PBL 1 2 3 4 (MDD) PBL Project Based Learning MDD PBL PBL PBL MDD PBL A Software Development PBL for Beginners using Project Facilitation Tools Seiko Akayama, 1 Shin Kuboaki, 2 Kenji Hisazumi 3 and Takao Futagami 4 Model Driven Development (MDD) can verify the software and automatically generate the source codes leading the programing beginners to focus on the modeling and improve their modeling skills. To apply the modeling technique in software developments, Project based Learning (PBL) is effective method to learn the application of MDD. We proposed the educational program combined with MDD education and PBL method. In this project, we adopted the timebox system for the software development using the project facilitation tools in our MDD education program. Our proposed program leads beginners to learn the programing skills smoothly, and improve the modeling skills. 1. 1) UML UML 2) Model Driven Development:MDDMDD MDD 3) 4)5) PBL Project Based Learning PBL PBL 3 4 6)7)8) 1 Kyushu Technical Education College 2 Afrel Co.,Ltd. 3 LSI System LSI Research Center, Kyushu University 4 Toyo Corporation 1 c 2011 Information Processing Society of Japan
MDD PBL 1 2. 2.1 2008 ET 9) 2) ET ET 2.2 2), 1 2 5) 1 2 3 MDD PBL PBL 3. 3.1 MDD MDD MDD 10) MDD Executable UML 11) Executable UML MDD Executable UML UML Executable UML 3 1 Executable UML ( 1 ) ( 2 ) ( 3 ) ( 4 ) ( 5 ) ( 6 ) 3.2 PBL 3 MDD PBL 2 c 2011 Information Processing Society of Japan
MDD MDD Fig. 1 1 Executable UML Fundamental elements of Executable UML. Fig. 2 2 Relationship between educational materials. 1 1 Table 1 Education items basic and advanced classes. A RTOS A A B UML MDD B A B A MDD PBL 2 PBL 3.3 LEGO Mindstorms NXT 3 3 3 MDD 4 AutoTranspoter LineTracer 2 2 MDD 3 c 2011 Information Processing Society of Japan
4. PBL B MDD PBL 5 3 Fig. 3 Auto transport robot. MDD BridgePoint Mentor Graphics Fig. 5 5 PBL Guide on how to develop PBL. Fig. 4 4 Auto transport system class diagram. 4.1 PBL 6 ET 2010 9) ( 1 ) 2 3 ( 2 ) ( 3 ) 4 c 2011 Information Processing Society of Japan
Table 2 2 PBL The contents of PBL exercises. 1 2 3 4 5 6 B Bluetooth 1 12) 13) PBL 14 PBL 3 2 2 6 PBL Fig. 6 Course layout for PBL. PBL 2 API 4.2 PBL PBL PBL 10 MDD PBL 3 4.3 4 5 1 PC 4.4 PBL 2 5 c 2011 Information Processing Society of Japan
3 PBL Table 3 Schedule of PBL course. 1 2 PBL2 PBL3 PBL4 PBL5 PBL7 PBL9 PBL10 PBL PBL 4.4.1 7 50 ToDo OK NG ToDo OK NG 4.4.2 KPTT 1 KPTT 8 KPTT ( 1 ) ( 2 ) Keep 7 Fig. 7 Time box board. ( 3 ) Problem ( 4 ) Try ( 5 ) ToDo Try ToDo Try ToDo 4.5 PBL 1 1 14) 9 ( 1 ) 6 c 2011 Information Processing Society of Japan
1 8 KPTT Fig. 8 KPTT table. ( 2 ) 15 4 PBL ( 1 ) 15 ( 2 ) 1 6 50 5 40 5 ( 3 ) 15 KPTT ( 4 ) 9 Fig. 9 Retrospective meeting. 4.6 PBL PBL. PBL API 5. 3.2 PBL 1 4 7 c 2011 Information Processing Society of Japan
C IT 2 1 PBL 3 1 21 4 Table 4 Outline of the trial. 1 PC1 1 3 1 7 1 20 1 PC1 1 4 1 7 UML 2 MDD 4 P 1 17 B 4 5 5 14 2 2 L PBL 3 5.1 PBL PBL 7 5 PBL 6 Test Test 3) PBL Table 5 5 PBL Evaluation Results of class diagrams in PBL trial. 1) 60% 80% 2) 0% 20% 3) 40% 80% 4) 0% 60% 5) 0% 80% Table 6 6 PBL Achievement rate of the PBL class exercise. A B C D E 1) 100 % 2) 100 % 3) 100 % 4) 40% 5) 100% 6) 40% 7) 60% 8) 0% 63% 63% 75% 88% 50% 68% 2 3 7 MDD MDD 8 c 2011 Information Processing Society of Japan
5.2 7 7 Table 7 Motivation survey results. PBL 10 % 16 % 24 % 38 % 21 % 29 % 24 % 37 % 35 % 29 % 26 % 12 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % MDD PBL MDD MDD PBL MDD PBL 5.3 PBL KPTT PBL 10 8 KPTT 9 77% 65% ToDo A B ToDo 8 C D PBL 50 KPTT 77% Keep 95% PBL ET 9) PBL PBL KPTT 8 Table 8 Fill rate of time box board. A B C D E A B 31.8 % 24.3 % 91.3 % 72.5 % 85.0 % 61.0 % 59.7 % 79.7 % ToDo 42.9 % 29.6 % 90.8 % 88.6 % 69.2 % 64.2 % 92.9 % 60.7 % OK 14.1 % 26.8 % 31.7 % 49.2 % 44.2 % 33.2 % 46.7 % 42.0 % NG 13.5 % 17.3 % 55.0 % 49.1 % 57.7 % 38.5 % 28.6 % 54.7 % 6. MDD PBL PBL PBL 9 c 2011 Information Processing Society of Japan
Table 9 9 KPTT The Number of entries in the KPTT tables. A B C D E Keep 30 24 21 14 15 20.8 Problem 28 24 11 21 19 20.6 ToDo 25 15 16 11 13 16 Try 5 28 3 6 15 11.4 MDD PBL PBL 10) Liggesmeyer, P. and Trapp, M.: Trends in Embedded Software Engineering, IEEE Software, Vol.26, No.3, pp.19 25 (2009). 11) Mellor, S.J. and Balcer, M.J.: Excutable UML-MDA - (2003). 12) Vol.8 http://www.objectclub.jp/community/pf/ (2011). 13) CQ (2004). 14) Vol.7 http://www.objectclub.jp/community/pf/ (2010). 1) [ ] (2006). 2) UML (2005). 3) UML, 2004-CE-74 Vol.2004, No.49, pp.9 16 (2004). 4) Vol.2009-CE-101, No.1, pp.1 8 (2009). 5) Vol.2011-CE-109, No.5, pp.1 9 (2011). 6) Vol.50, No.11, pp.2677 2689 (2009). 7) PBL EVM Vol.2009-CE-99, No.9, pp.1 8 (2009). 8) PBL Vol.2009-IS-107, No.32, pp.185 192 (2009). 9) ET ET 2011. http://www.etrobo.jp/2011/. 10 c 2011 Information Processing Society of Japan