You Want Me to Work with Who? Stakeholder Perceptions of Automated Team Formation in Engineering ...
summary
Study of the CATME tool across eight project courses surveys N=277 students and interviews with 13 instructors, showing algorithmic team formation yields unexpectedly high student satisfaction but no correlation between satisfaction and measured team performance. Instructors pick from 27+ criteria and weight them; common choices include schedule and commitment. Students value the objective rationale yet want explanations of assignments and a voice in criterion selection; recommendations include student voting, team-level summaries, and exemplar criterion presets.
AI-written summary · about
chapters (8)
- 0:00Introduction to team formation
- 1:00Current assignment methods
- 2:18Automated team formation tools
- 5:17Study methodology
- 8:04Student satisfaction findings
- 9:24Perceived strengths and gaps
- 12:05Guidelines and future research
- 14:47Q&A session
related talks
18mWho should be my teammates: using a conversational agent to understand individuals and help teaming
13mDeveloper Satisfaction = Better Code | Here's Why
45mAdvanced Software Teaming
25mReading the game: Mental skills for high-performing engineering teams
45mEffective Evaluation of Automation Tools
32mDeveloper productivity 2.0
27mTeam Assessments: the Good, the Bad and the Ugly
27mDevelopers Expose What's Breaking Productivity in Their Companies