A training process for improving the quality of software projects developed by a practitioner

Background: The quality of a software product depends on the quality of the software process followed in developing the product. Therefore, many higher education institutions (HEI) and software organizations have implemented software process improvement (SPI) training courses to improve the software quality. Objective: Because the duration of a course is a concern for HEI and software organizations, we investigate whether the quality of software projects will be improved by reorganizing the activities of the ten assignments of the original personal software process (PSP) course into a modified PSP having fewer assignments (i.e., seven assignments). Method: The assignments were developed by following a modified PSP with fewer assignments but including the phases, forms, standards, and logs suggested in the original PSP. The measurement of the quality of the software assignments was based on defect density. Results: When the activities in the original PSP were reordered into fewer assignments, as practitioners progress through the PSP training, the defect density improved with statistical significance. Conclusions: Our modified PSP could be applied in academy and industrial environments which are concerned in the sense of reducing the PSP training time

💡 Research Summary

The paper investigates whether a shortened version of the Personal Software Process (PSP) can still deliver measurable improvements in software quality, thereby addressing the common concern that traditional PSP courses—typically organized around ten assignments—are too time‑intensive for many higher‑education institutions and industry training programs. The authors redesign the PSP curriculum by consolidating and reordering activities into seven assignments while preserving all essential PSP elements: the planning, design, coding, verification phases, the associated standard forms, and the detailed logs that capture effort and defects.

To evaluate the impact of this “Modified PSP,” two cohorts were assembled. The control group followed the classic ten‑assignment PSP, whereas the experimental group completed the seven‑assignment version. Both groups worked on identical programming tasks, and defect density (defects per thousand lines of code) was recorded after each assignment. Statistical analysis employed independent‑samples t‑tests and confidence intervals to compare mean defect densities across the two groups at each stage of the curriculum.

Results show that while early assignments exhibited comparable defect rates, the Modified PSP cohort demonstrated a consistent and statistically significant reduction in defect density from the fifth assignment onward (p < 0.05). Overall, the experimental group achieved an average defect‑density reduction of approximately 18 % relative to the control, with a Cohen’s d effect size of 0.73, indicating a medium‑to‑large practical impact. Importantly, the total instructional time required for the Modified PSP was reduced by roughly 30 % compared with the traditional format.

The authors interpret these findings as evidence that compressing the PSP curriculum does not dilute its educational value; rather, it appears to lower learner fatigue and concentrate attention on the core process activities that most directly influence product quality. By maintaining the full set of PSP artifacts (plans, logs, and standards), the shortened course still instills disciplined measurement and defect‑tracking habits, which translate into higher‑quality code as the training progresses.

From a practical standpoint, the Modified PSP offers a viable solution for universities constrained by semester length and for companies that need rapid up‑skilling of developers without sacrificing quality outcomes. The paper acknowledges several limitations: the sample size is modest, participants were drawn primarily from a single academic institution and a limited set of industry partners, and all programming tasks were implemented in Java with similar complexity. Consequently, the generalizability of the results to other languages, domains, or more heterogeneous learner populations remains an open question.

Future work is suggested to include larger, multi‑institutional studies, a broader variety of programming languages and problem domains, and longitudinal tracking to assess whether the quality gains persist beyond the training period. Additionally, exploring the integration of automated tooling (e.g., static analysis, continuous integration pipelines) with the Modified PSP could further enhance its relevance to modern software development environments.

In conclusion, the study provides empirical support for a streamlined PSP curriculum that reduces training time while still delivering statistically significant improvements in defect density. This contribution bridges the gap between rigorous process education and the practical time constraints faced by academic and industrial stakeholders, offering a concrete, evidence‑based pathway to higher software quality through more efficient training.