Pair programming productivity: Novice–novice vs. expert–expert

Lui, Kim Man; Chan, Keith C. C.

doi:10.1016/j.ijhcs.2006.04.010

Cited by 92 publications

(43 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A student who is considerably good in programming was asked to team up with a student who has average programming skills for Scholar-Naive combination (Lui and Chan, 2006).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Optimising Pair Programming in a Scholastic Framework: A Design Pattern Perspective

Rajagopal¹,

Hareesha²,

Kundapur³

2017

Journal of Computer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Pair programming is one of the widely used practices of Extreme Programming (XP). XP is a software development process which intends to enhance quality of software code in order to cater to the ever increasing demands of customers looking for IT solutions. Pair programming promotes team building, raises confidence among individuals and eventually results in richer and a better codebase. As an attempt to compare solo and pair programming, group of post graduate students were assigned the task to implement four out of 23 design patterns (pertaining to real world scenarios) in their lab sessions. In this study, a systematic investigation on pairing by contemplating a pair programming scenario from a design pattern perspective has been presented. Results were obtained using JavaNCSS tool by considering software code metrics which indicated that pair programming can be beneficial in a scholastic framework.

show abstract

“…A student who is considerably good in programming was asked to team up with a student who has average programming skills for Scholar-Naive combination (Lui and Chan, 2006).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Two individuals with sound knowledge of programming collaborate for Scholar-Scholar combination (Lui and Chan, 2006). Naive-naive combination doesn't yield any benefits in a scholastic framework.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Optimising Pair Programming in a Scholastic Framework: A Design Pattern Perspective

Rajagopal¹,

Hareesha²,

Kundapur³

2017

Journal of Computer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In software, peer review of code has been a standard part in computationally-intensive research for many years, particularly as a post-software creation check. Additionally, peer-programming (also known as pair-programming) has been growing in popularity, especially as part of the Agile methodology, where it is employed as a check made during software creation ( Lui & Chan, 2006). Software development and sharing platforms, such as GitHub , support and encourage social code review, which can be viewed as a form of peer review that takes place both during creation and afterwards.…”

Section: Potential Future Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A multi-disciplinary perspective on emergent and future innovations in peer review

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Peer review of research articles is a core part of our scholarly communication system. In spite of its importance, the status and purpose of peer review is often contested. What is its role in our modern digital research and communications infrastructure? Does it perform to the high standards with which it is generally regarded? Studies of peer review have shown that it is prone to bias and abuse in numerous dimensions, frequently unreliable, and can fail to detect even fraudulent research. With the advent of web technologies, we are now witnessing a phase of innovation and experimentation in our approaches to peer review. These developments prompted us to examine emerging models of peer review from a range of disciplines and venues, and to ask how they might address some of the issues with our current systems of peer review. We examine the functionality of a range of social Web platforms, and compare these with the traits underlying a viable peer review system: quality control, quantified performance metrics as engagement incentives, and certification and reputation. Ideally, any new systems will demonstrate that they out-perform and reduce the biases of existing models as much as possible. We conclude that there is considerable scope for new peer review initiatives to be developed, each with their own potential issues and advantages. We also propose a novel hybrid platform model that could, at least partially, resolve many of the socio-technical issues associated with peer review, and potentially disrupt the entire scholarly communication system. Success for any such development relies on reaching a critical threshold of research community engagement with both the process and the platform, and therefore cannot be achieved without a significant change of incentives in research environments.

show abstract

“…In addition, 'Customer Satisfaction' was also identified as a criterion of measuring productivity [13]. Lui and Chan [14] performed a controlled experiment called repeat-programming which can facilitate the understanding of relationships between human experience and programming productivity, and found that productivity in 'pair programming' achieved higher quality within minimum time.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Measuring productivity in agile software development process: a scoping study

Shah¹,

Papatheocharous²,

Nyfjord³

2015

Proceedings of the 2015 International Conference on Software and System Process

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An agile software development process is often claimed to increase productivity. However, productivity measurement in agile software development is little researched. Measures are not explicitly defined nor commonly agreed upon. In this paper, we highlight the agile productivity measures reported in literature by means of a research method called scoping study. We were able to identify 12 papers reporting the productivity measures in agile software development processes. We found that finding, understanding and putting into use agile productivity definitions is not an easy task. From the perspective of common roles in agile software development process and existing knowledge workers' productivity dimensions, we also emphasize that none of the productivity measures satisfy these fully. We recommend that future effort should be focused on defining agile productivity in measurable, practicable and meaningful form.

show abstract

Pair programming productivity: Novice–novice vs. expert–expert

Cited by 92 publications

References 11 publications

Optimising Pair Programming in a Scholastic Framework: A Design Pattern Perspective

Optimising Pair Programming in a Scholastic Framework: A Design Pattern Perspective

A multi-disciplinary perspective on emergent and future innovations in peer review

Measuring productivity in agile software development process: a scoping study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About