Process Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning (POGIL) in computer science & software engineering

Abstract

Educators have developed a wide variety of approaches to engage students, enhance learning, and emphasize attitudes and skills in addition to knowledge. One such approach is Process Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning (POGIL), in which teams of learners (typically 3-5) work on scripted inquiry activities and investigations designed to help them construct their own knowledge. The teams follow processes with specific roles, steps, and reports that help develop process skills and encourage individual responsibility and meta-cognition. POGIL has been developed and validated over the last 15 years, primarily in chemistry, and studies have found that POGIL significantly improves student performance. POGIL has particular potential for education in computer science (CS) and software engineering (SE). Software development is largely a team-based, problem-solving activity, and POGIL helps students to develop team process skills and problem-solving abilities. POGIL also encourages students to collaborate and learn from each other rather than focusing on an instructor. POGIL in CS and SE also presents some challenges. There are not many POGIL activities for CS and SE, and developing them requires significant time and effort. CS and SE courses and curricula vary widely, and portions of the content change rapidly, making it more difficult to adapt or adopt materials developed elsewhere. This paper describes an ongoing NSF funded project to develop POGIL activities for CS and SE. First, it reviews relevant background on effective learning and POGIL, compares POGIL to other forms of active learning, and describes the potential of POGIL for CS and SE. Second, it describes a sample POGIL activity for SE, including the structure and contents, student and facilitator actions during the activity, and how activities are designed. Third, it summarizes current progress and plans for the NSF project. Finally, it discusses student reactions, lessons learned, and future directions. © 2012 American Society for Engineering Education.