Advertisement

Teaching and Learning State-Oriented Business Process Modeling. Experience Report

  • Georgios Koutsopoulos
  • Ilia BiderEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing book series (LNBIP, volume 287)

Abstract

Though experience on teaching and learning workflow-based business process modeling exists and is partly documented, this is not true for other types of business process modeling. Even if such experience exists, it is not documented in research publications devoted to process modeling or BPM education. This paper tries to fill the gap by reporting on experience of teaching and learning state-oriented business process modeling, which does not belong to the mainstream. The report gives both the teacher’s and learner’s perspective from a course where state-oriented process modeling was in the focus. The material is partly based on the reflections from the authors, one of whom is a learner, and the other - a teacher, and partly – on an investigation of opinions of other learners via interviews and a small-scale survey. The paper considers difficulties of teaching/learning state-oriented modeling, of which some does not exist for other types of process modeling, and gives suggestions on how they can be overcome.

Keywords

BPM Education Business process Business process modeling State-oriented 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work could not have been completed without the students from the first round of BPCM volunteering to participate in interviews and surveys. The authors appreciate very much the time they spent and comments they provided.

References

  1. 1.
    Dumas, M., La Rosa, M., Mendling, J., Reijers, H.A.: Fundamentals of Business Process Management. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bandara, W., Chand, D., Chircu, A., Hintringer, S., Karagiannis, D., Recker, J., van Rensburg, A., Usoff, C., Welke, R.: Business process management education in academia: status, challenges, and recommendations. CAIS 27, 747–776 (2010)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    NIST: Integration definition for function modeling (IDEF0), Draft Federal Information Processing Standards, Publication 183 (1993). www.idef.com/downloads/pdf/idef0.pdf. Accessed Feb 2015
  4. 4.
    Khomyakov, M., Bider, I.: Achieving workflow flexibility through taming the chaos. In: 6th International Conference on Object Oriented Information Systems, OOIS 2000, pp. 85–92 (2000)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Andersson, T., Andersson-Ceder, A., Bider, I.: State flow as a way of analyzing business processes - case studies. Logistics Inf. Manage. 15(1), 34–45 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Mott, V.: Knowledge comes from practice: reflective theory building in practice. In: Rowden, R.W. (ed.) Workplace Learning: Debating Five Critical Questions of Theory and Practice, pp. 57–63. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco (1996)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bider, I., Perjons, E.: Evaluating adequacy of business process modeling approaches. In: Handbook of Research on Complex Dynamic Process Management: Techniques for Adaptability in Turbulent Environments, pp. 79–102. IGI (2009)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    IbisSoft: iPB Reference Manual. http://docs.ibissoft.se/node/3. Accessed 2009
  9. 9.
    Bider, I., Henkel, M., Kowalski, S., Perjons, E.: Simulating apprenticeship using multimedia in higher education: a case from the information systems field. Interact. Technol. Smart Educ. 12(2), 137–154 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Siau, K., Loo, P.: Identifying difficulties in learning UML. Inf. Syst. Manage. 23, 43–51 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Meyer, J., Land, R.: Threshold concepts and troublesome knowledge (2): epistemological considerations and a conceptual framework for teaching and learning. High. Educ. 49(3), 373–388 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Perjons, E., Bider, I., Andersson, B.: Building and exploiting a business process model for lobbying: experience report. Commun. IIMA CIIMA 7(3), 1–14 (2007)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Biggs, J., Tang, C.: Teaching for Quality Learning at University, 4th edn. Open University Press, New York (2011)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.DSV - Stockholm UniversityStockholmSweden

Personalised recommendations