Proposal for a Radical Change to Teaching, Learning and

Assessment in the Department of Computer Science and

Information Technology

TABLE of CONTENT
S
Executive Overview and Summary.............................................................................1
The foundation principle.......................................................................................... 1
Teaching Practices.................................................................................................. 1
Learning Principles and Practices............................................................................1
Curriculum Matters.................................................................................................. 2
Assessment and Evaluation.....................................................................................2
Meeting Industry Expectations................................................................................2
Background and Vision............................................................................................... 4
Background of the Author: Roy Morien....................................................................4
Interest in IT/IS Education and Publications:............................................................4
What has changed in 50 Years?...............................................................................5
Other Research, Experience and Opinion.................................................................6
Summary of the Proposed ‘Radical’ Approach:........................................................6
Subject Consolidation and the ‘Super Project’..........................................................6
What is the real value of the ‘Super Project’............................................................7
Consistency with University and Faculty Policy........................................................8
No Barrier to Implementation..................................................................................9
Curriculum Matters................................................................................................... 10
Consolidation of Subjects......................................................................................10
Sequence of Subjects............................................................................................ 10
Curriculum Content: Relevance and Comprehensiveness......................................11
Just-in-Time Learning............................................................................................. 11
Lean Education..................................................................................................... 12
Post-Practice Reflection......................................................................................... 12
Assessment and Evaluation......................................................................................13
Suggestions and Recommendations......................................................................13
Work Load Imposed on the Teaching Academic.....................................................14
Teaching Approach................................................................................................... 16
The Learning Pyramid...........................................................................................16
Learning Styles..................................................................................................... 16
Blended Learning.................................................................................................. 16
E-Learning............................................................................................................. 17
Social Media Use................................................................................................... 17
Learning Matters...................................................................................................... 18
Student Responsibilities........................................................................................18
Team Based Learning............................................................................................18
Providing Evidence of Activities and Outcomes......................................................18
Learning ‘Best Practices’.......................................................................................18
The Social Aspect of Learning................................................................................19
Industry Expectations............................................................................................... 20
Personal Experience.............................................................................................. 20
Institutional Experience.........................................................................................20
Department Facilities Availability and Access...........................................................21
Equipment Facilities.............................................................................................. 21
Software Facilities................................................................................................. 21
Building the Brand.................................................................................................... 22
Engagement with Employers.................................................................................22
Building a Research Profile....................................................................................23
Attracting Graduate Research Students and Other Researchers............................23
A Leading Name in CS and IT Education................................................................23
A Final Word: Personal Experience........................................................................23
Executive Overview and Summary
This proposal is for a radical change to the Teaching, Learning and Evaluation and
Assessment practices and processes in the Department of Computer Science and
Information Technology in the Faculty of Science in Naresuan University.

The foundation principle or philosophy of this proposal is:

Skills, know how, knowledge and deep understanding, NOT preparation for
the exams.
The proposed radical changes arise from the author’s experience as a Lecturer,
Researcher and Author in this area of Academic Endeavour (put simply, computer
systems development) over the course of a university teaching career since 1986; 30
years. The author has written two textbooks, and has published nearly 40 conference
papers and journal articles.
This experience includes leadership of students in industrial experience project
development, giving the author a high level of confidence that the proposed radical
changes can be successful. The changes encompass the following:

Teaching Practices:

 Learning Leaders: Teaching academics will be styled ‘Learning Leaders’ to

emphasise their role in mentoring and guiding students through their learning
experience. Teaching Academics will have a major mentoring role, and they will
have a significant responsibility to ensure students achieve at a high level by
constant monitoring, mentoring, assisting and evaluating students’ progress.
 Teaching Teams: Teaching Academics will now be a teaching team rather than
individually and alone being responsible for semester bounded subjects, often
with protected ‘ownership’ of the subject. Students will consult Teaching
Academics on the basis of the Teaching Academic’s particular expertise and
competence in an academic area or topic, rather than as the teacher in charge
of a subject.
 Blended Teaching: E-Learning & Social Media will become prominent, with
traditional lectures and formal tutorials abandoned in favour of a substantially e-
Teaching environment and the use of social media, with face-to-face learning
between members of the Teaching Team and student project groups. Teaching
Academics will be required to create e-Learning material, particularly video
material, for students to access via the Internet on a Facebook group or a
dedicated University e-Learning website.
 Continuous, Longitudinal Assessment: While maintaining the term/subject
structure for any necessary University administrative purposes, end of terms
exams could be abandoned in favour of continuous longitudinal assessment,
including assessment by the Teaching Team, by student self-assessment and peer
assessment, where students do not ‘fail’ but revise, reflect and re-learn where
appropriate under the guiding eye of the Teaching Team.
 Course Based on a “Super Project”: The use of a ‘super project’, an industrial
strength and complex development project activity, as the platform for
developing student competence, skills, know-how, knowledge and deep
understanding over the full period of the course. Requirements will be added and
modified all during the course to ensure students experience all important
aspects of software development as required in the curriculum.

Learning Principles and Practices:

 Blended Learning: A combination of e-Learning, student learning groups, as

needed lectures, face-to-face learning with members of the Teaching Team.
 Student Centred Learning: Students will be required to take significantly
greater responsibility for their own learning. Overall, Student Centred Learning
with hands-on, practical learning will be the usual Learning approach.
 Project Based Learning: Project-based Learning, with the ‘super project’, will be
the primary learning vehicle, ensuring students have significant hands on system
development experience, with deep learning and gaining significant ‘know-how’
and ‘know-why’.
 Team Learning & Soft Skills: Soft Skills, including Team Learning, with
students being grouped into Learning Teams of 6 students, and undertaking all of

Roy I. Morien Teaching, Learning & Assessment Proposal Page

 their work in the team, with curriculum emphasis on Creative Thinking, Problem
Solving, Design Thinking, Agile Learning etc..
 Longitudinal Learning and Assessment: ‘Deep Learning’ experiential learning
rather than ‘Shallow Learning’ for the purpose of a forthcoming examination.
Continuous evolution of knowledge and know-how. The ‘super project’ will provide
a constant context and continuous learning opportunities.
 E-Learning & Social Media: E-Learning becomes a major aspect of the
students’ learning endeavours. Self-Directed Learning, self-motivation, and
reflective learning practices will be the norm.
 Meeting Industry Needs: Students will gain many of the essential skills, hard
and soft, that will enable them to confidently and immediately be useful to their
future employer, while also having a broad education.

Curriculum Matters:

 The “Super Project” foundation: The curriculum will be defined by the

development requirements of the ‘super project’ which will be controlled and
managed, and extended and broadened as necessary by the Teaching
Academics.
 Comprehensive curriculum: Overall, the ‘super project’ will reflect an
appropriate and comprehensive curriculum more than sufficient to meet any
academic quality guidelines.
 Effective and Efficient Curriculum Streaming: The curriculum will be
streamlined and streamed in such a way as to ensure continuity of learning and
eradication of the ‘waste’ of students’ shallow learning only for the purpose of
passing an exam, and deep learning by appropriate continuous repetition of
development activities will be achieved.
 Creative Thinking, Problem Solving Methods will be an essential component
of the curriculum which will emphasize ‘soft’ skills including Self-Directed
Learning, Team participation, etc.
 Appropriate aspects of the curriculum will be self-taught with guidance and
reflective analysis of previous experience in the ‘super project’.

Assessment and Evaluation:

 Continuous assessment, peer assessment, self-assessment will be

emphasised, and sit-down exams will be de-emphasised, to the point of just not
having exams at all.
 Mentoring and guiding students: The primary purpose of assessment will be
to provide guidance to the Learning Leaders (the Teaching Academics) for the
mentoring and guidance of students, with the ultimate aim of achieving a
significantly high level of learning achievement by students.
 High Learning Achievement: There should be no more satisfaction with
students earning ‘Ds’ or ‘Cs’ which in reality is an acknowledgement that the
student didn’t really learn much. There should be an expectation that all students
will achieve a Summative Assessment score in the 85%-99% range, rather than in
the 40%-55% range.
 Teaching Academic Responsibility: Teaching Academics will shoulder a
greater burden of ensuring that their students do achieve these results, which will
be quite possible in the Teaching and Learning processes suggested here. This is
done now, but the Teaching Academic’s options are restricted by the, usually
unwritten, policy of not failing students.

Meeting Industry Expectations:

 While acknowledging that the University’s role is far more than being a training
school, industry expectations must be understood and met by the production of
competent, knowledgeable and skilled graduates, able to demonstrate a high
level of know-how, independence and creative thinking and Life-Long learning
ability.
 Aspects of industry which are most important and can be achieved under this new
radical approach include the ‘soft’ skills of:
 Teamwork: software developers normally work in teams. After 3 years of
working in a team with perhaps 5 or 6 other students, the student will be well
experienced in this.

Roy I. Morien Teaching, Learning & Assessment Proposal Page

  Problem Solving: Software developers are constantly faced with the need
to solve problems and develop the programmed logic to solve those
problems. The 3 years of ‘hands-on’ experience solving the problems in the
‘super project’ will certainly ensure that students have problem solving skills
and abilities.
 Thinking Creatively: the T&L emphasis on creative thinking, independent
action, ability to find solutions, ensures the graduate will, again, be very well
able to bring these skills to their employment.
 Ability to work independently: 3 years of monitored, mentored but self-
directed learning with significant hands-on experience and know-how
ensures that the graduate has this attribute.
 Professionalism: Knowing their status as educated professionals behaving
in an independent, well informed and ethical manner.
 Ability to continue Learning (Life-Long Learning, essential in professional
practitioners)
 General know-how, hands-on skills, and analysis ability.
 Transitional skills: coping with Change.
 Hard Skills: The graduate from the Department should have a number of
essential hard skills, including:
 Programming Skills: Well developed skill in one, perhaps two languages,
and importantly, skills in debugging, code modification as well as the ability
to learn other languages based on their broad knowledge of computer
programming structures and concepts.
 Database Skills: In depth understanding and skill in creating databases,
using SQL, using database development and development support tools.
Modern DBMS’s now termed NoSQL DB’s will be included.
 Systems as a Service: Good knowledge of concepts and practices of PaaS,
SaaS, IaaS, DevOps and Cloud Computing, including hands-on skills and
knowhow in using appropriate software.
 Ability to develop in most platforms; Windows, and smartphone and tablet
computing.

Roy I. Morien Teaching, Learning & Assessment Proposal Page

Background and Vision
Background of the Author: Roy Morien.
Over a career in University teaching spanning 30 years, and some years in a training
role in the Australian Public Service, I have accumulated significant experience and
gained many insights into the education process, especially in the area of Information
Systems development education. Experience does count, especially if that experience
is evidenced by published research.
If I include my years as a student, then I can say that I have been in the University
sector since 1965, a period of more than 50 years. I have obviously observed, and
have been part of, extraordinary change in the Information System Industry. In fact,
when I first went to university, there was no Information Systems Industry, if you
include computers and information technology in that observation. My first contact
with computers was on a Burroughs programmable accounting machine in 1974, in
what was termed the Accounting Lab at my college (The Western Australian Institute
of Technology in Perth, Australia, a.k.a WAIT). I started in a programming career with
NCR in February 1976, exactly 40 years ago to the month (that is, March, 2016). I
learned COBOL in that year. After a year with NCR (now defunct as a computer
manufacturer and is a subsidiary of Bell Corp), what followed was a 10 year career
mainly in the Australian Public Service in Canberra in which I learned about CICS, I
programmed in FORTRAN, CICS/COBOL and ASSEMBLER, I learned about VSAM and I
was introduced to micro-computers that used the 8080 and 6502 microprocessors. All
of these knowledge areas have been overwhelmed by a flood of new technology.
Then, after 10 years in the government service, and being promoted to a senior
development manager role, in 1986, I entered the academic sphere as a lecturer at
what soon became the Curtin University of Technology in Perth, Western Australia,
formed from the Western Australian Institute of Technology.
Things Haven’t Changed Much!
In 1965, as a student of Economics, in each subject I sat in a weekly 2-hour lecture
and a 1 hour tutorial, I wrote a term paper, and had an exam at the end of each
semester.
Ten years later, in 1975, as a lecturer in Corporate and Taxation Law, in each subject
I taught a weekly 2-hour lecture and a 1 hour tutorial, I assessed a term paper, and
set an exam at the end of each semester.
In 1986, as a lecturer in programming and in the emerging topic of database
development and systems analysis in each subject I taught a weekly 2-hour lecture
and a 2 hour practical session, I assessed a small term project, and set an exam at
the end of each semester.

Interest in IT/IS Education and Publications:

In 1992 I published a software prototyping methodology for database development 1,
and subsequently an updated version of this software prototyping methodology was
published at an international conference in Denver, Colorado, in the United States 2 in
2005. I have been teaching this database development approach since 1992.
In 1994 I made my first foray into the subject of college and university curriculum 3,
because, at that time, I was very aware of the significant gap between curriculum
content, academic aspirations and the Information Systems industry’s expectations
and requirements. Particularly I wrote on what I saw as the lack of ‘soft’ or
‘transitional’ skills in curriculum (such as Creative Thinking, Problem Solving, Team
work and Leadership). In 2004 I presented ideas on teaching practice and student
feedback4 at a university research conference, and an associated paper was

1
Morien, Roy, Prototyping Large On-Line Systems: Using a concept of a Focal Entity for task
identification, Proceedings of the Third Australian Conference on Information Systems,
Wollongong, 5-8 October, 1992
2
Morien, Roy, Agile Development of the Database: A Focal Entity Prototyping Approach,
Agile Conference, Denver, Colorado, USA, July, 2005
3
Morien, Roy and Olive Schmidenberg, Educating IS Professionals: The Tertiary Education
Challenge, APITITE'94 Conference, Brisbane, June, 1994
4
Chang, Elizabeth, Roy Morien, Chin Kum Leng & C. Cheah, Systematic Approach to Triple
Feedback Systems for Teaching Enhancement, Teaching & Learning Forum, 2004, Murdoch
Roy I. Morien Teaching, Learning & Assessment Proposal Page
published at an International conference in Las Vegas 5. Of particular interest in this
paper is the listing of several Teaching issues and Learning issues, all of which are
relevant in 2016, twelve years later.
In 2005. I discussed and summarised my concerns at what I saw was the poor state of
database education and the contradictory and confusing information on database
development methods published in popular textbooks6. This paper was republished in
that year in an international journal7
In two further papers I published the results of my ‘Teaching Academic in the
classroom’ research into student experience and responses in their Final Year
industry experience projects, which I oversaw as Subject Leader 8. This paper was also
published in an international journal9. The second paper10 was also published in an
international journal11.

What has changed in 50 Years?

In the Computer industry: everything!
In the way universities and colleges teach, and students learn: very little! Obviously
what we may term ‘educational technologies’ have been developed and applied, and
the Internet has provided substantially greater opportunities for plagiarism, but as far
as the pedagogy of computer systems development is concerned, basically nothing
has changed in 50 years. College and university Teaching Academics still usually give
a weekly stand-up lecture, still give students a term paper and an end of term exam,
students still undertake, where appropriate, a small practical project. The tutorial may
now have been replaced by a practical lab session. But, basically, nothing has
changed!

Other Research, Experience and Opinion

This diagram summarises my proposal, and shows the extent of research, experience
and opinion that is available on the Internet. A significant aspect of my recent
publications has been the need for an understanding of appropriate reference
disciplines, and drawing ideas and issues from outside the more narrow scope of
‘computer system development methodologies’.1213

University, Perth, Australia, February 2004

5
Morien, Roy, E. Chang, and K. L. Chin, Seeking Systematic Feedback For Enhancing
Curriculum Quality and Relevance, International Conference on Software, Engineering
Research and Practice (SERP'04: June 21-24, 2004, Las Vegas, Nevada, USA
6
Morien, Roy A Critical Evaluation of Database Textbooks, Curriculum and Educational
Outcomes, Information Systems Education Conference (ISEC2005), Columbus, Ohio, USA,
October 2005
7
Information Systems Education Journal, 4 (44). http://isedj.org/4/44/. ISSN: 1545-679X.
8
Morien, Roy, Insights into Using Agile Development Methods in Student Final Year Projects,
Informing Science + Information Technology Education Joint Conference (INSITE2004), Central
Queensland University, Rockhampton, June 2004 (paper accepted in "Best Paper" Category,
for presentation, and awarded Conference Silver Medal).
9
Journal of Issues in Informing Science and Information Technology, Vol.1, 2004.
10
Morien, Roy, Student Experience of Using Agile Development Methods in Industrial
Experience Projects, Information Systems Education Conference (ISEC2005), Columbus, Ohio,
October 2005).
11
Information Systems Education Journal, 4 (103). http://isedj.org/4/103/. ISSN: 1545-679X.
12
Morien, Roy, An Agile Project Management Manifesto – A Reference Disciplines Framework
for Agile Development, iNCEB2010, Kasetsart University, Bangkok, Thailand, November 2010.
13
Morien, Roy, Seeking a New Paradigm for Software Project Management: Reference
Disciplines for Agile Development, 5th International Conference on Internet (ICONI 2013),
December, 2013, Pattaya, Thailand. (paper received "Best Paper" Award).
Roy I. Morien Teaching, Learning & Assessment Proposal Page
 Summary of the Proposed ‘Radical’ Approach:
1. Teaching approaches including Team Teaching and E-Teaching to replace the
traditional single Teaching Academic per subject, giving stand-up lectures and
tutorials.
2. Learning Blended Learning Approach which includes Student Centred Learning,
Self-Directed Learning, Problem Based Learning, Student Responsibility for
learning, Deep Learning, E-Learning in place of lecture and tutorial attendance.
3. Assessment and Evaluation Approaches of Student Self-Assessment, both
Evaluative and Formative Assessment, Continuous Assessment.
4. Curriculum Matters, including teaching Creative Thinking, ‘soft’ skills such as
Team Participation, Leadership skills and Problem Solving, as well as ‘hard’
technical skills, attention to employability.
5. Consider experience from other institutions in e-learning.
6. Understand and meet industry expectations and the employability of our
graduates. Promote our graduates by direct contact with employers, PR programs,
skills ‘fairs’.
7. Building a ‘brand’ for the Department, Faculty and University.

Subject Consolidation and the ‘Super Project’

 Individual subjects will be combined and consolidated, but will remain ‘on the books’
essentially only as administrative units in accordance with University policy and
requirements.
 The mainstream of Teaching and Learning over the duration of the course will be
based on a ‘super project’ which will be developed over the whole course of the
students’ studies. This project will be of a very substantial nature, of ‘industrial level’
complexity, and will incorporate as many aspects of the contemporary Information
Systems technical landscape as possible, from PC based spread sheeting through
Cloud based database systems, DevOps, to Smartphone applications and ‘remote’
and ‘mobile’ computing concepts and practices.
 Teaching Academics will cooperate overall as a Teaching Team, each Teaching
Academic having particular expertise that students can access as and when required.
Students will therefore have available to them a Teaching Academic who is expert in
programming, if needed, or another Teaching Academic who is expert in database, if
needed, or one expert in iPhone App development or Android App development, or
Internet programming and web design, and so on.
 Students will develop this ‘super project’ in teams over the whole period of their
course.
 Stand up lectures will be phased out in favour of properly developed videos, perhaps
developed in collaboration with students from the Mass Communication, TV
department of another Faculty.

What is the real value of the ‘Super Project’

Teaching academics have usually tried to include a ‘hands on’ project in the subject
they are teaching. This acknowledges the importance of such practical activity.
However, there are a number of weaknesses in this approach, which bring such
projects almost to the point of irrelevance and failure.
 A subject based project sufficient for one term, does not give students any
realistic experience in systems development which could be carried forward into
their future employment.
 Subject based projects must necessarily be small and simple, narrowly defined,
which again do not give students any realistic experience in systems
development.
 Because the project is assessable, all requirements need to be given to students
at the start of term and cannot be changed, thereby not reflecting in any way the
reality of project development.
 Students working in teams allows some students to hide behind the good work of
other students.
 Students often copy from others, or ask outsiders to do the development.
Having a ‘super project’ as suggested here means that the students will be working in
a context that evolves and in which the students’ knowledge can grow with the
project ‘so far’ providing a solid foundation for further learning. The main benefit of
the ‘super project’ is that it gives the students an on-going context in which to learn,
Roy I. Morien Teaching, Learning & Assessment Proposal Page
in which they can see real outcomes. My experience has been that the students
become engrossed in the project and are proud of their demonstrable achievement.
Students usually have a significant level of creativity which is not used when students
are sitting in a 2-hour lecture, and not otherwise drawn upon. A summary of the
benefits of the ‘super project’ include:
 Students have experience over a period of time of working in a team, being part
of a social group working together, solving problems, sharing knowledge and
enjoying the companionship.
 The continuing project becomes an understandable and understood context for
the students, providing a realistic environment for students to work in, resulting in
a demonstrable outcome that the students will be proud to show.
 Students better understand the requirements for standards and appropriate
documentation.
 Students will gain real-world experience of the problems, difficulties, successes
and disappointments when developing a project of an industrial scale.
 Students will better understand the need for collaboration with other ‘developers’
and ‘clients’ and ‘users’. The social aspects of team development are
experienced, not just the technical.
 From a purely Teaching and Learning perspective, the students will learn ‘deeply’
and gain realistic knowledge and knowhow.
 A well-developed outcome of which the students will be proud will drive ‘deep
learning’, in total contrast the anxiety driven shallow learning of the exam
environment.
 As the project spans maybe 3 years of their course, the concept of longitudinal
learning is experienced. The students’ knowledge and knowhow is built up over
time, layer on layer, in a longitudinal way, akin to the intellectual development
experienced in a research project.

Consistency with University and Faculty Policy

While the University does have administrative policies and requirements, it is not the
practice at universities to dictate curriculum nor to impose teaching and learning
practices on lecturers and students. What is taught and how it is taught are usually
left up to the Faculty or Department, and the individual lecturers. Similarly, while
assessment is a given requirement, the style, nature and mode of assessment is not
usually prescribed.
The current structures of the courses are obviously in accordance with University and
Faculty policy, and Department course structure requirements. There is no reason
why the proposed radical approach to Teaching, Learning and Assessment must
necessarily be counter to current policies. However, subjects will essentially become
administrative units only, to conform to University policy and practice.
For example, students would still enroll in the Introduction to Database Development
subject in a semester, as always. However, perhaps that would be in Semester 1
rather than Semester 3, because the ‘super project’ approach introduces students to
data structures, database development tools, database system analysis activities, ER
Modelling and Data Modelling right at the start (and their knowledge grows, evolves
and becomes deeper over time). Students would enroll in the Systems Analysis and
Design subject in the normal way and be assessed in that subject based on the
knowledge that they have acquired by doing the ‘super project’ so far.
However, the Systems Analysis and Design subject would be moved to the final
semester for the purpose of enrolment. The subject would then become much more
of a reflective subject with students, who would now be much more mature in the
learning and intellectual attitudes, bringing their experience gained in the ‘super
project’ to developing theories, discussing systems analysis best practices, writing a
substantial User Guide for systems analysts as post-hoc reflective learning. Perhaps
we can call this ‘deductive reasoning’ where the theories about Systems Analysis
methodologies are understood by reaching specific, logical conclusions based on
previous experience and the examination of that experience.
Similarly, by the final term of their course, the students will have had sufficient
experience to re-visit their team activities over the course of the ‘super project’ and
reflect on the success of the project, the efficiency and effectiveness of their
development activities, and be able to present a substantial, thoughtful, mini-

Roy I. Morien Teaching, Learning & Assessment Proposal Page

dissertation on Software Project Management. This would be done within a subject
framework addressing Software Project Management Best Practices, comparative
Software Project Management approaches and Leadership studies and Team Studies.
Experience and practice will enable students to better formulate, learn about and
understand appropriate Theory, while reflecting upon and developing their own
theoretical propositions and formulations. This is a significantly better approach than
having stand-up lectures before the practical learning activity while promising the
students that the theories presented to them will be better understandable ‘later’ and
applicable ‘sometime in the future’.
One important consideration is that regardless of which particular systems analysis or
project management method is taught and examined, almost inevitably the graduate
will commence with an employer who ‘does it their way’, often with in-house
approaches. This implies that specific methods being taught is not very helpful, but
better a good understanding of the need for a methodical approach is essential.

No Barrier to Implementation
How the ‘super project’ approach will be acceptable and accepted by ‘the powers that
be’ according to University policies and practices is an obvious potential barrier to
acceptance. However, as discussed above, it need not be fatal, and it need not even
be seen as a problem; certainly not as a problem that is insurmountable.
There are two major aspects to this proposal. The first is the essential amalgamation
of the curriculum, especially programming, systems analysis, database systems and
project management, into an holistic curriculum approach based on the second major
aspect, which is the use of a ‘super project’ of significant industrial proportions that
will be the major learning vehicle, covering most of the course, and undertaken by
the students over the full duration of their course.
As discussed above, students will still enroll in subjects in terms, essentially the same
curriculum will be covered overall, but the curriculum will be essentially be decided
by the requirements of the ‘super project’, as given to the students at any point in
time. Students will still be assessed and their grades recorded by subject and by
term. What will be different will probably be the order and sequence in which the
curriculum will be learned, the methods of Teaching and Learning, and the
Assessment methods. The curriculum will be modified to ensure that Creative
Thinking, Problem Solving and other ‘soft’ and ‘transitional’ skills will be emphasised.
So, from a policy point of view there should be no impediment to implementation of
the radical approach to Teaching, learning and Assessment, as proposed.
What follows in this document is written in a way that acknowledges the policy
constraints and demands.

Roy I. Morien Teaching, Learning & Assessment Proposal Page

Curriculum Matters
The overall curriculum content of any university or college course must always be
scrutinised, on a continuing basis, for appropriateness and relevance. This is
especially so for computer studies. It is difficult if not impossible to consider if the
curriculum is ‘complete’ as containing all the knowledge about the academic area,
but the curriculum must be sufficiently comprehensive to be able to rightly say that
the students are qualified in that professional or academic area.
The curriculum overall will be dictated by the nature and content of the ‘super
project’, and at any one time the curriculum of interest will be stated by the
requirements of the ‘super project’ as given to the students at any point in time.
Overall, curriculum could be classified into two categories: Practical and Theoretical.
Obviously any aspect of curriculum will contain elements of both, but one or the other
is prominent. For example, programming is an essentially hands-on activity and can
only really be learned by doing it. There are certainly theories, practices and
principles underpinning it, but unless these are put into practice, the students will
probably miss the point and forget about it. Similarly database system development.
Systems Analysis could be classified as being predominantly theoretical, although the
theory does form and inform the practice. Never forget, however, that there have
been more than 200 Systems Analysis Methodologies published in the last 40 years,
and nearly every textbook on database presents different versions of and approaches
to Entity Modelling and Data Modelling. Each of these methodologies is based on
theory and principle.
It is difficult to identify any part of an appropriate and comprehensive undergraduate
program of IT, Business Computing and even Computer Science that is theory only, or
is practical only. What is a problem is where theoretical aspects are taught without
practice, on the promise or assumption that the theory will be useful ‘later on’, ‘soon’,
in a ‘future subject’. Students may not grasp the full understanding of the theory,
and/or most probably will just forget about it after the exam.
So the principle here is that theory should be taught in situ, meaning put into practice
immediately to enable the students to understand its relevance and usefulness, or,
better still, the theory is derived by retrospective analysis of and reflection on the
experience and practice of the students in previous subjects.

Consolidation of Subjects
Many subjects can easily be consolidated. For example, systems analysis activities
can be undertaken as part of the development of a database system in which
database concepts, Entity Modelling, Normalisation etc. are taught, and practiced.
Include the development of database processing into the mix and it is easy to see
how the programming and construction of a database system, which includes data
and processing ascertained from users and clients, are really just different but closely
integrated parts of the whole.
By consolidating subjects, more room becomes available in the formal structure of
the course to include other subjects, which may or may not be able to be taught in
the ‘super project’ structure. ‘Introduction to Computer Forensics’, ‘System Hacking’
subjects come to mind.

Sequence of Subjects
Would it be appropriate, even better, to teach students about data structures, under
the heading of database development, as a first subject, with a programming subject
following that? Do students need a Systems Analysis subject only after they have
started to learn how to program, but before anything about Project Management is
taught? Is it really useful to spend a semester teaching students the intricacies of a
particular Database System Analysis Method (such as Falkenberg’s Deep Structured
Sentences or the ANSI/SPARC three-level framework for database management
systems, or traditional SDLC and Data Flow Diagrams) entirely as a theoretical
and paper based subject before a subject in which the students actually
implement a database system?

Roy I. Morien Teaching, Learning & Assessment Proposal Page

No! Often the sequence of subjects and streams of curriculum are just matters of
convenience, and not dictated by University or Faculty policy, nor are they essential
in their place in the curriculum overall.
So there is no reason whatever why students cannot start to experience System
Analysis on Day 1 of the course, while being introduced to data structures at the
same time, and starting to learn about the GUI development environment and
language that they will very soon be using. Their knowledge in these areas will be
deepened and expanded over the future period of the project.

Curriculum Content: Relevance and

Comprehensiveness
Obviously all curriculum should be relevant, but this must be considered in terms of
the future. Will the curriculum now being taught be relevant in the future when the
student graduates? The other real problem faced by curriculum developers is that
there are time limitations, so what to choose for the curriculum must be taken from a
large body of subjects of interest, and cannot include all of it.
A significant aspect of curriculum must be the ‘soft’ skills that students need to learn,
such as Critical Thinking, Leadership Skills, some management theory. Basically, the
reference disciplines that actually support the concept of building systems in a
systematic, productive way to support the activities of the business, or to apply
technology to problems. I addressed this situation in two papers14 and 15
What must not be disregarded is simply teaching students how to learn!

Just-in-Time Learning
Up until now, Just-in-Time learning has meant cramming ‘just in time’ for the end of
term exams. This approached has encouraged, indeed almost guaranteed, shallow
learning for the purpose of passing the exams. Just-in-Time learning is given a very
different meaning here, though.
There is a significant problem that has been experienced by any teaching academic,
and that is ensuring students learn particular subject matter by the time that
knowledge needs to be applied in other subjects. Significant time has been wasted by
students forgetting what they learned previously, by subject matter not being
followed up and applied in subsequent subjects, and so on. Frankly, efforts at
streaming and having ‘pre-requisite subjects’ have not been very successful for a
variety of reasons (especially the problem of ‘shallow learning’, cramming sufficient
for the end-of-term exam and then forgetting, by students).
By having the ‘super project’ as the basis of the learning agenda, requirements can
be introduced at any time that will challenge the student to complete. The student
must learn sufficient subject matter to be able to develop the requirements. Careful
consideration by the teaching staff of ‘what to teach next’, now more ‘what the
students should learn next’, will guide the immediately next facets of the ‘super’
project, and will result in students learning the intended lessons ‘just in time’ to apply
that knowledge. One significant and advantageous outcome of this is, given the
‘super project’ is thoughtfully managed, and by the end of the course students will
not have learned matters that are not really important or useful.
For example, the Teaching Team (comprised of all ‘Learning Leaders’ in the
Department), might decide it is time for students to learn how to develop smartphone
apps. So, the students are advised that the ‘super project’ system now requires a
smartphone app for managing student accommodation in and near the university,
and a second app for allowing students to see where the shuttle buses are on
campus, and a third app for allowing students to access their academic record and
assessment results on their smartphone. Because these apps are relevant to the
students, they are within the context of the project the students are working on, and

14
Morien, Roy, Seeking a new Paradigm for Software Project Management – is it Agile, Lean
or a Model of Concurrent Perception, iNCEB2010, Kasetsart University, Bangkok, Thailand,
November 2010.
15
Morien, Roy, Seeking a New Paradigm for Software Project Management: Reference
Disciplines for Agile Development, 5th International Conference on Internet (ICONI 2013),
December, 2013, Pattaya, Thailand. (paper received "Best Paper" Award).

Roy I. Morien Teaching, Learning & Assessment Proposal Page

will therefore be seen as useful to the students, instead of being a simple ‘made up’
project.
Lean Education
Following the basic precepts laid down by researchers and practitioners in the area of
Lean Manufacturing, and applying what are known as the 7 Wastes of Manufacturing,
the concept of Lean Product Development has emerged as a well published and
researched topic, as has the more relevant concept (in this context) of Lean Software
Development. These concepts can readily be applied to education, and The 7 Wastes
of Education have been identified as central issues in what is now known as Lean
Education. The ‘waste’ of unused or forgotten subject matter is one important aspect
addressed under the heading of Lean Education, a concept that I published in 2014
and 2015 at international conferences.16, 1718, 19
Post-Practice Reflection
Consider an example, that of Systems Analysis Methodologies. Since the 1970’s there
have been many different systems analysis methods published. These have been
categorised in many and various ways, such as being ‘soft systems analysis
methods’, ‘Waterfall model methods’, ‘Data-driven’, ‘Object Oriented, ‘Agile
Methods’. To have a separate and bounded subject called Systems Analysis Methods
which is limited to one term means that very little, if anything, can be taught about
most of these approaches. Usually a single approach is taught, selected usually
according to the particular lecturer’s view and knowledge. Such as subject is also
usually taught towards the beginning of the course, on the assumption that that
particular method will be applied in subsequent subjects.
Would it not be better to give students experience of actual hands-on analysis and
development, perhaps allowing them to develop their own analysis approach, for
better or for worse, and then allow the students to reflect upon their experience? This
would give them a reflective framework upon which to assess various systems
analysis methods, and to understand better why some methods are more
appropriate, more successful than others. Even perhaps to decide that having defined
methods that must be learned and followed, accompanied by process auditing, is
really not necessary.
Such post-practical reflection, which would be done in the students’ final year, can be
applied to many areas. By first having mentored, assisted, hands-on practical
experience in a realistic setting, followed by reflection on accomplishments and
failures, allowing thoughtful analysis of the previous behaviour and practice, will
surely provide greater insights and critical ability and intellectual development, which
we call ‘education’ as distinct from ‘training.

16
Morien, Roy, Streamlining Business Computing Education, 6th International Conference on
the Internet (ICONI 2014), December, 2014, Taipei, Taiwan.
17
Morien, Roy, Business Computing Education: A Radical Approach for Efficient Streamlining
of an Effective Education Process and Relevant Curriculum, International Journal of Advanced
Media and Communication (to appear)
18
Morien, Roy, Agile and Agility in Computer System Development Education, 7th
International Conference on Internet (ICONI 2015), December, 2015, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
19
Morien, Roy, Pedagogical Agility and Agile Methodologies in Computer System
Development Education, International Journal of Advanced Intelligence Paradigms (IJAIP), (to
appear).

Roy I. Morien Teaching, Learning & Assessment Proposal Page

Assessment and Evaluation
Keeping in mind that University policies and timetables (i.e. semesters, exams,
grades etc.) need to be adhered to in general, I see no reason why assessment of
students cannot be done on a semester basis. The semester results would be
essentially a longitudinal statement of learning achievement (Summative
Assessment), and would also be useful for the continuing monitoring of students’
further learning needs (Formative Assessment). The ‘super project’ is the overall
continuing part of the course, and assessment needs to be done regularly and
periodically as a matter of course.
I would consider the matter of assessment of students and evaluation of their projects
and activities in the following way.
1. Having studied the literature on academic assessment and evaluation, I would
include student self-assessment and peer assessment as an integral part of the
overall assessment.
2. End of semester exams may still be required by University and Faculty policy, but
we must acknowledge the negative aspects of this:
 Students tend to limit their learning to what they think will be in the exam.
 The 1-2 weeks prior to the exam week are usually seen as the real learning
period in the semester, when students study hard, cram in the knowledge
sufficient to pass the exam. The inevitably means shallow learning, and much
of what is ‘crammed’ is forgotten after the exam.
 It is almost policy in many Faculties that the Teaching Academics must give
students ‘exam tips’ which does nothing more than narrow down the students’
scope of shallow learning.
 The emphasis on the end of semester exam often causes significant stress on
students, often resulting in the student ‘freezing’ in the exam and failing
because of the stress impact.
 The very purpose of end of semester exams should be scrutinised and the real
academic benefits, if any, clearly stated.
3. Continuous assessment, or ‘semester papers’ and small semester limited projects
are open to cheating and plagiarism, students copying other students work,
students not participating in team-based projects, and so on.
4. Too often students fall behind in their studies, in a semester, and resort to
cheating etc., as suggested in 3, and there is no systematic or systemic approach
to monitoring students’ real progress and knowledge gain.

Suggestions and Recommendations

Overall assessment and grading of students should comprise four heads of
assessment:
1. Continuous assessment by the Teaching Academic over the course of the
semester, with students informed of this assessment outcome weekly – 40% of
total assessment.
2. Student self-evaluation by way of peer evaluation within the student project
teams – 40% of total evaluation.
3. Six small spot tests on particular topics, of 30 minutes duration, at various times
during the semester, totaling 20% of the total assessment mainly for Formative
Assessment purposes.
4. Final end of semester exam – It is suggested that these will be discontinued.
The spot tests (3.) and the end of semester exam (4.) are conventional, are within
University policies and practices, and need little explanation, except, for the spot
tests, these are an on-going encouragement to students to keep up with their
learning, and also to assist Teaching Academics to monitor students individually and
overall for the purpose of providing help and extra information as required. This
qualifies as Formative Assessment as well as, together with the final exam,
Summative Assessment.
In the ‘super project’ approach, Continuous Assessment can be made realistic, useful,
and free from corrupt practice (which cheating and plagiarism is!) in a number of
ways.
With students working in teams:

Roy I. Morien Teaching, Learning & Assessment Proposal Page

1. The team must prepare and update on a weekly basis, a Team Project Diary,
recording the decisions made by the team in regard to standards agreed upon,
documentation requirements agreed upon, design decisions agreed upon,
commentary on overall progress etc. etc.
2. The team must prepare and update on a weekly basis, a Team Project Backlog,
showing the known tasks, in order of development priority, that the team must
undertake (i.e. basically the Requirements List), or has completed, showing the
estimated time to complete, and in the case of finished tasks, the actual time to
complete, and indicate which team members or members were given the task.
3. For each individual member of the team:
a. An Individual Sprint Plan for the next week (or two weeks), showing the
task(s) taken from the Team Project Backlog by the team member for
them to develop or undertake. Each task should be directly linked to a task
on the Team Project Backlog. This plan will include a comment by the
students indicating completion or achievement.
b. An Individual Diary by the student with a commentary of the student’s
views and opinions, comments on their learning, self-assessment of their
progress etc., and notes on their view of the contribution of the other
members of the team, negative and positive.
At the end of each period (week or two weeks) the Teaching Academic is able to
check that what the student has planned to do (Individual Sprint Plan) concurs
with the task allocation of the team from the Team Project Backlog, check if the
Individual Sprint Plan indicates completion of the planned tasks, or effort expended
on the planned tasks, and then see the evidence of that effort which may be a
document, or specific set of code or coded functionality created by the student. The
code could then be examined and the student required to explain the code. This is
the highly desirable Plan -> Do -> Validate -> Feedback cycle stated by such as
Deming in what is known as the Deming Cycle.
The Teaching Academic can also view the student’s Individual Diary to see what
videos or documents have been viewed by the student as part of their learning
activity.
These documents provide a longitudinal narrative of the students’ progress and
activities which can be used for Teaching Academic continuous assessment,
Teaching Academic monitoring of student participation and other aspects of the
student’s behaviour to enable the Teaching Academic to provide a reasonable and
valid assessment.
Student self-assessment and peer assessment can be evaluated by the
Teaching Academic as to its validity when compared to the Teaching Academic’s
view. Students often have the tendency to give all members of the team a high mark,
regardless of the individual student’s actual contribution. Also, peer assessment
imposes peer pressure on the student to keep up, behave appropriately and
contribute.
I have attempted many different ways to examine, assess and evaluate students,
including take-home exams, practical exams where code or database schema is
developed in the exam room, provision at the start of semester of sample questions
to guide students’ study and learning etc.
One approach which I believe has been reasonably successful is to evaluate the team
as a whole, and provide a gross percentage for the team members to distribute
among themselves (e.g. 6 team members, my view was the team overall was worth
70%, so 420% was given to be allocated by the students according to the team’s
view of each members achievement).

Work Load Imposed on the Teaching Academic

There is no doubt that these assessment suggestions impose a greater workload on
Teaching Academics than just having a semester essay and a final exam to mark.
However, the assessment activity brings the Teaching Academic and students more
closely together, resulting in a fairer and more correct assessment. Weekly, or,
better, two-weekly meetings of each team with a Learning Leader (no longer
termed Teaching Academics) do take up time!

Roy I. Morien Teaching, Learning & Assessment Proposal Page

However, after an initial busy period preparing e-learning material such as videos,
staff will have their workload reduced by probably 4 hours a week by not being
required to have 2 hour lectures each week, and a 2 hour practical class each week.
My experience is that I, as a teaching academic, have always enjoyed the interaction
with students in a more informal way than by standing up the front of the lecture
room talking. My experience also is that students learn better, are more willing to
learn and act, when the Teaching Academic shows an obviously interested and
collaborative attitude, and is readily available to mentor, encourage and help the
students.

Roy I. Morien Teaching, Learning & Assessment Proposal Page

Teaching Approach
The Learning Pyramid
The Learning Pyramid, often referred to in educational publications, is shown here.
There has been a lot of criticism of this concept,
particularly of the percentages applied to each teaching
style. Nonetheless, we can take from the Pyramid the
fact that students retain little of what they are told in a
lecture, and retain a greater proportion of the
information they are given as the teaching method
becomes more participatory. What Teaching Academic
has not, themselves, understood the reality that when
we teach, we inevitably learn deeply about the subject
matter we are teaching.
Another version of the Learning Pyramid is more relevant
to the concept of having a ‘super project’ as the primary
Teaching and Learning Method. This indicates longer
term retention rates. If we consider the concept of deep
learning as being the ultimate retention rate, i.e. learning
over the longer term by practical hands-on learning, with
continuous reinforcement and enhancement, we can see that the bottom of the
pyramid is the most relevant. ‘Doing the Real Thing’ i.e. a long-term project-based
learning activity that is designed to be like ‘the real thing’. ‘Simulating the Real
Experience’ i.e. continuous development over the long term of an industrial strength
project tailored as needed to lead the students into a different but associated learning
experience which also reinforces the prior learning, resulting in deep learning, which
is actually knowledge and know-how.

Learning Styles
According to Wikipedia, there are many different theories on Learning Styles. One
prominent model divides students into four styles of learning: Visual, where the
student retains information visually presented, Auditory, where the students retains
more of what they hear, Read/Write Learning, where the student is a good note taker,
and learns most from reading texts, and tactile/kinesthetic learning where the
student prefers to learn via experience—moving, touching, and doing (active
exploration of the world, science projects, experiments, etc.).
This is only one model of learning styles, but what it does tell us is that a variety of
different Teaching Approaches are necessary to provide a good learning environment
for students. This is properly termed a Blenaded Learning approach.

Blended Learning
A combination of learning approaches, including e-learning, student learning groups,
face-to-face discussion with members of the Teaching Team, small group learning
based on student project groups, lectures only as needed. Discontinuing the practice
of regular stand-up lectures is part of this proposal. This has been done elsewhere, so
is not exactly leading edge (or ‘bleeding edge’ as some would have it). For example,
the Business School at University of Technology Sydney has a new building that has
no lecture rooms, because formal lectures in the traditional style are no longer
presented20. Similarly, Charles Sturt University in South Australia has introduced an
entirely new Teaching and Learning Model in the Faculty of Engineering that does not
include stand-up lectures, but is more project-based, hands-on experience.21 To put it
bluntly, stand up lectures, variously classified and indeed disparaged as ‘chalk and
talk, or ‘the sage on the stage’ are usually boring for the students, and their
effectiveness is usually measurable by the amount of inattention displayed by the
students.

20
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-11-11/uts-new-business-school-building-defies-
convention/5883506?section=nsw
21
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-02-18/no-exams-lectures-or-nerds-in-the-tower-csu-
engineering/7180538
Roy I. Morien Teaching, Learning & Assessment Proposal Page
E-Learning
In both institutions just mentioned, and in other universities such as Curtin University
of Technology in Perth22, greater emphasis is placed on e-Learning by having an
extensive library of videos of lectures available to students, on the Internet.
Social Media Use
I personally have little experience with using social media, such as Facebook and LINE
to support Teaching and Learning. However I am certainly aware that there are great
possibilities that could be achieved using modern social media. Part of the new
strategy for Teaching and Learning must include these.

22
http://elearn.curtin.edu.au/
Roy I. Morien Teaching, Learning & Assessment Proposal Page
Learning Matters
Student Responsibilities
The role of the university teaching academic is two-fold. First, to advise students on
what they must learn to become accomplished professionals in their field of study,
and, second, to guide the students in their study and help they achieve their learning
outcomes.
The role of the Teaching Academic in a university is not to tell students the specific,
bounded information that will be tested in a final exam, requiring only that the
students memorise that specific bounded knowledge.
Students must be handed greater responsibility for their own learning and knowledge
acquisition. As, usually, future professionals in their field, notions of Life-Long
Learning, Professional Development, expanding their knowledge through self-
motivated personal learning, are demanded.
This then is the first ‘learning matter’. But students coming from secondary schools
cannot be immediately expected to understand this, and understand how to do this.
Creative Thinking, conceptual thinking, personal responsibility etc. need to be taught
and can be taught.

Team Based Learning

Inevitably, graduates entering employment in the system development industry will
be placed in a team, possibly with a ‘mentor’. They will work in teams for the next
few years, if not for their entire careers. Therefore, a graduate who has experience in
working in teams, as an integral part of the university learning activity, will be in
demand by potential employers.
At the start of the ‘super’ project, students will be allocated into teams, essentially
randomly chosen at the start. The team comprising 6 or 8 students will be the
primary learning group. The team members will have the joint and several
responsibility to work in the team according to the team’s standards of behaviour,
and produce outcomes which will be in accordance with team standards.

Providing Evidence of Activities and Outcomes

As discussed elsewhere, certain documentation must be kept by the individual
student, and the team as a whole, that provides evidence of each student’s personal
endeavour and learning, and participation in the team activities. This documentation
includes weekly (or fortnightly) Personal Learning Plans, Personal Activity Logs and
subsequently demonstrable outcomes, such as program code, form designs, project
documentation etc. A strict chain of evidence of achievement is established linking
specific planned activities (in the Personal Learning Plan) with the actual achievement
of the plan (stated in the Personal Activity Log) and further linking to the
demonstrable outcome. This documentation will be assessed for its excellence and
veracity, and as evidence of endeavour and outcome by the student

Learning ‘Best Practices’

There is an overwhelming volume of literature available on the Internet and in a
hundred international learned journals on what can be termed ‘Learning Best
Practices’. All of Project-Based Learning, Task-Based Learning, Problem-Based
Learning, Self-Directed Learning, and Student Centred Learning etc. The
overwhelming view to be found in this research is that the active learning by way of
hands-on projects is superior to the passive learning of stand-up lectures and
tutorials. I would add to this the almost useless practice of having semester limited,
simplistic projects, particular to the subject.

The Social Aspect of Learning

What I mean by this is fundamentally Do the students enjoy their learning activities?
Are lectures basically boring? Would a hands-on practical activity with fast turnaround
feedback and immediate evidence of achievement make learning more enjoyable?
Would enjoying the learning activities together with your teammates and friends
enhance the learning experience, and thus enhance the learning per se?

Roy I. Morien Teaching, Learning & Assessment Proposal Page

My experience, as published in two papers at conferences and in international
journals23,24 clearly demonstrated both that the social aspects of the learning
environment and immediate feedback and evidence certainly were important, and
were significantly enhanced in a Project-Based Learning activity.
Almost all of the 150 plus students involved in the industrial experience projects
demonstrated significantly greater enthusiasm and interest, and obviously enjoyed
the experience. There was always a level of excitement when the students could
demonstrate the software that they had developed.

23
Morien, Roy, Insights into Using Agile Development Methods in Student Final Year Projects,
Informing Science + Information Technology Education Joint Conference (INSITE2004), Central
Queensland University, Rockhampton, June 2004 (paper accepted in "Best Paper" Category, for
presentation, and awarded Conference Silver Medal). And in Information Systems Education
Journal, 4 (44). http://isedj.org/4/44/. ISSN: 1545-679X.
24
Morien, Roy, Student Experience of Using Agile Development Methods in Industrial
Experience Projects, Information Systems Education Conference (ISEC2005), Columbus, Ohio,
October 2005). And in Information Systems Education Journal, 4 (103). http://isedj.org/4/103/.
ISSN: 1545-679X.
Roy I. Morien Teaching, Learning & Assessment Proposal Page
Industry Expectations
While it must be acknowledged that a college or university degree course must be
more than a training course in specific software products, the fact is that students are
always looking forward to employment. This demands that industry expectations
must be considered. This has been a matter of concern expressed by a number of
educational institutions and employers alike.

Personal Experience
On a visit to the Western Digital factory in Ayutthaya, I was discussing this problem
with some American executives. They made the clear, unequivocal statements that
“We have huge problems with new IT graduates! They can’t think, they must be
closely supervised, they cannot solve problems, and they cannot take a problem and
run with it on their own”.
In Australia, I was told by students returning from interviews that it was the industrial
experience project activity that employment interviewers were most interested in.
Clearly experience in working in teams, experience in actual development and client
interaction, and other aspects of the students’ hands-on project experience were
closely questioned.
In one Masters class, I invited an industry executive to make a presentation to my
students. During the presentation I myself asked her some questions about their use
of certain development approaches. She very hesitantly and carefully answered that
they didn’t actually do that. Later, she admitted that she had not used those methods
for years and was surprised that I was teaching the students these obsolete
approaches, but had been concerned about embarrassing me in front of my students.
I assured her that I was in total agreement with her, and these had been ‘loaded’
questions to gauge her response. However, those very same development
approaches were in fact taught in undergraduate subjects, and indeed by some other
Teaching Academics in the Masters. Industry experience and curriculum content
obviously diverged considerably.

Institutional Experience
In 25 two computer science professors at the University of California, Berkeley,
interviewed enterprise developers to find out what they wanted from new graduates.
The consensus from industry was that fresh college graduates were not equipped to
deal with corporate development scenarios. In effect, the enterprises were asking for
students that understood how to dive into an existing application’s codebase, then
modify, fix or otherwise work with it. That is, hands-on, real-world and realistic
experience!
"When employers do hire from college, the evidence suggests that academic skills
are not their primary concern," says Peter Cappelli, a Wharton professor and the
author of a new paper on job skills. "Work experience is the crucial attribute that
employers want even for students who have yet to work full-time." This quote comes
from 26 which, admittedly is talking more about graduates gaining experience in
internships. However, the point is made; educational institutions are more and more
acknowledging the necessity of hands-on, ‘real world’ project based experience in
new graduates entering their first employment.

25
Alex Handy, Making computer science class more like the real world,
http://sdtimes.com/making-computer-science-class-more-like-the-real-world/
26
Derek Thompson, The Thing Employers Look For When Hiring Recent Graduates,
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2014/08/the-thing-employers-look-for-when-
hiring-recent-graduates/378693/
Roy I. Morien Teaching, Learning & Assessment Proposal Page
Department Facilities Availability and Access
Equipment Facilities
It is obvious that Naresuan University is well provided with substantial computer
facilities. Computer labs at a number of Faculties contain hundreds of PCs. What is
remarkable also is the limited availability of these facilities to students. My
observations of the situation at Naresuan University is that the computer labs are
closed and unavailable to students between 8.30pm and 8am, and are also closed on
weekends.
At my previous University in Australia, in the Business School, of which the School of
Information Systems was part, computer labs were open 7 days a week, for extended
hours per day, and when approaching exam periods were open 24 hours a day. Any
Saturday afternoon, even Saturday evenings, Sundays, late on Sunday night, the
computer labs would be in use by many students. Every weekday evening and often
quite late at night, there would be students using the computer labs, often in groups.
With the ‘super project’ being the main learning vehicle, making computer facilities
available to students almost on a 24/7 basis would be extremely advantageous in
supporting student learning. If the idea of reducing or eradicating stand-up lectures is
adopted, large ‘lecture room’ spaces would become available for computer facilities
to be installed.

Software Facilities
In Australia, Microsoft had an Education Institution deal whereby a university could
license all of Microsoft’s software, ALL of it, and make it freely available to all enrolled
students and all staff of the university. An annual fee of $1,000 was payable for this.
There are many useful and easy to use software packages available on the Internet.
Two of my favourites for the purpose of supporting my teaching and being useful to
students are Teamviewer®, a remote access and control product, and any number of
virtual printer packages. These are free downloads.
The Department should compile a sophisticated set of software packages to support
all aspects of the ‘super project’ and ensure that students are fully trained and skillful
at using them. This is now an extremely important aspect of any CS or IT student’s
skillset, especially given the plethora of tools that can be categorised under the
heading of DevOPS. As well, proper licenses should be obtained, to demonstrate the
Department concern for correct and ethical behaviour.
A word on using Teamviewer
One problem I always had in another Faculty was to do with assessing students’
database projects. When the students brought their development efforts to my office,
they usually demonstrated their project on their laptop. They had no understanding of
the problem of developing on one system and running in production on another
system. They also usually had a Database Connection Object in each screen
processing program, which meant that they had maybe 10 DCO’s. If the students had
been required to install their system on my computer (thereby demonstrating an
appropriate skill), it would have been necessary to update the connection string on
every Database Connection Object in their system, demonstrating another skill and
understanding. If they had only one DCO, then only one edit would have been
needed, not 10. I couldn’t advise them on how to do that because I didn’t know the
language or the IDE that they were using. In the Teaching Team situation, as
envisaged in my proposal, I could have called in an expert to teach the students how
to define a single Database Connection Object and make it visible to all programs in
the system, and to read the new connection string from a small text file set up for the
purpose.
Alternatively, if the students had downloaded and used Teamviewer, I could have
then used Teamviewer to connect to their laptop in their room and control their
computer, viewing their effort in situ.

Roy I. Morien Teaching, Learning & Assessment Proposal Page

Building the Brand
“There is fierce competition among universities … to entice students to enrol in their programmes, …”,
ex-WTO chief, Mr. Supachai
The President of Naresuan University has taken a number of steps over the last few
years to ‘Build the Brand’ of the University. The slogan ‘Going World Class’ is a
prominent PR action intended to both show a guiding principle to Naresuan staff and
also to tell the world that Naresuan University is an educational institution intent on
improvement and achievement of a reputable place in the company of Universities.
The President has also moved to take Naresuan University into the International
Community. So “Go World Class, and Go International” is the ambition.
Following the lead of the President, I would strongly suggest that the proposal I am
making, if adopted and put into practice, would steer the Department of Computer
Science and Information Technology towards significant ‘brand recognition’ as World
Class. Appropriate PR activities to herald the start of the program, to promote the
program with employers, publish papers in IS Education journals, attend IS Education
conferences, and more, all with the intention of announcing ‘This Department is
Forward Looking, The education that our graduates will have received is of the
highest standard (‘Going World Class’), and employers would benefit greatly by
employing our graduates, because of the rigor and style of our Teaching, Learning
and Assessment practices’. We are different! Almost as an aside, I would suggest a
greater emphasis on English in the Department for both Academic staff and students,
thus moving the Department to ‘Go International’.
The President has clearly enunciated policies on the necessity for academic staff to
undertake research and to publish. A quick search on the Internet finds information
on 37 international education conferences to be held in 2016. A list of refereed
international education journals includes 810 journals. This list is published by an
American university (Saint Mary’s University in Minnesota)27
It does not need me to point out that a University has two main responsibilities;
Teaching and Researching. I would see substantial benefits flowing from the proposed
‘radical approach’ under both of these headings. I am convinced that the standard of
Learning with improve dramatically with this radical approach to Teaching, and the
program will provide substantial opportunities for Research in the area of IT
education, curriculum development, evaluation and assessment methods etc.

Engagement with Employers

As referred to elsewhere in this document, on a visit to the Western Digital
manufacturing plant in Ayutthaya, in 2011, I was told by some American executives
of their concerns and disappointments about recent graduates that they had
employed. I believe that by placing greater responsibility for their own learning on the
students, and ensuring that the curriculum includes Creative Thinking, Problem
Solving, Team Participation and Leadership, Design Thinking, and so on, graduates
from CSIT can earn a reputation of excellence that will make them very ‘marketable’,
especially to international companies operating in Thailand. Engaging with potential
employers to participate in the program is essential. By holding ‘Skills Fairs’ to which
employers are invited, and other activities that ensure the employers know and
acknowledge the excellence of the graduates. By inviting potential employers to
actively participate in the program in whatever way that they can will help ‘Build the
Brand’ of the Department, the Faculty and the University.
I do understand that the University does have programs which incorporate these
ideas, with final year internships and collaboration with companies, so there may
already be a solid foundation on which to further build these ideas.
I know from personal experience gained in my time as Project Manager of the student
industrial experience projects at Curtin University that employers concentrated
mainly on the students experience in the projects when they were interviewing.
Nobody was very interested in hearing about the students experience in seeing Roy
Morien stand up and present a lecture! It was the fact that the students had practical,

27
http://www2.smumn.edu/deptpages/tclibrary/search/subjects/ed_scholarly_journals_11.pdf

Roy I. Morien Teaching, Learning & Assessment Proposal Page

hands-on, demonstrated experience in a substantial project that was of greatest
importance to the employers.

Building a Research Profile

As discussed elsewhere, teaching academics will probably have more time to do their
own research. As well, the whole ‘super project’ concept as discussed opens up a vast
opportunity for all academics to publish, at least one paper per year in a significant
education journal or IS education journal. By definition, this adds to the research
profile of the University. Research into Computer Education is just as welcome as
research into image processing and Internet security issues and taxonomies.
Improving computer education should certainly be high in the mind of academics,
Deans and Academic Administrators.

Attracting Graduate Research Students and Other

Researchers
By building the brand, applying to this Department, this Faculty, will be an attractive
option for Graduate students particularly, both Masters and PhDs. The corollary is that
by having more researchers in the Department, the brand is enhanced.

A Leading Name in CS and IT Education

This is what could be achieved for the Department of Computer Science and
Information Technology; gain a high reputation, and become a leading name in CS
and IT education, especially in Thailand, but still ‘Going World Class’. In a world
where there is an on-going demand for well skilled and well educated professional,
but where there are also a huge number of education providers, maybe ‘Building
the Brand’ might even become a matter of survival. It can certainly be a matter of
pride and of known and acknowledged excellence.

A Final Word: Personal Experience

Ever since universities in my home country instituted fees, a question that should
have been asked was ‘What exactly constitutes a ‘quality’ course?’ During a visit to
Pakistan, as Program Manager for our Information Systems Undergraduate courses, in
1999, I asked the executives of my host education company this question: ‘What
exactly constitutes a ‘quality’ course?’ I did so because in my public speeches to
potential students and their parents I was often asked ‘Why should our kids enroll in
your courses? What makes your University better than any other in Australia?’ The
answer given to me by those executives, with an important example, was ‘Academic
rigour’. Students want to enroll in a course that is widely recognised as being
rigorous, and in the end they can feel proud of having succeeded in that course, and
potential employers want to employ them because of the known high standard of the
course. The example university in Pakistan had ‘built their brand’ well!
So I will finish here by asking you, the reader, the two questions:
‘What do you think constitutes a ‘quality’ course?’
‘Are you confident that your courses meet your criteria for being a
‘quality course’?

Roy I. Morien Teaching, Learning & Assessment Proposal Page