Conference PaperPDF Available

Integrating Challenge Based Learning Into a Smart Learning Environment: Findings From a Mobile Application Development Course

Authors:

Abstract and Figures

Training students on mobile application development inherits the challenges of teaching software engineering where the target computer is a device that has a large number of features accessible by software. Furthermore, the most related experience in teaching students reveals difficulties in developing software engineering competencies. In this paper we present results from an iOS course held in a Smart Learning Environment that adopted the Challenge Based Learning framework as the teaching methodology. Our results indicate that combining an active methodology along with an engaging environment can foster and improve software development learning.
Content may be subject to copyright.
Integrating Challenge Based Learning Into a Smart
Learning Environment: Findings From a Mobile
Application Development Course
Rafael Chanin, Alan R. Santos, Nicolas Nascimento, Afonso Sales, Leandro Pompermaier and Rafael Prikladnicki
Pontifical Catholic University of Rio Grande do Sul, School of Technology
Av. Ipiranga 6681, Porto Alegre, Brazil, CEP: 90619-900
{rafael.chanin, alan.santos, nicolas.nascimento, afonso.sales, leandro.pompermaier, rafaelp}@pucrs.br
Abstract—Training students on mobile application develop-
ment inherits the challenges of teaching software engineering
where the target computer is a device that has a large number
of features accessible by software. Furthermore, the most related
experience in teaching students reveals difficulties in developing
software engineering competencies. In this paper we present
results from an iOS course held in a smart learning environment
that adopted the Challenge Based Learning framework as the
teaching methodology. Our results indicate that combining an
active methodology along with an engaging environment can
foster and improve software development learning.
KeywordsSmart Learning Environments, Challenge Based
Learning, Mobile Software Development, Teaching.
I. INTRODUCTION
Active learning methodologies like Problem-Based Learn-
ing, Project-Based Learning (PBL) and Challenge Based
Learning (CBL) engage students and improve their perfor-
mance. These approaches moves students to a different role
when compared to traditional classes, engaging students in real
problems [6]. In this study, we focus on the use of CBL in a
smart learning environment. CBL enables students to conduct
research by integrating practices with theory and application
of knowledge and skills, such as collaboration and problem
solving, and taking action in the community context [5].
Moreover, the educational context is changing due to the
advancements in technology [4]. Tradicional classes, often
perceive as formal, passive, and not engaging, have been
slowly replaced by student-centric approaches. This new way
of perceiving education, combining active methodologies,
technology and modern infrastructure has led to the creation
of the term “Smart Lerning Environments” [3].
In this sense, this paper presents findings from a 6-weeks
mobile application development course that uses CBL as a
teaching methodology. Our preliminary results indicate that
applying a pro-active pedagogy framework that fosters col-
laboration and personalized learning within a smart learning
environment can be beneficial to students.
The remainder of this paper is organized as follows.
Section II presents the background on smart learning en-
DOI reference number: 10.18293/SEKE2018-058
vironments. In Section III the concept of Challenge Based
Learning is explained and, in Section IV, we describe the
mobile application course in detail. Section V depicts the
methodology used in this research. In Section VI we present
our preliminary results and, finally, we draw our conclusion
and future works in Section VII.
II. SM ART LEARNING ENVIRONMENTS
There are several definitions for Smart Learning Environ-
ments (SLE) in the literature. However, in the context of this
paper, we use the one from Koper [3], which is “physical
environments that are enriched with digital, context-aware
and adaptive devices, to promote better and faster learning”.
Even though the word “smart” relates to the use of smart
technologies, the main goal of a SLE is to provide learning
guidance and all the necessary infrastructure to make the
learning process effective, efficient and engaging [2].
One of the main goals of a SLE is to meet the educational
needs from current students. Tradicional classes, in which
instructors are in the center of the process and students do
not actively participate, have been replaced by approaches that
foster collaboration, action and engagement. However, in order
to effectively implement this change, not only the physical
environment needs to be adapted, but also instructors need to
put in place a different teaching methodology [4].
In this new context, instructors are no longer the only
source of knowledge. Similarly, students are not only knowl-
edge consumers. In fact, the roles of instructors and students
may become less distinct and could be interchangeable [4].
III. CHA LL EN GE -BA SE D LEARNING
Experiential learning is the source of a variety of learning
frameworks that are used all over the world. Problem-Based
Learning, Project-Based Learning, Task-Based Learning and
Challenge Based Learning are just a few examples of these
frameworks. “The foundations of experiential learning can be
found within the history of most cultures, but were formally
organized and presented by David Kolb drawing heavily on
the works of John Dewey and Jean Piaget” [6]. Challenge
Based Learning (CBL) [5] is a learning framework based on
solving real world challenges.
The CBL process begins with the definition of a big idea,
which is a broad concept that can be explored in several ways.
The big idea has to be engaging and important to students
and society. Once the big idea is chosen and the essential
question is created, the challenge is defined. From this point,
students must come up with the guiding questions and guiding
activities and resources, which will guide them to develop a
successful solution. The next step is analysis, which will set the
foundation for the definition of the solution. Once the solution
is agreed upon, the implementation begins. Finally, evaluation
is undertaken in order to check out the whole process and
verify if the solution can be refined.
IV. THE COURSE
The course curriculum applied in this work can be divided
into two portions: iOS Programming and User Experience.
All participants received CBL training and were required to
dedicate 20 hours per week during six weeks. The learning was
facilitated by instructors, which had different levels of industry
and academic experience. All instructors had previous iOS
development training and CBL training, and more than four
years experience. In addition, the course was held in a smart
learning environment, which provided not only all necessary
equipment, but also a modern infrastructure that allow students
to be creative and comfortable during the learning process.
TABLE I. CL ASS ES ACTIVITIES
Class Activities Deliverable
1 Equipment assignment to students. Student’s and
Instructors presentations. Quick introduction to
important tools and shortcuts.
Reflection
2 Introduction to Coding, Introduction to Story-
boards, UILabel and UIButton.
Exercise
3 UIView, UIViewController and the Model-View-
Controller (MVC) paradigm.
Exercise
4 Introduction to UX (User-Experience) in iOS, Per-
sonas and Paper Prototyping.
Exercise
5 UIImageView, UIPicker, UIDatePicker. Exercise
6 Navigation using multiple ViewControllers,
UINavigationController and UITabBarController.
Exercise
7 UISlider and UIScrollView. Exercise
8 Challenge Based Learning. CBL Process Do-
cumentation
9 AutoLayout. Exercise
10 UITableView and Nano-Challenge. None
11 Nano-Challenge Development and Deliver. Nano-Challenge
Solution
12 UserDefaults and CoreData. Exercise
13 Design Guidelines. Exercise
14 MapKit. Exercise
15 Mini-Challenge - Engage. None
16-17 Mini-Challenge - Investigate. None
18-29 Mini-Challenge - Act. None
30 Mini-Challenge Presentations. Mini-Challenge
Solution Keynote,
Reflection
The deliverables described in Table I are related to items
used for students development and assessment as described by
Nichols et al. [5]:
Reflection: It is a video, audio or text file where
students reflect on the content and on the process. As
described in [5]: “Much of the deepest learning takes
place by considering the process, thinking about one’s
learning, and analyzing ongoing relationships between
the content and concepts..
Exercise: Students are encourage to follow a devel-
opment rule (such as using a specific framework) but
are free to increment the solution and to develop it.
CBL Documentation: During the course, learners
produce contents using text, video, audio and pictures.
These artifacts are helpful, as they expose information
of the learning process. These can serve many uses,
such as reflections, assessments, evidence of learning,
portfolios and for telling the story of their challenges.
Nano-Challenge: One type of CBL activity. These
are shorter in length, focused on a particular content
area or skill, have tight boundaries and are guided by
the instructor. Both Big Idea and Essential Question
are provided to the students. The process includes
some level of investigation, but at a lower level of
intensity and often stop short of implementation with
an external audience.
Mini-Challenge: Another type of CBL activity. It has
a longer duration (2-4 weeks) and allows learners
to start with a Big Idea and work using the entire
framework. The research depth and the reach of their
solutions increases and the focus can be content spe-
cific or multidisciplinary. Mini-Challenges are good
for intense learning experiences that stretch learners
and prepare them for longer challenges.
V. METHODOLOGY
The research methodology for this study was based on a
process proposed by Eisenhardt [1]. The proposed research
question was: “Can mobile application development be more
effectively learn if taught in a smart learning environment
using an active methodology, such as Challenge Based Learn-
ing?”. The rationale behind this question was to find out
whether students can take advantage of the environment as
well as of the methodology in order to better learn the content.
A. Data Collection & Analysis
Throughout the course, we collected several data regarding
students deliverables. In addition, we conducted a survey
with all students that have completed the course described
in Section IV. In total, 25 students were interviewed. All
questions were open-ended and focused on the following
areas: (i) teaching environment; (ii) teaching methodology; (iii)
content; and (iv) instructors.
Once all data was collected, we grouped and categorized
the information. It is important to point out that part of our
evaluation was based on data collected from students. In order
to mitigate eventual flaws during data collection, the interviews
were conducted by two people that did not directly participate
in the course.
VI. RE SU LTS
We found indicatives that the combination of an innovative
environment with an active learning methodology was key to
the success of the course. Students felt engaged and motivated
to learn and even to go beyond the course content.
Regarding the environment, 90% of the students empha-
sized how impressed they were when they first enter the
classroom. The infrastructure, a coworking space equipped
with comfortable and adjustable chairs and tables and several
spaces to brainstorm and to sketch ideas, not only provided
everything students needed, but it was also inspiring.
One key point the final survey allowed us to perceive was
regarding the teaching methodology. Some of the students
reported feeling uncomfortable with the dynamics used in class
at first, as the lecturing (where the instructor would present the
content) was not long and the students were quickly given a
challenge. However, as the course progressed, they understood
that this approach was beneficial, as they reported being more
engaged with the content.
None of the students knew Challenge Based Learning prior
to the course. Nonetheless, all of them pointed out that the
methodology was key to keep them focused and engaged
throughout the course. Several students, however, mentioned
that the methodology could have been introduced in the first
week of the course. As can be noticed in Table I, CBL was
only presented to students on the 8th class.
The Mini-Challenge delivered and presented at the end
of the course proved (according to the evaluation of the
instructors) that students learned the content. Even though
some students mentioned that having one or two more weeks
would be beneficial to the learning process, they were all able
to create a complete mobile application, with some having
developed features that were not even covered during classes,
such as Speech Recognition.
Regarding the instructors, 50% of the students pointed out
that the different teaching styles was a problem. For example,
while one instructor explained a specific content in detail,
the other chose to give just a quick overview and then let
students search for other information. In total, four instructors
participated in the course. It became clear that it was not
necessary to have that many instructors in this course.
Another set of data collected was students’ deliverables.
ADelivered task (85%) is one that is completed in terms
of scope, quality and deadline. A Partially Delivered task
(2%) is one that fail in scope, quality or deadline. Finally,
aNot Delivered task (13%) is one that was not delivered. The
evaluation for each task was made by at least two instructors.
This information was somehow intriguing to the authors,
since they understood that having 13% of the tasks not deliv-
ered was too much. By analysing task by task (see Fig. 1) it can
be seen that tasks 10 and 11 are the outliers. By talking to the
instructors, we found out that since students were performing
really well, they decided to raise the bar after task 9. It turned
out that almost half of the students were not able even to
partially deliver these challenges.
A lesson learned about this approach is that to push
students in order to see where they can get can be good.
However, this needs to be strategically done in order not to
disengage students. For instance, a given challenge can have
three different achievement levels (for example, bronze, silver
and gold). By doing so, not only instructors can measure how
far students can go, but it also keeps students motivated into
achieving the highest level.
Fig. 1. Deliverables During the Course
VII. CONCLUSION AND FUTURE WORK
The traditional educational landscape is changing to a more
pro-active and collaborative one. In this scenario, instructors
also need to adapt themselves in order to better help students
throughout the learning process.
This work presented a case study that represents this new
trend. We provided findings from a mobile application devel-
opment course that took advantage of a modern environment,
new technologies, and a pro-active teaching methodology -
Challenge Based Learning. Our results, although preliminary,
reveal that students in fact learn and engage more when they
are put in the center of the learning process. Moreover, the use
of challenges kept students motivated to find solutions, which
makes the learning process more fun and less tedious.
As future work we intend to monitor and evaluate more
courses in similar contexts that the one presented in this paper.
In addition, we are planning to extend the duration of the
course from six to eight weeks in order to give more time
for the students to practice the concepts learned as well as
more time in the Mini-Challenge activity to develop a more
robust mobile application.
ACK NOW LE DG ME NT S
This project is partially funded by FAPERGS, project
17/2551-0001/205-4.
REFERENCES
[1] K. Eisenhardt. Building theories from case study research. Academy of
management review, 14(4):532–550, 1989.
[2] B. Gros. The design of smart educational environments. Smart Learning
Environments, 3(1):1–11, 2016.
[3] R. Koper. Conditions for effective smart learning environments. Smart
Learning Environments, 1(1):1–17, 2014.
[4] J. Ng, D. Ruta, A. Al Rubaie, D. Wang, L. Powell, B. Hirsch, L. Ming,
C. Ling, and A. Al Dhanhani. Smart learning for the next generation
education environment. In 2014 International Conference on Intelligent
Environments, pages 333–340. IEEE, 2014.
[5] M. Nichols, K. Cator, and M. Torres. Challenge Based Learning Guide.
Digital Promise, Redwood City, CA, USA, 2016.
[6] A.R. Santos, A. Sales, P. Fernandes, and M. Nichols. Combining
Challenge-Based Learning and Scrum Framework for Mobile Application
Development. In Proceedings of the 2015 ACM Conference on Innova-
tion and Technology in Computer Science Education (ITiCSE’15), pages
189–194, Vilnius, Lithuania, July 2015.
... We summarize the trend of SLE's research since 2008 to beginning of 2019. [15] Smart lab [16] Technology E-learning system • Mobile and ubiquitous learning [11], [15], [17], [18] • Ontology model [19], [20] • Learning analytic [21], [22] • Smart teaching [10] • Virtual classroom [4] Communication system • Social networking [4], [11] • Device management/control room [3], [23] Devices / sensors [10] Architecture [3], [4], [10]- [12], [16], [18], [21], [24], [25] Learner aspects Personalized learning • Learning activities/path [14], [19], [26] • Learning contents [4], [20] Self-learning [14], [20], [27] / Social Learning [4] Learner behavior / cognitive [10], [19], [28] Teaching aspects Presentation of learning material [23], [27] Teacher's role/behavior [12], [22], [29] Learning scenarios/strategies [10], [11], [13], [16], [19], [23], [26], [28], [29] Assessment, intervention and feedback [4], [14], [17] Teacher training [13] SLE's studies on the physical aspect carried out to create and utilize smart environments. Smart environment's components in smart city was used by [21] to proposed a structured framework of SLE, while [16] used it to build Smart City Lab. ...
... We summarize the trend of SLE's research since 2008 to beginning of 2019. [15] Smart lab [16] Technology E-learning system • Mobile and ubiquitous learning [11], [15], [17], [18] • Ontology model [19], [20] • Learning analytic [21], [22] • Smart teaching [10] • Virtual classroom [4] Communication system • Social networking [4], [11] • Device management/control room [3], [23] Devices / sensors [10] Architecture [3], [4], [10]- [12], [16], [18], [21], [24], [25] Learner aspects Personalized learning • Learning activities/path [14], [19], [26] • Learning contents [4], [20] Self-learning [14], [20], [27] / Social Learning [4] Learner behavior / cognitive [10], [19], [28] Teaching aspects Presentation of learning material [23], [27] Teacher's role/behavior [12], [22], [29] Learning scenarios/strategies [10], [11], [13], [16], [19], [23], [26], [28], [29] Assessment, intervention and feedback [4], [14], [17] Teacher training [13] SLE's studies on the physical aspect carried out to create and utilize smart environments. Smart environment's components in smart city was used by [21] to proposed a structured framework of SLE, while [16] used it to build Smart City Lab. ...
... The embedding of an IoT-based microchip on elements of the smart education system enables the teaching and learning process and management of education effectively [3], [4], [25]. Another researches, [23] and [26] combine innovative environment and learning scenarios to improve activities and learning's interest. ...
... Challenge-Based Learning is another teaching and learning strategy that has been used to help students develop an entrepreneurial mindset. It is a teaching style in which learners learn in a real-world setting while dealing with questions and real-world problems that they or current businesses have offered (Chanin, et al., 2018). A study by Colombelli et. ...
... Aside from that, a pedagogical approach to entrepreneurial education encourages entrepreneurial learning via hands-on experiences that mimic the environment in which entrepreneurs operate. There are a lot of research done on pedagogical approaches towards instilling entrepreneurial mindset among children and youth (Arfiana & Wijaya, 2018;Bosman, Duval-Couetil, Mayer, & McNamara, 2019;Botha, 2010;Chanin, et al., 2018). The current pedagogical setup is a formal education setup ranging from primary education up until the university level. ...
Article
Full-text available
Entrepreneurship is a branch of study aimed at assisting students, individuals, and organisations with their entrepreneurial issues. It is necessary for the country's and society's economic development. Individuals, communities, and nations benefit from a wide range of social and economic benefits that entrepreneurship provides. The purpose of this article is to compile the results of early research on the content and method of establishing an entrepreneurial mindset. As a result, the current state of the literature on the concept of entrepreneurship has been consolidated, allowing researchers to better comprehend its origins, roots, and evolution. The author wishes to encourage youngsters to become entrepreneurs as early as primary school. They gain entrepreneurial experience, skills, and abilities as well as the ability to solve entrepreneurial difficulties as a result of their efforts. This article explains the concept of an entrepreneurial mindset in depth, making it easier for individuals and organisations to participate in interactive entrepreneurial activities in their daily lives. The purpose of this study is to conduct a literature review in order to have a better grasp of the concept of the entrepreneurial mindset. An in-depth explanation of the author's different primary subtopics will provide a comprehensive knowledge of the entrepreneurial mindset. The literature will explain the methods utilised to instil an entrepreneurial mindset in children, adolescents, adults, retirees, and people with disabilities. Furthermore, the literature will also rationalize the role of entrepreneurial education on the development of an entrepreneurial attitude.
... Previous work has shown that it can be combined with Scrum, specifically for teaching MAD [13], and with Lean Startup and Customer Development concepts, supported by software development techniques [4]. Besides that, an investigation regarding CBL in active learning environments has been performed previously [6] for short iOS training courses. ...
... The context that will be further explained in Section 3 have already being explored by other studies [5,6]. These two studies focused more on how the CBL methodology fits into the environment. ...
Conference Paper
This paper presents an investigation on how students' background, previous experience and teams composition may influence the teaching process on active learning environments. Using a survey we were able to get data from students that participated in a two-year mobile application development course. We have found indicatives that the timeframe of an activity and the composition of the teams can have an impact students individual perception regarding the project. Moreover, our results also present indicatives that the number of students participating in a project may impact the students perception of projects.
... CBL has also been drawing attention through published studies involving education in the areas of STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics). These studies include applications and adaptations for robotics [23], [24], physics, mathematics, computational tools [19], and mainly for learning mobile application development [14], [25], [26]. According to [18], the CBL approach allows flexibility for adaptation and customization for different learning environments, providing several entry points according to personal or institutional learning goals. ...
... During the Engagement phase, the scenario is presented. Such an introduction must be attractive for the students, and should have a relevant impact in both the students' lives and society [22]. From this presentation, the main questions are to be detailed, as they will be the backbone of the challenge. ...
Article
Full-text available
Current tendencies of product, project and services development focus on a higher consideration of the User Experience (UX). Therefore, traditional training and teaching methodologies need to adapt to prepare the students to develop strategies for problem solving for their professional education. Such needs have risen and interest in tendencies such as education and Industry 4.0 has grown. This paper presents and analyzes the process and results of a teaching implementation methodology based on Challenge-Based Learning (CBL). The paper describes the process followed, explaining the methodology precedents that led to the final implementation case. It also mentions previous experiments on product analysis and home automation developments that are linked to implementation of the technology. This case’s implementation, analysis and experimentation integrated the use of Emotional Domotics (ED) Tools for the UX analysis, to grant feedback and compare the students’ results with the bio-metrical and emotional computational analysis. The methodology, described through this document, allowed the students to better understand and experience some of the implications of an interconnected system with instant information feedback. This allowed them to better grasp part of the impact that the tendency towards the Internet of Things (IoT) is currently having, and the impact of the improvement proposals from the students.
Book
Full-text available
The official guide to Challenge Based Learning provides an overview of the framework and a a process for getting started.
Article
Full-text available
This paper discusses the key characteristics of smart learning and the main challenges to be overcome when designing smart educational environments to support personalisation. In order to integrate smart learning environments into the learning ecosystem and educational contexts, innovative uses and new pedagogical approaches need to be implemented to orchestrate formal and informal learning. This contribution describes the main characteristics of smart learning and smart learning environments and sustains the relevance of taking the participation of future users into account during the design process to increase knowledge of the design and the implementation of new pedagogical approaches in smart learning environments.
Conference Paper
Full-text available
The global educational landscape is changing due to the advancement of technologies and services, some have termed it as the 'climate change' in education. The students of today engage with the learning environment differently from the students of yesterday. The traditional landscape is often perceived as 'formal', 'passive', 'direct', and 'push' learning environment designed largely for the knowledge consumers, and the modern landscape is often perceived as 'informal', 'active', 'collaborative', 'social', and 'pull' learning environment designed not only for the knowledge consumers but also for the knowledge creators. This paradigm shift in education is imminent and has gathered a lot of interests in the recent years to create and/or adapt the education environment for the 21st century. To facilitate this impending modern landscape, this paper would introduce a new radical construct, termed as self-organized and/or purposely-organized peer-to-peer learning, and its impacts towards both the formal and informal learning environment. An overview of some of the solutions, that have been developed under the holistic intelligent campus (iCampus) initiative, would also be delineated so as to address such aspectual issues and challenges pertaining to the next generation smart learning environment.
Conference Paper
Full-text available
The market for mobile applications has been growing dramatically, as has the complexity of the applications and the speed of the development process. These changes require a rethinking of the development process and of how developers are trained. In order to better prepare faculty and students for the emerging mobile application market, this study presents a new learning and software development framework that combines Agile methodologies with the Challenge-Based Learning (CBL) framework. CBL provides a student-centered learning framework that mirrors the modern workplace. Agile methodologies address the changing landscape of mobile development environments. A combination of the CBL learning framework and Agile methodologies can better prepare students for the development market. This paper presents an empirical study applying CBL and Scrum in a mobile application development course evaluated through a series of post surveys. The results indicate that a teaching and learning environment based on practical experience combining the CBL framework with the Scrum process is an effective model to promptly teach undergraduates how to be successful mobile application developers.
Article
Full-text available
Smart learning environments (SLEs) are defined in this paper as physical environments that are enriched with digital, context-aware and adaptive devices, to promote better and faster learning. In order to identify the requirements for 'better and faster learning', the idea of Human Learning Interfaces (HLI) is presented, i.e. the set of learning related interaction mechanisms that humans expose to the outside world that can be used to control, stimulate and facilitate their learning processes. It is assumed that humans have and use these HLIs for all types of learning, and that others, such as parents, teachers, friends, and digital devices can interact with the interface to help a person to learn something. Three basic HLIs are identified that represent three distinct types of learning: learning to deal with new situations (identification), learning to behave in a social group (socialization) and learning by creating something (creation). These three HLIs involve a change in cognitive representations and behavior. Performance can be increased using the practice HLI, and meta-cognitive development is supported by the reflection HLI. This analysis of HLIs is used to identify the conditions for the development of effective smart learning environments and a research agenda for SLEs.
Article
- This paper describes the process of inducting theory using case studies from specifying the research questions to reaching closure. Some features of the process, such as problem definition and construct validation, are similar to hypothesis-testing research. Others, such as within-case analysis and replication logic, are unique to the inductive, case-oriented process. Overall, the process described here is highly iterative and tightly linked to data. This research approach is especially appropriate in new topic areas. The resultant theory is often novel, testable, and empirically valid. Finally, framebreaking insights, the tests of good theory (e.g., parsimony, logical coherence), and convincing grounding in the evidence are the key criteria for evaluating this type of research.