- 202201-CMSC435-0101-SOFTWARE ENGINEERING (James Purtilo) - Instructor Report

202201-CMSC435-0101-SOFTWARE ENGINEERING (James Purtilo) - Instructor Report - Spring 2022

Project Title: University of Maryland Course Experiences Spring 2022

Number of Students Invited: 36
Number of Evaluations Submitted: 18
Response Rate: 50%

Report Comments This report presents feedback received from students for the course SOFTWARE ENGINEERING and for the Instructor James Purtilo in that course. Course means are calculated from all responses by all students in the unit (i.e., course section/lecture) on that item and exclude N/A (not applicable) responses.

Indication is provided below for the Report Group if there is one affiliated with this course section, otherwise it is blank. The Report Group will be the lead section of a grouped course (i.e. multi-section lecture) and/or the primary of cross-listed courses. Subsections are found in the Instructor Subgroup Report.

Semester: Spring 2022
College: College of Computer, Math & Natural Sciences
Department: CMNS-Computer Science
Course #: CMSC435
Section #: 0101
Course Title: SOFTWARE ENGINEERING
Report Group:

Instructor: James Purtilo

Download PDF

University-Wide Course Items Applied to All Section Instructors
N/A responses have been excluded from the following calculations.

Campus Wide Course Questions

1. The content covered in the course was directly related to the course goals and objectives.

Graphs illustrating the information in the accessible table that should immediately follow it.

Table for [QTitle]-1. The content covered in the course was directly related to the course goals and objectives..
Options	Score	Count	Percentage
Strongly Disagree	1	0	0%
Disagree	2	0	0%
Neutral	3	0	0%
Agree	4	2	11%
Strongly Agree	5	16	89%

Table for [QTitle]-1. The content covered in the course was directly related to the course goals and objectives.-Statistics.
Statistics	Value
Response Count	18
Mean	4.9
Standard Deviation	0.3

2. The assessments (e.g., tests, quizzes, papers) were directly related to what was covered/practiced in the course.

Table for [QTitle]-2. The assessments (e.g., tests, quizzes, papers) were directly related to what was covered/practiced in the course..
Options	Score	Count	Percentage
Strongly Disagree	1	0	0%
Disagree	2	0	0%
Neutral	3	1	6%
Agree	4	5	28%
Strongly Agree	5	12	67%

Table for [QTitle]-2. The assessments (e.g., tests, quizzes, papers) were directly related to what was covered/practiced in the course.-Statistics.
Statistics	Value
Response Count	18
Mean	4.6
Standard Deviation	0.6

3. The required texts (e.g., books, course packs, online resources) helped me learn course material.

Table for [QTitle]-3. The required texts (e.g., books, course packs, online resources) helped me learn course material..
Options	Score	Count	Percentage
Strongly Disagree	1	0	0%
Disagree	2	2	13%
Neutral	3	3	19%
Agree	4	5	31%
Strongly Agree	5	6	38%

Table for [QTitle]-3. The required texts (e.g., books, course packs, online resources) helped me learn course material.-Statistics.
Statistics	Value
Response Count	16
Mean	3.9
Standard Deviation	1.1

4. This course pushed and expanded my ability to think deeply about the subject.

Table for [QTitle]-4. This course pushed and expanded my ability to think deeply about the subject..
Options	Score	Count	Percentage
Strongly Disagree	1	0	0%
Disagree	2	0	0%
Neutral	3	0	0%
Agree	4	5	28%
Strongly Agree	5	13	72%

Table for [QTitle]-4. This course pushed and expanded my ability to think deeply about the subject.-Statistics.
Statistics	Value
Response Count	18
Mean	4.7
Standard Deviation	0.5

5. I believe the content of this course was a valuable part of my education.

Table for [QTitle]-5. I believe the content of this course was a valuable part of my education..
Options	Score	Count	Percentage
Strongly Disagree	1	0	0%
Disagree	2	0	0%
Neutral	3	1	6%
Agree	4	0	0%
Strongly Agree	5	17	94%

Table for [QTitle]-5. I believe the content of this course was a valuable part of my education.-Statistics.
Statistics	Value
Response Count	18
Mean	4.9
Standard Deviation	0.5

6. I believe I learned a lot from this course.

Table for [QTitle]-6. I believe I learned a lot from this course..
Options	Score	Count	Percentage
Strongly Disagree	1	0	0%
Disagree	2	0	0%
Neutral	3	1	6%
Agree	4	2	11%
Strongly Agree	5	15	83%

Table for [QTitle]-6. I believe I learned a lot from this course.-Statistics.
Statistics	Value
Response Count	18
Mean	4.8
Standard Deviation	0.5

On average, how many hours each week did you spend on this course (e.g., attending class, doing homework, studying, completing assignments)?

Table for [QTitle]-On average, how many hours each week did you spend on this course (e.g., attending class, doing homework, studying, completing assignments)?.
Options	Count	Percentage
Less than 3 hours	0	0%
3 up to 6 hours	1	6%
6 up to 9 hours	2	11%
9 up to 12 hours	7	39%
12 up to 15 hours	5	28%
15 hours or more	3	17%

Table for [QTitle]-On average, how many hours each week did you spend on this course (e.g., attending class, doing homework, studying, completing assignments)?-Statistics.
Statistics	Value
Response Count	18

How did this course fit into your academic plan and/or educational goals?

Reponses for this item are "select all that apply."

	Frequency
Required for program/major/minor/certificate, or as a prerequisite	11
Elective for program/major/minor/certificate	7
To satisfy an undergraduate General Education requirement	1
In preparation for research, employment, or future program/degree	8
Personal interest in content	11
Other/It doesn't	0

The counts above are based on a total of 18 responses to the survey.

Comment Items Applied to All Section Instructors

What about the course and/or instruction most enhanced your learning?

Table for [QTitle].

Comments

Really enjoyed how projects forced you to think outside of the box and communicate ideas to team members. There really isn't another course like this that is offered at UMD. Was a great final sendofff for my last semester here.

The class project was very engaging and challenging, and it required me to expand my skills.

How realistic and applicable the course is to real life most enhanced my learning and challenged me to work on a lot of new tech stacks and go through trial and error to succeed in the class.

What most enhanced my learning was the real life and future career application of this course. Professor Purtilo made the curriculum applicable to any sort of software engineering role and demonstrated, with real–life evidence, the value and consequences of taking Software Engineering with him. My favorite parts included the alumni days where past students would come back and explain what they got from the course and how it has impacted their career.

I think the early emphasis on important lessons was extremely valuable. For example, it was made very clear early on that it was inevitable that people were going to hit obstacles in the class, and setting those expectations and being equipped to handle them when they came up was extremely important. My group in the class felt we learned great lessons through experiences that came up, but we felt ready to take them on based on the precedent that was given in class, which greatly helped emphasize why the content of the class was important.

This is a good class, get you hands on about real world problems

The "internship lite" approach to this course makes it uniquely valuable among similar CS courses, many of which fail to cover crucial "peripheral" aspects of programming. Without a course like this one, it would be possible to graduate from UMD with a CS degree, and yet only know how to program individual functions in a class that has already been laid out by an instructor. This is deeply insufficient and ignores numerous additional challenges in actually making a program that you can run and distribute to others, rather than submit to a grade server.

The communication aspects covered by this course are also immensely valuable, especially if you are likely to be directly in contact with clients in your future career. This is a fuzzy concept that can really only be gotten across via demonstration, hence the actual for–a–client work presented by the course. Dealing with ambiguity directly was extremely helpful.

All this is to say that other CS courses basically only prepare you to be a cog that has ready–made TODOs handed down to you. This isn't sufficient for most people's career goals, so this course is invaluable.

Instruction was passionate and opinionated in a good way. Strong but respectful perspectives. It has an unorthodox style, which is a pro or a con depending on how much brain power you want to put into understanding a class. If you're engaged, it means that you get a unique and memorable experience rather than cookie–cutter lectures. If you're not, it's just another barrier to getting a good grade.

The availability of the professor outside of class was always helpful and out meetings with him led us to make better and more logical design decisions.

I felt that the proposal process was very effective.

The semester long project with the team really gave me a glance into what industry has to offer and expects in terms of software engineering. Dr. Purtilo did a fantastic job at teaching us to realize and make decisions for our product and take note how those decisions could affect the final product. Overall, I feel this class has greatly benefited me and helped prepare me to graduate and take a full time software engineering career.

Dr. Purtilo is the most available professor to his students I have ever had at UMD. Emails you back before you even click send.

I think the iribe swipe access really helped me and my group. It gave us a place to meet and work. Especially since our project required coding on the pi, we were able to connect it to the big screen and everyone could see what was going on. It really helped the entire team stay on track and engaged.

The weekly meetings my group had with Dr. Purtilo helped us get fast feedback and allowed us to succeed.

Professor Purtillo has made the class fun and engaging. His Dashboard can sometimes get overwhelming with information which causes confusion. Overall, I enjoyed the course and found it to be meaningful to my education.

The ambiguity contributed a lot to the course. We weren't given everything and had to ask for clarification from either the prof or the clients we worked for. This is gonna translate really well into industry

Dr. Purtilo was very knowledgeable about the topic and cared a lot about our learning. I liked that it was hands–on and reflected the work that a real software team would do. I liked being able to work with an actual client.

The use of projects with real clients that have a significance outside of the class really helped me care about the class. Being able to imitate some of the standards of industry helped me better prepare for my future as a software developer.

The fact that I was able to experience how the real world would be before entering into it. In this class I learned a lot more about software engineering that I have in my 4 years here at UMD. This class is VERY hands–on which I very much appreciate.

What about the course and/or instruction can be improved the next time it is offered?

Table for [QTitle].

Comments

I think lectures can be a bit more simplified (they definitely went through a lot of valuable material), but I feel like the main point to some of them could be explained in a more concise fashion.

Much more clarification on the requirements for assignments is needed. I was often lost on what was expected of me.
In addition, this class should be at least 4 credits. The workload is unbelievably high for a simple 3 credit course,
and it risks leading students into disaster.

to give more descriptions of what will be covered in class such as more detailed course schedule so students can have time to review course material and prepare for the lecture earlier.

I can't think of much to improve on other than getting more guest speakers if possible and doing some of the lectures earlier. For instance I think that some of the scrimmage stuff should've been cut shorter and that lecture should've happened before we started the greenlight document.

I think there was often times where it felt like the coming weeks were going to be very stressful due to important deadlines. In a way, it was a good thing because it really made clear the importance of learning certain processes and practices, but it also felt like it was adding pressure in a way that was not entirely necessary. I think there is a good balance that could be found somewhere between the current structure and that of one where deadlines are less do–or–die if that makes sense.

maybe share the slides with the students

Personally, I think there are some sections of the class that should be streamlined or made more available for later review/study without having to take perfect notes (or pictures) in class. To me, this means:
+ Lecture slides of some form (even if abridged)
+ An organized calendar of due dates, rather than having to search through blog posts, emails, and syllabi pages

I understand that not offering these things may be a roundabout way of increasing student engagement, and I do agree that "convenience" is not always the top priority – requiring some legwork can improve how a product feels. This is a design principle that I feel is often neglected these days. However, I think a better balance can be struck, especially considering that the class uses a posting platform that is completely disjoint from ELMS and other class websites to which students are accustomed. I missed some points due to missing deadlines set within the blog posts, and misunderstanding peer review rollover times (which were likely explained in some email weeks earlier). Additionally, if I missed a slide in lecture, it was very difficult for me to review it later due to the lack of a canonical support text. In some cases, I found myself worried about whether I was providing accurate definitions of on quizzes, since I may have reviewed and recalled a differing definition from a different source.

I can't offer a perfect solution here, and I expect that you wouldn't be willing to post full slides due to the negative effect it would have on attendance and engagement. Maybe a middle ground would be offering an "outline of ideas", but without definitions, so that students can go and review those ideas on their own in whatever support text they choose? A schedule of due dates for EVERY assignment would similarly be very helpful. This class uses an atypical structure for due dates (SOB/COB) and doesn't have an ELMS style centralized dashboard yet. Hell, make that a student project or something.

Last note is that this course should be a 4, 5, or 6 credit course. I think a lot of negative feedback for this course stems from the fact that its required workload exceeds what is expected of a 3–credit course, which is legitimately pretty painful to students that walk into it unprepared. We have other courses! However, assigning a lighter workload while still achieving the same course goals would be essentially impossible. You seem to be aware of this already, just re–iterating. To others reading this, please take this feedback into consideration. I've taken other 6–credit courses at this university (from the JAPN department), so I know it's possible. This class is exceptional in comparison to other CS courses (even 400–level ones) and deserves an exception to the general rule.

I think some of the lectures could also include software engineering best practices when it comes to programming habits. While major topics of communication, project planning and work mentality are incredibly useful, I think coming into this course I also wanted to be learn coding practices to improve my skills. Maybe that was an incorrect assumption on my part about the course, but I think early on, it could be a good way to provide that base to students so that going into the field, they are better prepared on that front as well.

I think some exercises to demonstrate some of the practices of software engineering might have helped

This course is worth more than 3 credits of work.

My group didnt have an “client” like the other groups and so we felt lost at the beginning. We also werent able to find a niche early on and that delayed our actual project greatly.

I think less time spent in the beginning scrimmages would be more beneficial to allow the main projects more time to succeed

The ethics material/grading was great, but I feel like it came at a time when we already had a lot of work to do. I know it's probably there because you can't fit it anywhere else, but it would be nice if it could be earlier. Hell, i'd like a whole mandatory course on cs ethics just on that topic.

I think possibly having some sort of notification system for new assignments would be helpful, because sometimes I missed deadlines because things would be posted without notification.

The scrimmage assignments were good, but I felt like we could have cut the time on those assignments shorter so that we had more time to develop the project and have a clearer plan before the greenlight and more time to test and develop after the CDR.

I think that explaining to students that they should meet with the professor at least every week or so to check in about the class/ project/ or even personal life and goals. I also think this course could be combined with other courses like ENGL393 or a business class because it incorporates a lot of the elements from these classes in this class.

University-Wide Instructor James Purtilo Items
N/A responses have been excluded from the following calculations.

Campus Wide Instructor Questions

1. The instructor provided constructive feedback on my work that helped me to learn.

Table for [QTitle]-1. The instructor provided constructive feedback on my work that helped me to learn..
Options	Score	Count	Percentage
Strongly Disagree	1	0	0%
Disagree	2	2	11%
Neutral	3	0	0%
Agree	4	0	0%
Strongly Agree	5	16	89%

Table for [QTitle]-1. The instructor provided constructive feedback on my work that helped me to learn.-Statistics.
Statistics	Value
Response Count	18
Mean	4.7
Standard Deviation	1.0

2. The instructor provided feedback in the course in time to apply it.

Table for [QTitle]-2. The instructor provided feedback in the course in time to apply it..
Options	Score	Count	Percentage
Strongly Disagree	1	0	0%
Disagree	2	1	6%
Neutral	3	1	6%
Agree	4	1	6%
Strongly Agree	5	15	83%

Table for [QTitle]-2. The instructor provided feedback in the course in time to apply it.-Statistics.
Statistics	Value
Response Count	18
Mean	4.7
Standard Deviation	0.8

3. The instructor clearly communicated grading criteria for my work throughout the course.

Table for [QTitle]-3. The instructor clearly communicated grading criteria for my work throughout the course..
Options	Score	Count	Percentage
Strongly Disagree	1	1	6%
Disagree	2	2	11%
Neutral	3	0	0%
Agree	4	5	28%
Strongly Agree	5	10	56%

Table for [QTitle]-3. The instructor clearly communicated grading criteria for my work throughout the course.-Statistics.
Statistics	Value
Response Count	18
Mean	4.2
Standard Deviation	1.2

4. The instructor clearly communicated the purpose, instructions, and deadlines for my graded work throughout the course.

Table for [QTitle]-4. The instructor clearly communicated the purpose, instructions, and deadlines for my graded work throughout the course..
Options	Score	Count	Percentage
Strongly Disagree	1	0	0%
Disagree	2	1	6%
Neutral	3	1	6%
Agree	4	2	11%
Strongly Agree	5	14	78%

Table for [QTitle]-4. The instructor clearly communicated the purpose, instructions, and deadlines for my graded work throughout the course.-Statistics.
Statistics	Value
Response Count	18
Mean	4.6
Standard Deviation	0.8

5. The instructor helped me understand new content by connecting it to things I already knew.

Table for [QTitle]-5. The instructor helped me understand new content by connecting it to things I already knew..
Options	Score	Count	Percentage
Strongly Disagree	1	0	0%
Disagree	2	0	0%
Neutral	3	1	6%
Agree	4	6	33%
Strongly Agree	5	11	61%

Table for [QTitle]-5. The instructor helped me understand new content by connecting it to things I already knew.-Statistics.
Statistics	Value
Response Count	18
Mean	4.6
Standard Deviation	0.6

6. The instructor created an inclusive environment where everyone belonged.

Table for [QTitle]-6. The instructor created an inclusive environment where everyone belonged..
Options	Score	Count	Percentage
Strongly Disagree	1	0	0%
Disagree	2	0	0%
Neutral	3	1	6%
Agree	4	3	17%
Strongly Agree	5	14	78%

Table for [QTitle]-6. The instructor created an inclusive environment where everyone belonged.-Statistics.
Statistics	Value
Response Count	18
Mean	4.7
Standard Deviation	0.6

7. The instructor demonstrated confidence in everyone's potential to succeed in the course.

Table for [QTitle]-7. The instructor demonstrated confidence in everyone's potential to succeed in the course..
Options	Score	Count	Percentage
Strongly Disagree	1	0	0%
Disagree	2	1	6%
Neutral	3	0	0%
Agree	4	3	17%
Strongly Agree	5	14	78%

Table for [QTitle]-7. The instructor demonstrated confidence in everyone's potential to succeed in the course.-Statistics.
Statistics	Value
Response Count	18
Mean	4.7
Standard Deviation	0.8

8. I felt like the instructor cared about my learning in the course.

Table for [QTitle]-8. I felt like the instructor cared about my learning in the course..
Options	Score	Count	Percentage
Strongly Disagree	1	0	0%
Disagree	2	0	0%
Neutral	3	1	6%
Agree	4	3	17%
Strongly Agree	5	14	78%

Table for [QTitle]-8. I felt like the instructor cared about my learning in the course.-Statistics.
Statistics	Value
Response Count	18
Mean	4.7
Standard Deviation	0.6

Campus Wide Instructor Questions (continued)

9. I would recommend this instructor to other students for this course.

Table for [QTitle]-9. I would recommend this instructor to other students for this course..
Options	Score	Count	Percentage
Strongly Disagree	1	1	6%
Disagree	2	0	0%
Neutral	3	0	0%
Agree	4	4	22%
Strongly Agree	5	13	72%

Table for [QTitle]-9. I would recommend this instructor to other students for this course.-Statistics.
Statistics	Value
Response Count	18
Mean	4.6
Standard Deviation	1.0

End of Report