Soft Skills for IT People:

initial experiences with putting

theory into practice

Prof. Dr. Renate MotschnigResearch Lab for Educational Technologies

University of Vienna, Faculty of Computer Sciencerenate.motschnig@univie.ac.at

... in the context of technology enhanced learning

Goals

• Development towards significant learning:better qualifications and relationships for all participants;more successful projects in the longer run.

• Support through new media (Internet)– effectiveness– actuality, in particular for new generation

Test and EvaluationInstruments

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

Antwortverhalten allgemeinDer Lehrveranstaltungsleiter oder die Lehrveranstaltungsleiterin gibt:O destruktive, demotivierende AntwortenO ineffektive, überhebliche AntwortenO minimal effektive AntwortenO Antworten, die merklich zum Weiterkommen beitragenO Antworten, die einem Mut zusprechen, förderlich sind und in hohem Maß zum Weiterkommen beitragen

Visual Models of Scenarios &Repository Organization

Platform

Web Services

Knowledge Management

Object Technology

Courses

Adaptation of Theoriesfrom Soft Sciences

StaffDevelopment

Strategies

Action Research Cycles

Test and EvaluationInstruments

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

Antwortverhalten allgemeinDer Lehrveranstaltungsleiter oder die Lehrveranstaltungsleiterin gibt:O destruktive, demotivierende AntwortenO ineffektive, überhebliche AntwortenO minimal effektive AntwortenO Antworten, die merklich zum Weiterkommen beitragenO Antworten, die einem Mut zusprechen, förderlich sind und in hohem Maß zum Weiterkommen beitragen

Test and EvaluationInstruments

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

Antwortverhalten allgemeinDer Lehrveranstaltungsleiter oder die Lehrveranstaltungsleiterin gibt:O destruktive, demotivierende AntwortenO ineffektive, überhebliche AntwortenO minimal effektive AntwortenO Antworten, die merklich zum Weiterkommen beitragenO Antworten, die einem Mut zusprechen, förderlich sind und in hohem Maß zum Weiterkommen beitragen

Visual Models of Scenarios &Repository Organization

Visual Models of Scenarios &Repository Organization

Platform

Web Services

Knowledge Management

Object Technology

Courses

Adaptation of Theoriesfrom Soft Sciences

Adaptation of Theoriesfrom Soft Sciences

StaffDevelopment

Strategies

Action Research Cycles

Overview on research context

Overview

• Why soft skills? getProfile• Soft skills and e-learning: complement or

contradiction?• Web Services and Person Centered Learning:

our partners in the marriage• 3 scenarios for developing soft skills in courses

of the computer science and BI curriculum• evaluation and students‘ reaction• further practice and research• call for cooperation

ResearchResearch

Industry/practiceIndustry/practice

Knowledge-managementKnowledge-management

DevelopmentDevelopment

SignificantLearning

SignificantLearning

Technology Soft-Sciences

GOALS

getProfile: Top Ten requirements from Industry

getProfile on Communication

• Wie stehen Sie zu folgenden Aussagen?

– Erfolgreiche IT-Arbeit ist mindestens zu 50% erfolgreiche Kommunikationsarbeit. (119)

3 %stimmt eher nicht 1 %neutral

55 %stimmt vollkommen

1 %stimmt sicher nicht

40 %stimmt eher

getProfile on Learning

Wodurch lernen Sie persönlich am meisten? Wählen Sie 0 bis 2 Begriffe aus. (208)

15 %Bücher

20 %Kurse, Workshops

39 %Kollegen, Teamarbeit

4 %Sonstiges

22 %Internet: Tutorials, Foren, etc.

Goal: Improve (learning) processes by employing techology

Intellect

Social Skills

Personality, Dispositions

Didactic Baseline: Action-focused, Person-Centered

Traditional Blended (our blend)

Learning Targets

instructor participative, cooperative

Transfer Direction

instructor learnercooperative, multiple perspectives, flexible

TransferMode

lectureoffer, exchange, sharing,

interaction, forum, moderation, presentations

Instructor's

Roleexpert

facilitator, coach, mentor, mediator

Tasks constructed authentic, situative

Significant Learning

• “Significant learning combines the logical and the intuitive, the intellect and the feelings, the concept and the experience, the idea and the meaning. When we learn in that way, we are whole .“ (Rogers, 1983) S. 20.

• Ganzheitliches, bedeutsames Lernen, auch: Aspy, Barrett-Lennard, Tausch, Teml,..

Person-Centered Learning

• Basis: Actualizing tendency (Rogers):

• Can unfold itself best, if facilitator provides a working climate based on:– openness, transparency, realness– acceptance, respect– understanding, empathy

Expressions of PC core conditions (Motschnig)

• Realness authentic problemsopen, shared reflection, multiple perspectivestransparent communication and processes

• Acceptancelearner participation in all aspects of courseself-initiated learning goals and processesblended evaluation of students‘ projects

• Understandingcourse design takes whole situation into accountamong all participants; of novel situations

Blended Learing System Structure (BLESS)

Layer 5:

Learning Platforms

Layer 1:

Blended Learning

Courses

Layer 2:

Course scenarios

Layer 3:

Blended Learning

Patterns

Layer 4:

Web Templates

«Pattern»

Peer-Evaluation

Participants: evaluatepeers based on targets

Instructor: defineevaluation targets

Instructor: publishevaluations

{optional}

Evaluation

«Pattern»

Are evaluation targets assigned?

Participants:choose targets

Instructor: assign targets

{optional}

yes

«use»

«derive»

«use»

no

Publish

«Pattern»

Instructor. publish peer-evaluation details Publish

«Pattern»

«use»

Project-Based Learning Course

PreliminaryPhases

«Pattern»

Project-BasedLearning

«Pattern»

AssessmentPhases

«Pattern»

«Pattern»

Publish

Selectrecipient(s)

Choosedelivery type

Initiate/performdelivery

«Pattern»

Self-Evaluation

Participants: evaluation basedon assigned targets

Instructor: assignevaluation targets

Instructor: publishevaluations

{optional}

«use»

«derive»

«use»

Evaluation

«Pattern»

Publish

«Pattern»

Visualization,Modeling

Modularization,Decomposition

Selection,Implementation

Instantiation,Application

Application

Design,Composition

TECHNOLOGY

LEARNING THEORY

Features

Support

TECHNOLOGY

LEARNING THEORY

platform-independent

platform-dependent

CEWebS: Sample architecture at the Universtiy of Vienna

DKE

MIS

SMILE + SVGPlayground

LOM Editor

BISSematic WebTutor

RPD/SSMModelling

Business ProcessVisualizer

QA PracticalExample

XML Tools

The course/container ist filled with components from different locations, scattered over the organisation.

For the students and the facilitator the systembehaves transparent.

Surveys,Questionaires

TeamBuilding

CourseInformation

CommonRepository

Administration & Reports

Some learnings from practiceFrom a technical point of view:

• First: Web Computing infrastructure• Now: elements of Grid Computing

(Blackboard Messaging System)• The services cooperate transparently

(exchange pieces of information) Platform Platform

Service Service Service

Blackboard Messaging

From a users point of view – KISS:• Simplification of the activities involved in certain tasks

• One step to submit a contribution – the contribution is placed automatically in the correct container

• Focus on the workflow of a course – aggregated views of the progress

• Efficient UI – only relevant parts visible• Reports - qualitative and quantitative analysis

Current CEWebS Architecture:

CEWebS Applicationssome numbers

• In use for the 4th term

• Prooven design – scalable and stable– handled courses with 300 Students with high

loads (upload of contributions)– Avg. of 500 students per semester– > 1 GB of Data accumulated > 20 GB transfered

• 18 functional components (WS‘s)

• Parts distributed over 3 OS‘s

• Interoperable parts in Java/.NET/C++/Ruby

Blended Learning in Action:

• Web Engineering

• Project Management Soft Skills (PM/SS)

• Person-Centered Communication and New Media

Blended Learning in Action: Web Eng

• Course context and objectives

• Previous cycles, stepwise evolution

• Course Scenario

• Patterns applied

• Platforms used

• Evaluation and students‘ reactions

• Consequences

Web Engineering - General

• Goal: competence in WB-systems design– technically - soft skills

• Development regarding platform usage:LN on homepage, Student‘s projects on homepage, TeleWIFI, dayta, CEWebs– CHANGING !!!

• Didactic approach: PCeL – stepwise development towards more freedom within well-defined, flexible process.– CONSTANT, yet ripening

Web Engineering – Practice (320 students)

• Self-chosen projects in teams• predefined project milestones• Presentations and partner teams• Phase reflection online• Consulting time in lab-courses• tutorials, tutor-presence and forum• Project demo‘s and oral discussions• Interactive lectures

– written exam OR learning contract

Observations

• Lot of extra effort in design and coordination in the first year

• Lot of reuse of design and experience in second year, due to platform!

• Conclusion: The enormous extra effort for “rich didactics“ in the context of many students is significantly reduced in second year due to platform!

Web Engineering Scenario

Web Engineering Scenario

Project-based Learning

WELL Patterns

WELL-contract

• about 84% (of about 330 students)

• topic to suit the theme and the interest of the team as well as group of learners

• blended evaluation

• knowledge based via topic maps

WELL Contract StructureGroup / team number:

Instructor:

Team members with e-mail address:

Topic:

Goals:

Activities and documents:

Significant changes and their dates:

Intermediate version accepted on:

Final version due:

Signature team representative:

Signature instructor:

Top 15 WELL ContractsTopic

Number ofEvaluations

Bonus Points

PHP 62 186

JavaScript 39 83

Internet Exchange Markets 32 83

XML 25 70

Usability and User Interface Design 23 84

Battlenet 23 25

Elaboration of Web-Engineering Exam Questions 22 67

Intrusion Detection Systems 22 65

Formulating Questionnaires 22 38

Web Services (Interoperability) 20 80

Cyberlaw 20 60

IPv6 – The Next-Generation Internet Protocol 20 54

Analyzing Webshops in the USA and in the EU 19 46

Social and Security Aspects of Web Communication 19 44

Security in E- and M-Commerce 18 60

Feedback

Evaluation

General

Project-Based Learning

Course Types

Assessment

Interactive Elements

Reaction Sheets

«Pattern»

Questionnaire

«Pattern»

Feedback Forum

«Pattern»

Collect Feedback

«Pattern»

AlternatingPhases

«Pattern»

(from General)Collect

«Pattern»

(from General)

Feedback Phase

Evaluation

«Pattern»

Self-Evaluation

«Pattern»

Peer-Evaluation

«Pattern»

Instructor-Evaluation

«Pattern»

GenericEvaluation

«Pattern»

BlendedEvaluation

«Pattern»

Examination

«Pattern»

Alternating Phases

«Pattern»

(from General)

Self-Examination

«Pattern»

Instructor-Examination

«Pattern»

AchievementAw ard

«Pattern»

AlternatingPhases

«Pattern»

PreliminaryPhases

«Pattern»

Publish

«Pattern»

StaffMeeting

«Pattern»

Diary

«Pattern»

Collect

«Pattern»

InitialMeeting

«Pattern»

PresentationPhases

«Pattern»

TeamW orkspaces

«Pattern»

Course

«Pattern»

M eeting

«Pattern»

(from Interactive Elem ents)

Exchange ofContributions

«Pattern»

(from Interactive Elem ents)

Project-BasedLearning

«Pattern»

Project Milestone

«Pattern»

Learning Contracts

«Pattern»

Alternating Phases

«Pattern»

(from General)

Know ledge BaseConstruction

«Pattern»

InteractiveLecture

«Pattern»

Lab Course

«Pattern»

Project-BasedLearning Course

«Pattern»

Seminar

«Pattern»

Course

«Pattern»

(from General)Assessment

Phases

«Pattern»

Elaborate Goalsand Expectations

«Pattern»

TheoryElaboration

«Pattern»

Interactive Element«Pattern»

Brainstorming«Pattern»

OnlineDiscussion

«Pattern»

Consultation«Pattern»

Approval«Pattern»

Market«Pattern»

M eeting«Pattern»

Proposal«Pattern»

TeamBuilding

«Pattern»

ConsiderConventional

Style

«Pattern»

Tutorial«Pattern»

W orkshop«Pattern»

InformationGathering

«Pattern»

Chat«Pattern»

ProblemProposals

«Pattern»

Alternating Phases

«Pattern»

(from General)

Computer-M ediatedCommunication

«Pattern»

Exchange ofContributions

«Pattern»

Web Templates

1) Provide administration, user, and report views for pattern application Platform-independent specification

Web Templates2) Instantiation on a particular learning platform

Platform-dependent implementation

Peer-Evaluation submission form

Evaluation

WELL

Current term: about 75% expected WELL participants

2.2%

0.7%

1.5%

4.4%

9.6%

10.3%

22.8%

11.8%

50.0%

30.9%

14.0%

41.9%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

I consider the requiredtime investment in a

WELL contractcompared to learning

for a conventional examas (n=136)

I consider the long-termlearning effect from a

WELL contractcompared to a

conventional exam as(n=136)

much highersomewhat higherequalsomewhat lowermuch lowerno response

Evaluation of WE module

...correlate with students' motivations to participate

comprehensive evaluations are available at http://elearn.pri.univie.ac.at/pca/research

Motivation due to Course Style

3.59

4.05

3.66

3.18

3.19

1 2 3 4 5

Expected(n=131)

Instructor 1(n=38)

Instructor 2(n=36)

Instructor 3(n=32)

Instructor 4(n=25)

(1 = low ... 5 = high)

Motivation in WE: top

factors

Motivations to participate in Web Engineering

4.40

4.03

3.97

3.72

3.48

3.39

4.22

4.19

4.31

4.26

4.03

3.97

4.31

4.08

4.06

4.08

3.78

3.39

4.25

4.10

3.84

2.88

2.69

3.10

4.04

4.12

3.92

3.12

2.28

3.24

1 2 3 4 5

I wanted to improvemy professional

skills

Cooperation withpeers was very

collegial

I had great interestin the content

provided

I liked theatmosphere / theworking climate of

the course

The way the coursewas conductedappealed to me

Active participationof all students was

possible

Typical courseWE instructor 1WE instructor 2WE instructor 3WE instructor 4

agreedisagree

Aspects of Tool Support in Web Engineering:The tools supported me with...

3.42

3.25

3.18

1.85

2.51

2.99

2.27

2.94

3.06

2.65

3.76

3.43

3.76

2.02

2.80

3.15

2.52

3.17

3.13

3.07

3.44

3.18

3.11

1.76

2.21

3.13

2.16

3.08

3.26

2.59

3.23

3.28

2.77

1.84

2.52

2.85

2.21

2.60

2.83

2.28

3.15

3.00

3.00

1.67

2.41

2.74

2.12

2.93

3.04

2.63

1 2 3 4 5

(1) online materials

(2) online examples

(3) storage for differentkinds of resources

(4) discussion forums

(5) workspaces for team andgroup

(6) presentations on the web

(7) exchange withcolleagues

(8) self-evaluation

(9) peer-evaluation

(10) reaction sheets

All instructors (n=160)

Instructor 1 (n=47)

Instructor 2 (n=39)

Instructor 3 (n=47)

Instructor 4 (n=27)

Response behavior, Person-Centered attitudes, and competence in Web Engineering

4.29

4.80

4.67

4.49

4.16

4.21

4.72

4.44

4.05

4.38

3.77

4.20

4.33

3.98

3.35

3.15

3.81

4.11

3.59

2.11

1 2 3 4 5

ResponseBehavior

Transparency

Acceptance

EmpathicUnderstanding

ProfessionalCompetence

Instructor 1

Instructor 2

Instructor 3

Instructor 4

„Die Übung war wieder einmal sehr anders als alle anderen. Das freut mich immer wieder und ich sehe, dass es meinen Kollegen genauso zusagt (die Übungen sind auch immer voll). Sie haben bewiesen, dass sie auch ein konservatives Übungsthema wie Programmieren in einem neuen Stil halten können. Es liegt also nicht am Fachgebiet, sondern nur an der Einstellung. Anfangs war ich der Meinung, es geht nur mit Kommunikativen und diffusen Themen, aber man sieht, es ist auch bei ziemlich exakten Anforderungen möglich, einen Freiraum zu lassen (der nicht nur aus freier Projektwahl besteht). Man konnte ja auch selbst wählen, wie man die Meilensteine gestaltet. Die angeschlossenen WELL-Verträge haben natürlich dazu beigetragen, mehr Kontakt (aber sicher auch mehr Arbeit) zu den Studenten zu haben. (…) “

„Unsere Übungsgruppe war zeitweise chaotisch. Eine bessere Koordination wäre sehr wünschenswert.“

„Persönlich gesehen war es eine ausgesprochen positive Übung mit guter Stimmung und Arbeitsklima. (…) Aus technischer Sichtweise wäre eine bessere Unterstützung bei der Verwirklichung der Projekte wünschenswert gewesen.

Conclusions from the WE experience:

1. In Blended Learning, the platform is used primarily for information transfer, administration, and various forms of reflection

2. Personal dispositions make the difference, if the blended learning scenario relies heavily on cooperative, interactive processes

3. Added value1. learning on three levels, professional action,

2. increased motivation

is feasible, but doesn‘t come for free!!!

Project Management- Soft Skills

• Moderation and selected soft skills depending on students‘ interest

• Szenario

• Learning on three levels

• students‘ rating and reactions

PM/SSScenario

Person-Centered Communication

• 3 Workshops (a 4h) for Theory and structured tasks/exercises, then 3 encounter groups (a 11h).

• Szenario

• Learning on three levels

• students‘ rating and reactions

PCCScenario

Learning on 3 levels

4 intellect 21

16 skills 31

26 personality 4

XXXX

XXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX

XXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXX

X

XXXX XXXXX XXXXX

XXXXXXX

XXXXX XXXXXXX

XXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX

XXXX

PCC PM/SS

Contribution vs. Profit

PCC PM/SS

Contributed 8.10 8.78

Profited 8.95 8.23

SUM 17.05 17.01

Scale:0 = not at all ... 10 = very much

Winter term2003/04

PCC PM/SS

Contributed 7.94 8.64

Profited 9.00 9.59

SUM 16.94 18.23

Winter term2004/05

3.88

4.35

3.41

4.71

4.65

2.12

4.65

4.35

4.00

4.12

4.41

3.94

2.47

4.06

4.06

4.59

3.18

4.71

4.71

1.94

4.71

4.29

4.06

4.35

4.47

4.00

2.82

4.47

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00

Ich gehe unvoreingenommen an Dinge heran

Es fällt mir leicht, andere zu respektieren

Ich fühle mich nur in vertrauter Umgebung wirklichsicher

Ich mag es, wenn ich andere wirklich gut verstehenkann

Ich bin anderen Meinungen gegenüber offen

Es fällt mir schwer, andere zu verstehen

Ich lerne von anderen gerne etwas dazu

Ich kann mich gut in andere hineinversetzen

Ich komme mit neuen Situationen gut zurecht

Ich empfinde mich als authentisch und offen

Ich schätze die Präsenz von anderen

Es fällt mir leicht, auf Meinungen und Gefühle anderereinzugehen

Ich verlasse mich gerne auf andere

Ich kann andere akzeptieren, selbst wenn ich andererMeinung bin

Bewertung (1 = gar nicht, 5 = sehr)PZK

typ. LVA

Challenges for Organizational Development

• Strategies on how to achieve and assess added value and how to convince others.

• How to capture Blended Learning wisdom?• Staff development strategies.• First step towards international

cooperation; virtual community: PCA/HE: http://elearn.pri.univie.ac.at/pca

Finally ...

• Every viewpoint is welcome

• ... as is international cooperation