A Survey of Student Attitudes: Database Competition NCC 2003 Lissa F. Pollacia Pam Miller...

A Survey of Student Attitudes:Database Competition

NCC 2003Lissa F. Pollacia

Pam Miller

Northwestern State University

Claude Simpson

University of Texas Pan American

Nola McDaniel

McNeese State University

Database Design and Implementation Contest

New for 2003!

Two components:

Database Design

•Entity Relationship Diagram

•Relational Schema

Implementation

•Access 2002 database “shell”

•Problem statement:Table operationsQueriesFormsReportsWeb pageSwitchboardMacros and VBA modules

Time was critical!

Exit Survey

• Administered as teams turned in their solution

• Demographics:– 65% male, 35% female– 94% in 2-person teams– Average of 21 computing hours

Database classes completed

Class/Level Number indicated

Introduction to Database Concepts (Freshman and Sophomore)

19

Access (all levels) 25

SQL, SQL Server, or MySQL (all levels) 11

Oracle (all levels) 18

Database Design and Administration (Junior and Senior)

31

Data Warehousing or Data Mining (Senior)

3

Results for overall contest

Overall contest: % Agree or neutral

% Disagree

Problem statement was well organized.

80.2 19.8

The instructions were clear. 77.1 22.9

I was familiar with most Access operations.

65.6 34.4

I had enough time to complete most tasks.

46.9 53.1

The computer equipment was adequate.

76.0 24.0

The room environment was good.

58.3 41.7

Results for Modeling(Part I)

Conceptual Modeling Component: % Agree or neutral

% Disagre

e

Instructions were clear for this part. 83.3 16.7

Length of problem was too long. 65.6 34.4

There was enough time to complete this part.

77.1 22.9

Results for Implementation(Part II)

Access Implementation Component:

% Agree or neutral

% Disagree

Instructions were clear for this part.

76.0 24.0

Length of problem was too long. 87.5 12.5

There was enough time to complete this part.

53.1 46.9

Comparison of adequate time to complete Part I vs. Part II

Agree or neutral

Disagree

Part I adequate time

78% 22%

Part II adequate time

50.5% 49.5%

chi-square = 13.785, df=1, p = 0.0002Significant Difference

Compare “beginners” vs. “advanced” students

Part I: Difficulty of Modeling by Groups

0.00

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

1 2 3 4 5

Level of difficulty

pe

rce

nta

ge

Group 1

Group 2

No Significant Difference

Part II: Difficulty of Implementation by Groups

01020304050

1 2 3 4 5

Level of difficulty

pe

rce

nta

ge

group1

group2

No Significant Difference

Room environment

• Compared responses of those who said the environment was OK (58%)

• Versus those who reported problems

Surprisingly…

No Significant Differencefor any questions!

Conclusion:

• Problem statement was well-organized

• Instructions were clear• Problem length & level of

difficulty about right

Big Success!

Problems with room environment:

• Large number of teams

• Many teams did not pre-register– Last minute room

accommodations

• Problems were unavoidable

2004 Database Competition

• NCC Omaha, April 1 – 4• Database competition:

Friday, April 2nd

• Problem statement: similar format

• Better job with logistics• Better survey questions

See you

there!