The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Who Does What? Work Division and Allocation Strategies of Computer Science Student Teams
Open accessAbstract
Collaboration skills are important for future software engineers. In computer science education, these skills are of-ten practiced through group assignments, where students develop software collaboratively. The approach that students take in these assignments varies widely, but often involves a division of labour. It can then be argued whether collaboration still takes place. The discipline of computing education is especially interesting in this context, because some of its specific features (such as the variation in entry skill level and the use of source code repositories as collaboration platforms) are likely to influence the approach taken within groupwork. The aim of this research is to gain insight into the work division and allocation strategies applied by computer science students during group assignments. To this end, we interviewed twenty students of four universities. The thematic analysis shows that students tend to divide up the workload to enable working independently, with pair programming and code reviews being often employed. Motivated primarily by grade and efficiency factors, students choose and allocate tasks primarily based on their prior expertise and preferences. Based on our findings, we argue that the setup of group assignments can limit students' motivation for practicing new software engineering skills, and that interventions are needed towards encouraging experimentation and learning.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
This organization did not resolve the pedagogical tension between functioning effectively as a research team and ensuring that every student practices every research skill.
“Importantly, this organization did not resolve a well-known pedagogical tension between functioning effectively as a research team and ensuring that every student practices every research skill (van der Meulen and Aivaloglou 2021).”
From Generative AI Expands the Intellectual Reach of Course Based Undergraduate Research Experiences (CUREs) (2026) · cites this paper as van der Meulen and Aivaloglou 2021
Citations
Cites
Using thematic analysis in psychology
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006) · Qualitative Research in Psychology · doi:10.1191/1478088706qp063oa · Cited by 194,414
The Construction of Shared Knowledge in Collaborative Problem Solving.
Roschelle, J., & Teasley, S. D. (1995) · Computer Supported Collaborative Learning · doi:10.1007/978-3-642-85098-1_5 · Cited by 2,274 · cited 2×
“Collaboration, in turn, explicitly involves a continued process to construct and maintain a shared concept of a problem [25].”
Background
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 39
- 10.1145/3428029.3428563 · DOI
- 10.1145/990680.990684 · DOI
- 10.1145/1082983.1083107 · DOI
- 10.1145/2642937.2642959 · DOI
- 10.1108/02635570710750408 · DOI
- 10.1145/2729094.2742613 · DOI
- kim, 2012, Assisting instructional assessment of undergraduate collaborative wiki and svn activities, International Conference on Educational Data Mining
- 10.1109/FIE.2002.1158709 · DOI
- 10.1109/ICCSE.2014.6926497 · DOI
- 10.15640/jehd.v5n1a2 · DOI
- 10.2458/v6i1.18772 · DOI
- bentley, 2013, Students’ experience and perceptions of group assignments, Journal of Pedagogic Development, 3, 11
- van hattum-janssen, 2013, Student perceptions of group work, University of Minho Research Centre in Education 4710, 57
- 10.1002/tl.330 · DOI
- 10.1037/0033-2909.94.3.429 · DOI
- 10.1007/s11412-018-9277-y · DOI
- teasley, 1993, Constructing a joint problem space: The computer as a tool for sharing knowledge, Computers as Cognitive Tools, 229
- 10.1016/j.chb.2008.12.008 · DOI
- 10.1145/3159450.3159480 · DOI
- 10.1145/3159450.3159508 · DOI
- 10.1109/ASWEC.2008.4483195 · DOI
- 10.5121/ijcseit.2018.8101 · DOI
- 10.1109/ICGSE.2009.12 · DOI
- 10.1109/ICSE.2015.335 · DOI
- 10.1145/2445196.2445351 · DOI
- 10.1287/mnsc.46.12.1554.12072 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1145/2094131.2094143 · DOI
- 10.1177/105256298400900409 · DOI
- craig, 2018, Listening to early career software developers, J Comput Sci Coll, 33, 138
- 10.1145/1734263.1734359 · DOI
- labeouf, 2014, The value of academic group work: An examination of faculty and student perceptions, The Business Review Cambridge, 22, 32
- 10.1177/0273475302250571 · DOI
- 10.1145/1370750.1370781 · DOI
- 10.1002/asi.23032 · DOI
- 10.4018/978-1-59140-408-8.ch005 · DOI
- 10.1007/978-3-642-60968-8_3 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.chb.2004.10.016 · DOI
- 10.1002/meet.2011.14504801035 · DOI
- simão filho, 2015, Task allocation approaches in distributed agile software development: A systematic review, Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, 349, 252
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Babar, A., Davin, K. J., & Dornburg, A. (2026) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2608.27638
“Importantly, this organization did not resolve a well-known pedagogical tension between functioning effectively as a research team and ensuring that every student practices every research skill (van der Meulen and Aivaloglou 2021).”
Metadata
- Authors
- van der Meulen, A., & Aivaloglou, E.
- Affiliations
- Leiden University (NL)
- Venue
- 2021 IEEE/ACM 43rd International Conference on Software Engineering: Software Engineering Education and Training (ICSE-SEET)
- Publisher
- IEEE
- Published
- 2021-05
- Pages
- 273-282
- OpenAlex
- W3137835814
- Cited by
- 0
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 0.00
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- IEEE/ACM International Conference on Software Engineering: Software Engineering Education and Training (ICSE-SEET) (publishedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- DSpace (Open University in the Netherlands) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Funders
- Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Science Applications › Teaching and Learning Programming
- Social Sciences › Education › Problem and Project Based Learning
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Software Engineering Techniques and Practices
- Keywords
- division of labor, task allocation, group assignments, software engineering education, collaboration skills, pair programming, code review, software repositories, student motivation
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review