly emphasized Task cards Driver/co-pilot Times Benefit: Estimates vs. actual times Disadvantage: one quiet/inexperienced, other good programmer Collective code ownership Code on server On-site customer Focus on customer Instructor = customer and project manager Benefit: customer always present Disadvantage: hard to play two roles 2nd semester: grad students project managers Stand-up meetings Very efficient Couldn’t access laptop Had to make contribution Everybody had to speak Beginning/end of class XPAU 2004 Calgary, Canada School of Computer and Information Sciences University of South Alabama, Mobile, Alabama USA

XP Practices On-site Customer Customer presence emphasized Fall: Instructor = customer + project manager Spring: Instructor = customer Grad assistants = project manager XPAU 2004 Calgary, Canada School of Computer and Information Sciences University of South Alabama, Mobile, Alabama USA

XP Practices Stand-up Meetings Beginning/end of class Each student had to speak Very efficient XPAU 2004 Calgary, Canada School of Computer and Information Sciences University of South Alabama, Mobile, Alabama USA

XP Practices Testing Emphasized because is important Fall: test plan Spring: JUnit & test-driven development Some problems Tested after coding Didn’t realize value of JUnit Didn’t realize value of JUnit due to small programs XPAU 2004 Calgary, Canada School of Computer and Information Sciences University of South Alabama, Mobile, Alabama USA

Assessment Quantitative Qualitative Affective objectives Cognitive objectives Qualitative Student comments Observations Affective objectives involve the promotion of professional practices, value, belonging, internalization of concepts, interest, perceived relevance…Intrinsic Motivation Inventory – validated instrument used to measure affect levels Leo Denton and I have done research on integrating affective objectives into our CIS curriculum and in that research we have measured the affective factors of interests, value, effort, perceived competence, lack of pressure, and belonging. We measured these affective levels using a validated instrument as a pretest and a posttest and also correlated these factors with course grade. We have found that the factors positively correlate with grades. Correlation does not necessarily mean causation. Our other papers that have details of these statistics are on my web page. For this study we wanted to also promote team skills and so we used XP practices to create a real world programming team environment and asked to students to evaluate each other on team skills such as communication, cooperation, work-ethic, commitment, and adaptability. We also asked for student comments and had observers (Leo Denton and David Ensminger) come on the last day of the lab to record their observations on these categories. XPAU 2004 Calgary, Canada School of Computer and Information Sciences University of South Alabama, Mobile, Alabama USA

Quantitative Results: Affective Factors Correlated with Course Grade Student interest Belonging Value Perceived competence Lack of pressure Effort XPAU 2004 Calgary, Canada School of Computer and Information Sciences University of South Alabama, Mobile, Alabama USA

Qualitative Data Student Comments Satisfaction + - Real world + - Team work + - Cooperation + - Professional skills + - Observations Communication + - Cooperation + - Adaptability + - Work-ethic + - Commitment + - We used both student comments and observation in order to collect qualitative data. XPAU 2004 Calgary, Canada School of Computer and Information Sciences University of South Alabama, Mobile, Alabama USA

Reflections: Benefits Confidence building, “pair pressure” A sense of belonging Shared euphoria Working code Higher course relevance Self-regulated learning Cooperative learning A sense of satisfaction Promoted the development of professional skills XPAU 2004 Calgary, Canada School of Computer and Information Sciences University of South Alabama, Mobile, Alabama USA

Reflections: Improvements Needed Instructor role of customer Lab assistants as project manager Student journals Stricter adherence to the iteration schedule Test-driven development needs to be automated XPAU 2004 Calgary, Canada School of Computer and Information Sciences University of South Alabama, Mobile, Alabama USA

Julie Froeseth jf301@jaguar1.usouthal.edu Dawn McKinney dmckinney@usouthal.edu Julie Froeseth jf301@jaguar1.usouthal.edu Jason Robertson jrobertson@usouthal.edu http://www.cis.usouthal.edu/~mckinney/McKinneySyl121Sp2004.htm http://www.cis.usouthal.edu/~mckinney/XPAU2004Alabama.ppt