Add courses from Autumn 2024
@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
|
||||
<!doctype html>
|
||||
<html>
|
||||
<head>
|
||||
<title>Online text</title>
|
||||
<meta charset="utf-8">
|
||||
|
||||
</head>
|
||||
<body>
|
||||
<p dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;"></p><div><ul><li data-line="0" dir="auto"><strong>Exploratory</strong>: Exploring JavaScript and Related Languages: A Comparative Analysis with<br>TypeScript, CoffeeScript, ActionScript, Dart, and Elm.</li><li data-line="2" dir="auto"><strong>Descriptive</strong>: A Comprehensive Overview of Cloud-Based Charging Management Systems in the Electric Vehicle Industry.</li><li data-line="3" dir="auto"><strong>Explanatory</strong>: Investigating the Impact of AWS Kinesis on Real-Time Data Processing in Electric Vehicle Fleet Management.</li><li data-line="4" dir="auto"><strong>Improving/emancipatory</strong>: Optimizing Electric Vehicle Charging Operations: Enhancing Scalability and Resilience with AWS Elastic Load Balancing and Auto Scaling Groups.</li></ul></div><div><p dir="auto"><em>ChatGPT was used to rewrite this answer to make it sounds more like research topics.</em></p></div><br><p></p>
|
||||
</body>
|
||||
</html>
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
|
||||
<!doctype html>
|
||||
<html>
|
||||
<head>
|
||||
<title>Description Learning task 6: Cases and experiments</title>
|
||||
<meta charset="utf-8">
|
||||
|
||||
</head>
|
||||
<body>
|
||||
<p></p><div></div>Invent a very short example (just a title) of the following types of case studies:<br><ul><li>Exploratory - finding out what is happening, seeking new insights and generating ideas and hypotheses for new research</li><li>Descriptive - portraying a situation or phenomenon</li><li>Explanatory - seeking an explanation of a situation or a problem, mostly in the form of a causal relationship</li><li>Improving/emancipatory - trying to improve a certain aspect of the studied phenomenon</li></ul><div></div><p></p>
|
||||
</body>
|
||||
</html>
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
|
||||
<!doctype html>
|
||||
<html>
|
||||
<head>
|
||||
<title>Online text</title>
|
||||
<meta charset="utf-8">
|
||||
|
||||
</head>
|
||||
<body>
|
||||
<ol><li data-line="0" dir="auto"><p><strong></strong></p><div><div data-callout-metadata="" data-callout-fold="" data-callout="question"><div><p dir="auto"><strong>Explain the difference between theory testing and theory creation research.</strong></p></div></div></div><strong></strong><div><p dir="auto">Theory testing means checking whether an existing theory is true by using data to confirm or challenge its ideas. On the other hand, theory creation is about developing new theories to explain things that current theories cannot by observing of the practices and drawing conclusions from them. While theory testing refines or validates what we already know, theory creation helps us develop fresh ideas to better understand new or complex areas.</p></div><div><p dir="auto"><em>No AI tools were used in this answer.</em></p></div><p></p></li><li data-line="3" dir="auto"><p><strong>What is your opinion, how is positivism related to theory testing and creation?</strong><br></p><div><p dir="auto">According to Positivism, knowledge is concluded from empirical evidence gathered via observation and experimentation. It focuses on objective reality and rejects metaphysical or subjective interpretations. Therefore, I think that positivism is more aligned with theory testing, as it uses empirical data to verify existing theories. However, it also plays a role in theory creation when new evidence reveals patterns that current theories do not account for, leading to the development of new theories.</p></div><div><p dir="auto"><em>OpenAI's ChatGPT was used to explain positivism in an easy-to-understand way.</em></p></div><strong></strong><p></p></li></ol>
|
||||
</body>
|
||||
</html>
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
|
||||
<!doctype html>
|
||||
<html>
|
||||
<head>
|
||||
<title>Description Learning task 2: research methods</title>
|
||||
<meta charset="utf-8">
|
||||
|
||||
</head>
|
||||
<body>
|
||||
<p></p><div>1. Explain the difference between theory testing and theory creation research.</div><div>2. What is your opinion, how is positivism related to theory testing and creation?</div><p></p>
|
||||
</body>
|
||||
</html>
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,13 @@
|
||||
<!doctype html>
|
||||
<html>
|
||||
<head>
|
||||
<title>Online text</title>
|
||||
<meta charset="utf-8">
|
||||
|
||||
</head>
|
||||
<body>
|
||||
<ol dir="ltr"><li style="text-align: left;"><strong>How would you classify grounded theory in Orlikowski & Baroudi's
|
||||
classification? Is it positivist, interpretive or critical approach?
|
||||
Why?</strong><span><br>I would classify grounded theory in Orlikowski & Baroudi's classification as interpretivist because it focuses on understanding the meaning of human actions and the social context in which they take place. Interpretivist research aims to understand the subjective experiences and meanings from the actions and surroundings that an individual perceives.<br>Similarly in grounded theory, researchers examine data to understand the relations and interactions within the social world. This method stands in contrast to positivism, which is simply measuring and observing from an external perspective. This approach allows researchers to generate theories that are grounded in people's experiences and perceptions.<br><br><em>No AI tools were used in this answer.</em></span><em><strong><br><br></strong></em></li><li style="text-align: left;"><strong>Give an example of how ethnography could be used in software engineering research.<br></strong><span><div><p dir="auto">Ethnography means the process of recording and describing a culture of a specific people and their traits, patterns, and principles of coherent integration. In software engineering, ethnography could be used to explore the effects of remote work on communication and collaboration in software development teams, for example. The research could identify any communication gaps and discover the best practices for team collaboration.</p></div><div><p dir="auto"><em>No AI tools were used in this answer.</em></p></div></span><strong><br></strong></li></ol>
|
||||
</body>
|
||||
</html>
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,13 @@
|
||||
<!doctype html>
|
||||
<html>
|
||||
<head>
|
||||
<title>Description Learning task 3: Qualitative research</title>
|
||||
<meta charset="utf-8">
|
||||
|
||||
</head>
|
||||
<body>
|
||||
<p></p><div></div>1. How would you classify grounded theory in Orlikowski & Baroudi's
|
||||
classification? Is it positivist, interpretive or critical approach?
|
||||
Why?<br>2. Give an example of how ethnography could be used in software engineering research.<div></div><p></p>
|
||||
</body>
|
||||
</html>
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,13 @@
|
||||
<!doctype html>
|
||||
<html>
|
||||
<head>
|
||||
<title>Online text</title>
|
||||
<meta charset="utf-8">
|
||||
|
||||
</head>
|
||||
<body>
|
||||
<p dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;"></p><ol><li><strong><span lang="EN-US">Give an example how a phenomenon (for example
|
||||
software quality) can be studied quantitatively.</span></strong></li></ol><div><div><p dir="auto">Studying a topic quantitatively means collecting and analyzing data in a numerical or statistical manner. For software quality, the frequency of software crashes could be recorded and studied to measure software quality using a quantitative approach.</p></div><div><p dir="auto"><em>No AI tools were used in this answer.</em></p></div><br></div><ol><li><strong><span lang="EN-US">Compare interviews and questionnaires as data collection methods. What are their strengths and weaknesses in
|
||||
scientific research?</span></strong></li></ol><div><div><p dir="auto">Interviews are more in-depth and flexible, as they can contain open-ended questions or non-verbal cues, leading to richer data. However, they are also more time-consuming and can be influenced by the interviewer's biases.</p></div><div><p dir="auto">Questionnaires, on the other hand, are more standardized and can reach a larger number of participants. However, may not provide as much depth or nuance, and can be misinterpreted by respondents, leading to insufficient or inaccurate data.</p></div><div><p dir="auto"><em>No AI tools were used in this answer.</em></p></div><br></div><p></p>
|
||||
</body>
|
||||
</html>
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,13 @@
|
||||
<!doctype html>
|
||||
<html>
|
||||
<head>
|
||||
<title>Description Learning task 4: Quantitative research</title>
|
||||
<meta charset="utf-8">
|
||||
|
||||
</head>
|
||||
<body>
|
||||
<p></p><div></div><ol><li><span lang="EN-US">Give an example how a phenomenon (for example
|
||||
software quality) can be studied quantitatively.<br></span></li><li><span lang="EN-US"></span><span lang="EN-US">Compare interviews and questionnaires as data collection methods. What are their strengths and weaknesses in
|
||||
scientific research?</span></li></ol><div></div><p></p>
|
||||
</body>
|
||||
</html>
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
|
||||
<!doctype html>
|
||||
<html>
|
||||
<head>
|
||||
<title>Online text</title>
|
||||
<meta charset="utf-8">
|
||||
|
||||
</head>
|
||||
<body>
|
||||
<p dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;"></p><ol><ol><li><strong>Give an example of what could weak and strong mode of research be in software engineering</strong></li></ol></ol><div><div><p dir="auto">According to Newell (1969), strong methods are those designed to address a specific type of problem, while weak methods are general approaches that may be applied to many types of problems. Based on this definition, in software engineering, a weak mode of research could be a survey on developers' preferences for programming languages, while a strong mode of research could be investigating the impact of different programming paradigms on software maintainability.</p></div><div><p dir="auto">Newell. A., Heuristic programming: Ill-structured problems, in J. Aronofsky, ed., <em>Progress in Operations Research</em>, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1969.</p></div><div><p dir="auto"><em>No AI tools were used in this answer.</em></p></div></div><ol><ol><li><strong>What is the difference between action and design research?</strong></li></ol></ol><span><div><p dir="auto">Action research is a collaborative, iterative approach aimed at solving real-world problems in specific settings, like organizations or communities, by involving participants in both the research and implementation process. In contrast, design research focuses on creating and testing artifacts, such as products or systems, to solve specific problems or improve user experiences, with an emphasis on learning through the design process and refining solutions over time.</p></div></span><span><div><p dir="auto"><em>ChatGPT was used to rewrite this answer to make it better.</em></p></div></span><strong><br></strong><p></p>
|
||||
</body>
|
||||
</html>
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
|
||||
<!doctype html>
|
||||
<html>
|
||||
<head>
|
||||
<title>Description Learning task 5: Action and design</title>
|
||||
<meta charset="utf-8">
|
||||
|
||||
</head>
|
||||
<body>
|
||||
<p></p><div></div>Answer shortly to the following two questions:<ol><ol><li>Give an example of what could weak and strong mode of research be in software engineering</li><li>What is the difference between action and design research?</li></ol></ol><div></div><p></p>
|
||||
</body>
|
||||
</html>
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
|
||||
<!doctype html>
|
||||
<html>
|
||||
<head>
|
||||
<title>Feedback comments</title>
|
||||
<meta charset="utf-8">
|
||||
|
||||
</head>
|
||||
<body>
|
||||
<p dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;">Hey,</p><p dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;">AI-generated text has been detected in your assignment. Please review LUT University's guidelines/policy regarding the use of ChatGPT.<br></p><p dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;">Thanks.</p>
|
||||
</body>
|
||||
</html>
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
|
||||
<!doctype html>
|
||||
<html>
|
||||
<head>
|
||||
<title>Online text</title>
|
||||
<meta charset="utf-8">
|
||||
|
||||
</head>
|
||||
<body>
|
||||
<div><p dir="auto"><em>No AI tools were used in the next 3 tasks.</em></p></div><div><ol><li data-line="0" dir="auto"><p><strong>Why is the narrow meaning of science problematic for software engineering?</strong><br>I believe software engineering goes beyond just experimenting with solutions and observing outcomes. It also encompasses about design, abstraction, and problem-solving in a constantly changing environment. Classifying software engineering within the narrow definition of science misses out on the creative processes that are essential to development, as well as the complexities that come with user interactions and shifting requirements. This approach risks ignoring the many important methodologies that define the field.</p></li><li data-line="3" dir="auto"><p><strong>Why is it difficult to be value free in research, especially when studying humans?</strong><br>It is difficult to be value free in research because as humans, we carry biases in to study. Human behavior is very complex, influenced by social, cultural, and psychological factors. These values and assumptions affect the choice of methodology and the interpretation of results, which make complete objectivity near impossible.</p></li><li data-line="6" dir="auto"><p><strong>What do you expect of this course?</strong><br>I expect to learn a bit more about different research methodologies commonly used for software engineer as I expect to work on my thesis very soon.</p></li></ol></div>
|
||||
</body>
|
||||
</html>
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
|
||||
<!doctype html>
|
||||
<html>
|
||||
<head>
|
||||
<title>Description Learning task 1: intro</title>
|
||||
<meta charset="utf-8">
|
||||
|
||||
</head>
|
||||
<body>
|
||||
<p></p><ol><li>Why is the narrow meaning of science problematic for software engineering?</li><li>Why is it difficult to be value free in research, especially when studying humans?</li><li>What do you expect of this course?</li></ol><br><p></p>
|
||||
</body>
|
||||
</html>
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
|
||||
<!doctype html>
|
||||
<html>
|
||||
<head>
|
||||
<title>Description Submit the final report here (Lahti groups)</title>
|
||||
<meta charset="utf-8">
|
||||
|
||||
</head>
|
||||
<body>
|
||||
This is for Lahti groups. Please submit your final research plan here latest in 18 December!<br>
|
||||
</body>
|
||||
</html>
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
|
||||
<!doctype html>
|
||||
<html>
|
||||
<head>
|
||||
<title>Description Submit your presentation slides here (Lahti)</title>
|
||||
<meta charset="utf-8">
|
||||
|
||||
</head>
|
||||
<body>
|
||||
<div>This is for Lahti groups.</div><div><br></div><div>Please submit your presentation slides (pdf, ppt, etc.) here at least one day before your presentation.</div><br>There will be another place to submit your final research plan by the deadline in December.
|
||||
</body>
|
||||
</html>
|
||||
|
After Width: | Height: | Size: 20 KiB |
|
After Width: | Height: | Size: 22 KiB |
|
After Width: | Height: | Size: 77 KiB |
|
After Width: | Height: | Size: 62 KiB |
|
After Width: | Height: | Size: 73 KiB |
|
After Width: | Height: | Size: 115 KiB |
|
After Width: | Height: | Size: 126 KiB |
|
After Width: | Height: | Size: 140 KiB |
|
After Width: | Height: | Size: 148 KiB |
|
After Width: | Height: | Size: 124 KiB |
|
After Width: | Height: | Size: 112 KiB |
|
After Width: | Height: | Size: 103 KiB |
|
After Width: | Height: | Size: 17 KiB |
|
After Width: | Height: | Size: 215 KiB |
|
After Width: | Height: | Size: 228 KiB |
|
After Width: | Height: | Size: 68 KiB |
|
After Width: | Height: | Size: 132 KiB |
|
After Width: | Height: | Size: 46 KiB |
|
After Width: | Height: | Size: 75 KiB |
|
After Width: | Height: | Size: 70 KiB |
|
After Width: | Height: | Size: 66 KiB |
|
After Width: | Height: | Size: 46 KiB |
|
After Width: | Height: | Size: 269 KiB |
|
After Width: | Height: | Size: 44 KiB |
|
After Width: | Height: | Size: 155 KiB |
|
After Width: | Height: | Size: 198 KiB |
|
After Width: | Height: | Size: 148 KiB |
|
After Width: | Height: | Size: 226 KiB |
|
After Width: | Height: | Size: 50 KiB |
|
After Width: | Height: | Size: 63 KiB |
|
After Width: | Height: | Size: 120 KiB |
|
After Width: | Height: | Size: 45 KiB |
|
After Width: | Height: | Size: 47 KiB |
|
After Width: | Height: | Size: 72 KiB |
|
After Width: | Height: | Size: 74 KiB |
@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
|
||||
<!doctype html>
|
||||
<html>
|
||||
<head>
|
||||
<title>Description Final project submission</title>
|
||||
<meta charset="utf-8">
|
||||
|
||||
</head>
|
||||
<body>
|
||||
<p dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;"></p><p>Please submit the final project documentation here. Return only one PDF file, with the cover page including 1) the group name and 2) the name and email addresses of all members of your group. You can register your group within the assignments tab.<br><br><u>Do not submit duplicates.</u> Only one submission per group is needed. You must create and join a group before submitting an assignment. It is advisable to review your TurnItIn report. Feedback will be given through the grading rubric.</p><p>Deadline is on the last day of 2nd period, before the December exam week: 13th of December at 23:55.</p><p></p>
|
||||
</body>
|
||||
</html>
|
||||
|
After Width: | Height: | Size: 861 B |
|
After Width: | Height: | Size: 21 KiB |
|
After Width: | Height: | Size: 82 KiB |
|
After Width: | Height: | Size: 85 KiB |
|
After Width: | Height: | Size: 66 KiB |
|
After Width: | Height: | Size: 966 B |
|
After Width: | Height: | Size: 1.1 KiB |
|
After Width: | Height: | Size: 1.0 KiB |
|
After Width: | Height: | Size: 861 B |
|
After Width: | Height: | Size: 22 KiB |
|
After Width: | Height: | Size: 66 KiB |
|
After Width: | Height: | Size: 63 KiB |
|
After Width: | Height: | Size: 966 B |
|
After Width: | Height: | Size: 1.1 KiB |