Information technology team projects in higher education: an international viewpoint

It is common to find final or near final year undergraduate Information Technology students undertaking a substantial development project; a project where the students have the opportunity to be fully involved in the analysis, design, and development of an information technology service or product. This involvement has been catalyzed and prepared for during their previous studies where the students have been told and shown how to develop similar systems. It is the belief that only through this ‘real’ project do they get the chance to experience something similar to what is expected of them when they embark on their chosen profession; that is, as an information technology professional. The high value of ‘near real life’ educational experience is recognized by many universities across the globe. The aim of this paper is to present examples from three countries - Australia, United Kingdom and South Africa, of the delivery of these team, capstone or industrial experience projects; their curricula and management processes. Academics from institutions in each of the countries share experiences, challenges and pitfalls encountered during the delivery of these information technology projects within their institutions. An overview of each institution’s strategies is provided and highlights specific issues such as the selection of projects, allocation of teams to projects, legal requirements, assessment methods, challenges and benefits. The pedagogies presented here are not exhaustive; however, the three institutions do have in common the implementation of a combination of constructivism with a community of practice approach in delivering the project unit. The three universities recognize the need for industrial experience and learning of applied skills, and therefore make these projects a compulsory part of the curriculum. The projects tend to be real life business problems which are solved over a period of two semesters, and in the case of Cape Town it could be two consecutive years of two semesters each. These projects tend to involve practical development (for example databases and web sites). The process of project-to-team allocation is generally similar in all cases. Despite their differences, team work related problems are quite similar in all three cases presented, and seem to appear as a result of team work complexity, and the number of stakeholders involved. The intention of this paper is not to propose solutions to these problems (as these would be context dependent), but to draw the attention to the main problem categories for similar schemes, these are; • project selection, • management of students, • management of academic staff, • student team motivation, • equality and diversity, • passengers, and • assessment. Furthermore, it is not the intention of the authors to portray one approach as better than another, however, the approaches are representative of how team projects are being delivered across the globe, and in particular, in the contributing institutions. It is hoped that the assimilation and dissemination of information regarding the various approaches presented will nurture further discussion, and open communication across the globe with the view to enhancing the teaching and learning experience of such projects

Virtual Reality Interactive Learning Environment

Open Building Manufacturing (ManuBuild) aims to promote the European construction industry beyond the state of the art. However, this requires the different stakeholders to be well informed of what ‘Open Building Manufacturing’ actually entails with respect to understanding the underlying concepts, benefits and risks. This is further challenged by the ‘traditional ways of learning’ which have been predominantly criticised for being entrenched in theories with little or no emphasis on practical issues. Experiential learning has long been suggested to overcome the problems associated with the traditional ways of learning. In this respect, it has the dual benefit of appealing to adult learner's experience base, as well as increasing the likelihood of performance change through training. On-the-job-training (OJT) is usually sought to enable ‘experiential’ learning; and it is argued to be particularly effective in complex tasks, where a great deal of independence is granted to the task performer. However, OJT has been criticised for being expensive, limited, and devoid of the actual training context. Consequently, in order to address the problems encountered with OJT, virtual reality (VR) solutions have been proposed to provide a risk free environment for learning without the ‘do-or-die’ consequences often faced on real construction projects. Since ManuBuild aims to promote the EU construction industry beyond the state of the art; training and education therefore needs also to go beyond the state of the art in order to meet future industry needs and expectations. Hence, a VR interactive learning environment was suggested for Open Building Manufacturing training to allow experiential learning to take place in a risk free environment, and consequently overcome the problems associated with OJT. This chapter discusses the development, testing, and validation of this prototype

Centralisation of assessment: meeting the challenges of multi-year team projects in information systems education

This paper focuses on the difficulties of assessing multi-year team projects, in which a team of students drawn from all three years of a full-time degree course works on a problem with and for a real-life organization. Although potential solutions to the problem of assessing team projects may be context-dependent, we believe that discussing these in our paper will allow readers to relate to their teaching cases and increase the general appreciation of team project related work. Findings discussed in this paper are based on the first cycle of action research in relation to an existing multi-year team project scheme. Based on the interpretivist perspective, this work draws on data from staff and student focus groups, semi structured interviews and surveys. Team project clients were also asked to comment on their experiences and the way they would like team projects to be improved in the future. Since issues affecting the success of team projects are quite closely inter-related, a systemic view is adopted rather than analysis of a single issue in isolation. Overall there is a feeling that multi-year team projects are a good idea in theory but can be challenging to implement in practice. It is argued that the main areas of concern are the assessment process, the dilemmas and tensions that it can introduce, and the related inconsistencies in stakeholder involvement, which can compromise the learning experience if not handled well. We believe that the assessment process holds the key to a successful learning experience in team project work

STEM futures and practice, can we teach STEM in a more meaningful and integrated way?

Integrating Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) subjects can be engaging for students, can promote problem-solving and critical thinking skills and can help build real-world connections. However, STEM has long been an area of some confusion for some educators. While they can see many of the conceptual links between the various domains of knowledge they often struggle to meaningfully integrate and simultaneously teach the content and methodologies of each these areas in a unified and effective way for their students. Essentially the question is;how can the content and processes of four disparate and yet integrated learning areas be taught at the same time? How can the integrity of each of the areas be maintained and yet be learnt in a way that is complementary? Often institutional barriers exitin schools and universities to the integration of STEM. Organizationally, at a departmental and administrative level, the teaching staff may be co-located, but when it comes to classroom practice or the teaching and learning of these areas they are usually taught very separately. They are usually taught in different kinds of spaces, in different ways (using different pedagogical approaches) and at different times. But is this the best way for students to engage with the STEM areas of learning? How can we make learning more integrated, meaningful and engaging for the students