Forum for Advancing Software engineering Education (FASE) Volume 12 Number 03 (Issue 146) - March 15, 2002 Note: If you have problems with the format of this document, try ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Table of Contents May 2002 Topic: Computer Science and Software Engineering in Academia: Cooperation or Conflict? Articles Software-engineering.edu: Foundations of a Discipline by Peter B. Henderson Preliminary Report on the CSEET 2002 Workshop: Developing the Software Engineering Volume of Computing Curriculum 2001 by J. Barrie Thompson and Helen M. Edwards News Items WGSEET Email List Changed NSPE Engineering Times Has Article on SE Certification Exam IEEE-USA Announces New Electrical & Computer Engineering PE Exam 4th Annual List of Countries with Subscribers to FASE Calls for Participation International Summit on Software Engineering Education Position Openings Florida Gulf Coast University Knox College Rochester Institute of Technology Texas Tech University - New Graduate Extension in Abilene University of Houston-Victoria Book Advertisements Software Project Management in Practice Contact and General Information about FASE ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ May 2002 Topic - Computer Science and Software Engineering in Academia: Cooperation or Conflict? Topic Editors: Don Bagert Tom Hilburn Texas Tech University Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University Don.Bagert@ttu.edu hilburn@db.erau.edu In the United States and other countries, the number of software engineering degree programs are increasing, with more rapid growths expected in the near future. Most of those new software engineering programs will grow out of existing computer science departments, meaning that CS and SE stakeholders are potentially competing for resources. On the other hand, some departments have the various interests working together, in some cases even changing its name to "The Department of Computer Science and Software Engineering". The long-term future of many departments may depend on whether there is cooperation or conflict between the computer science and the software engineering faculty. Short (generally 2000 words or less) viewpoint and information articles related to this subject are requested. Industrial as well as academic viewpoints are encouraged. The deadline for submission is on May 8; the submission format is at http://www.cs.ttu.edu/fase/#submissions and at the end of this issue. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Articles ###################################################################### Software-engineering.edu: Foundations of a Discipline Peter B. Henderson Butler University phenders@butler.edu Tuesday morning, 2/26, 6:30am, can't sleep: Two days of Working Group on Software Engineering Education meetings and one day of CSEE&T 2002. I feel like Dorothy in Oz , Alice in non wonderland. What is happening to (software) engineering education today? Engineers are trusted by society to apply rigorous principles to design "things" useful and safe for mankind. Foremost, engineers pride themselves on technical design competency (footnote 1). Traditional engineering is an apprenticeship discipline. Bachelor graduates primarily learn their craft on the job and through advanced study and training. But undergraduate software engineering education seems to be trying to do it all, technical, programming, design, management, etc. "Jack of all trades, master of none!" "If knowledge is power, then being able to use knowledge is power!" (factorial, not exclamation) There is a significant lack of focus on the foundations required to leverage the knowledge students learn. I have seen statements that software engineering is different from traditional engineering disciplines due to its inherent abstract nature. Yet, the primary tool mankind has developed for abstraction plays a less significant role in software engineering education than in traditional engineering education [1]. Go figure!!! (exclamation) There are studies [4] and claims [3] that mathematics is not important for practicing software engineers. If graduates have not been provided with the proper mathematical tools for thinking and problem solving, naturally they will claim they don't use or need them. Nancy Levenson articulated this point very well in her CSEE&T 2002 keynote when she noted that she had two tools for all her home repairs jobs, a screwdriver and pliers; but the professional has an extensive collection of hand and power tools at his/her disposal Let's strive to give our students a collection of power(ful) tools for thinking and problem solving so they are not constrained to "a screwdriver and pliers." This rests upon building strong, lifelong foundations. So, let us work together to identify the foundations of the software engineering discipline and ensure our graduates have these foundations. As a starting point, I recommend reading Keith Devlin's article "Do Software Engineering Need Mathematics?" [1] and his subsequent CACM Viewpoint article "The Real Reasons why Software Engineers Need Math" [2]. Peter B. Henderson finding-our-way@software-engineering.edu [Editor's note: software-engineering.edu is not an actual domain. You can contact Pete at phenders@butler.edu.] [1] Devlin, K., "Do Software Engineering Need Mathematics?", MAA Online http://www.maa.org/devlin/devlin_10_00.html [2] Devlin, K., "The Real Reasons why Software Engineers Need Math," October 2001 CACM http://acs.math.ist.utl.pt/iprog3h0102/devlin.pdf [3] Glass, R.L., "A New Answer to 'How Important is Mathematics to the Software Practitioner?'" IEEE Software, vol. 17, no. 6, Nov./Dec. 2000, pp. 135-136. [4] Lethbridge, T., "What Knowledge Is Important to a Software Professional?" Computer, vol. 33, no. 5, May 2000, pp. 44-50. Footnote 1: The primary role of an engineer is design, rather than building. Yes, a software engineer should know how to program, but programming should not be their primary role. Civil engineers don't learn how to drive a bulldozer was an interesting thread on the SIGCSE mailing list several years ago. ###################################################################### From: Barrie Thompson Preliminary Report on the CSEET 2002 Workshop Developing the Software Engineering Volume of Computing Curriculum 2001 J. Barrie Thompson and Helen M. Edwards University of Sunderland, Sunderland, UK 1 Introduction The fifteenth IEEE Conference on Software Engineering Education and Training was held in Covington, Kentucky from 25th to 27th of February 2002. This preliminary report provides an overview of the operation and major results of a workshop [1] which was held during the conference. This was a participatory workshop comprising a peer group of 30 academics with experience in software engineering education and training. The format of the workshop was two one and a half-hour sessions, during the first afternoon of the conference. The prime aim of the workshop was to provide a forum that would allow for participation in the development of the Software Engineering Volume of Computing Curriculum 2001 (CC2001) [2,3]. The workshop was held since it was the organisers' view that there is a clear need to create Software Engineering programmes to meet local, national and international needs. For the curricula that will be defined in the Software Engineering volume of CC2001 to be accepted there needs to be involvement by the wider community in its development. The workshop objectives were: * For the members of the Software Engineering volume's steering committee to provide an overview of progress to date and the work remaining to be done. * For the workshop delegates to work together in teams and attempt to use templates that had been produced by the steering committee for use in developing the curricula * For the delegates to evaluate the appropriateness of the templates, their use, and provide feedback for the steering committee. The workshop was broken into two sessions: in the first, the steering committee outlined the progress with the CC2001 SE volume. Participants were then allocated to one of four groups and each group was assigned a Software Engineering knowledge area (from a list provided by the steering committee). Each group was tasked with an exercise which involved defining the knowledge area they had been given and to breaking it down into subcomponents (units). Towards the end of the session each group provided feedback on the exercise to the workshop participants. In the second session the four teams worked on a second exercise which required them to take one of the units, they had identified in session 1, and specify it using the draft template which had been devised by the steering committee. This template requires information to be provided on: Prerequisite Knowledge for the unit, a Description of the unit, Suggested Minimum Core Hour Coverage, Learning Objectives (and their level within Bloom's taxonomy (ref)), topics to be covered, Resources and References, Information on Coverage of this unit in current curricula, Guidance on where the unit should be covered in SE curricula and additional comments. The focus of the exercise was not to generate the content but to gather feedback on the usability and accessibility of this approach. In the following sections we provide details of: the pre conference meeting with members of the steering committee, a summary of the information presented by members of the steering committee at the start of the first session, the operation and results of the first session, the operation of the second session and the groups' feedback regarding the pros and cons of the processes they had undertaken, overall findings and suggestions for reconsideration and further work, and finally decisions reached at the post conference meeting with members of the steering committee. 2 Pre conference meeting with members of the steering committee During the evening prior to the conference the workshop organisers met with members of the Software Engineering volume's steering committee to discuss in what ways the workshop could best be used to assist in the development of the volume. When the original workshop proposal had been produced it had been assumed that much of the volume would be in a semi formal state and that the workshop could be used for evaluative purposes. It was explained to the workshop organisers that their had been some delays in the planned schedules and that as yet there were no curricula items for evaluation. However, members of the steering committee had been working on a set of templates which were intended to be used by the voluntary teams who would be involved in the development of the curricula and it was felt that the workshop could be used as an excellent opportunity to test the use and provide feedback on the templates. Hence the original workshop plans were modified to undertake this activity. 3 Summary the Steering Committee's Overview of the Status of the CC2001 SE Volume. Rich Le Blanc (project co-chair) outlined the overall Software Engineering Education Project (SWEEP) and it constituent parts: details of the committee, its Industrial Advisory Board, Editors, Knowledge Area Focus Group and Pedagogy Area Focus Group can be found at [4]. Tom Hilburn (co-editor) then reviewed the progress on the software engineering volume's outline against the headings of: Organisation and Management, Design, Construction, Internal Review, External Communications and Review. Organization & Management: This was concerned with assembling the CCSE team and make assignments, securing and managing financial support for the CCSE, establishing communication support for the project (e.g., email, web, teleconferencing), managing and facilitating CCSE meetings, establishing and tracking a plan for the project. Design: Determining the guiding principles for development of the CCSE Volume, outlining the key components of the Volume, developing a conceptual model for the curriculum, determining the key software engineering knowledge areas, and deciding on an outline for the curriculum description. Construction: Using the design materials, draft the chapters and appendices and integrating these into the CCSE volume. Using review feedback to make changes and produce a final document. Internal Review: The CCSE Steeping committees will review the principal artifacts produced in the Design and Construction phases, as they are produced. Review comment will be provided to the artifact authors and the editors. External Communications and Review: An external review group will review materials made available on a public web site, and review information will be disseminated through email, publications such as FASE, and in meetings of WGSEET, CSEET, SIGCSE, etc. The review group will include the CCSE Advisory board and other members in the SE education community. Ann Sobel (co-chair of knowledge area focus group) then provided the list of software knowledge areas (SKAs) that have been identified as relevant to undergraduate software engineering programs. These were: Software Requirements/Requirements Engineering/Analysis Software Design Software Construction Formal Methods Software Testing Software Configuration Management Software Maintenance SE Process SE Management & Project Management Software Quality SE Tools & Methods She then outlined the SKA template. Each group was to use this to provide a definition of individual areas and a list of components within each. 4 Session One: Defining Knowledge Areas and their units The number of attendees was such that it was possible to have four groups each consisting of five or six participants. Four knowledge areas were selected by the organisers and each was allocated to a group, the knowledge areas selected were: (i) Software Requirements, (ii) Design, (iii) Software Process and (iv) Quality. Since the purpose of the exercise was to test the use of the templates and it was felt that software engineering educators should be able to provide an input into any of these four knowledge areas there was no particular alignment of participants to knowledge areas. However, the opportunity was given to the participants to swap with a member from another group if they were really unhappy with the knowledge area they had been allocated to consider. Each group had thirty minutes in which to describe their knowledge area and identify its subcomponents (units) they then reported back to the workshop as a whole as follows: 4.1 "Requirements" Group The group decided that "this topic provides coverage of issues associated with gathering software requirements". It covers "the concepts, methods, processes, procedures and techniques associated with requirements modelling, elicitation, analysis, validation, specification and management and tool support". The units within the area were identified as: Life cycle and models, Elicitation, Analysis, Validation, Specification and Modeling, Management and Maintenance, Tools. 4.2 "Design" Group The group decided that this area is "Conceptual Solution that meets the requirements". They categorised the units into four groupings: "ways of doing", "ways of documenting", "ways of analysing" and "results". Ways of doing comprised: reuse, software patterns, methods of decomposition, structure, prototyping, modelling, design methods, and process. Ways of documenting comprised: notations for design, languages, and design tools. Ways of Analysing comprised: traceability, verification and validation, risk assessment, and constraints. Results comprised: interface design, choice of development environment, and design documentation. 4.3 "Process" Group The group decided that the description here was "A set of activities for developing and maintaining a software system". They defined their units in terms of "what students should know". Students should: 1. Understand some standard process models and their strengths and weaknesses (such as waterfall, spiral, agile, others). 2. Appreciate the importance and uniqueness of software process 3. Experience at least one software process e.g. senior design capstone 4. Understand team versus individual processes 5. Awareness of process improvement 4.4 "Quality" Group The group gave their definition in terms of a list: (i) Measurably fit for purpose, (ii) Define area, (iii) Highlight pervasive elements, (iv) Emphasise some issues and (v) measure and evaluate. Their units were defined in terms of aspects the students should have experience of: (i) Appropriate metrics, (ii) Maintainability (iii) Life-span (iv) Performance (v) Defect Levels/Documentation (vi) Usability (vii) Process (viii) Standards (ix) Pitfalls. Plus they emphasised that in considering quality both process and outcome need to be factors. 5 Session Two: Using the Knowledge Unit Templates In this session the four groups worked on a second exercise which required them to take one of the units, they had identified in session 1, and specify it using the draft template (SEBOK Unit Template) which had been devised by the steering committee. This template requires information to be provided on: Prerequisite Knowledge for the unit, a Description of the unit, Suggested Minimum Core Hour Coverage, Learning Objectives (and their level within Bloom's taxonomy), topics to be covered, Resources and References, Information on Coverage of this unit in current curricula, Guidance on where the unit should be covered in SE curricula and additional comments. Rather than detail in this preliminary report, the groups' suggested contents for these templates, we have focused on the pros and cons that the groups identified regarding the processes they had undertaken. 5.1 "Requirements" Group Pros: Within the group there were different experiences/background. The close time frame kept the group focused Cons: There was not enough time The structure was fuzzy Team members would prefer to select the area to participate in and use their own expertise 5.2 "Design" Group Pros: The template is workable - it can be used. It provides a consistent structure It serves as a basis for communication It documents the collaborative work Cons: Relationships with other knowledge units was not clear There was no hypertext - therefore linkages to other documents was missing 5.3 "Process" Group Pros: The process was very structured There was a short timescale It was collaborative Cons: It was too restrictive (reflection not possible) There was a lack of common definition of terms 5.4 "Quality" Group Pros: In addition to those already covered by the other groups it allowed collaboration with colleagues from different parts of the world with different perspectives. Cons: In addition to those already covered... The template looks only at content, and not at learning The area addressed was not the participants' own area. 6 Overall Conclusions Concerning the Activities Undertaken 6.1 Positive Outcomes * The templates are usable and do assist in generating appropriate information. * Working in small discussion groups greatly assisted the process. * Timeboxing of tasks is valuable and focuses minds on tasks. * It provided a level of internationalisation. 6.2 Areas for reconsideration and further work * Users of the templates need clear guidance * Knowledge units often need to be addressed at different levels and within different stages (years) within the curriculum. Therefore the template needs to be enhanced so that this iterative/spiral mode of educational delivery can be specified. * The knowledge areas are not themselves orthogonal. This needs to be made clear to future reviewers and users of the curriculum: perhaps by displaying in some sort of matrix mapping * Reviewers need to self select their areas to ensure they have subject expertise (all reviewers?) * One delegate raised the query: why the eleven KAs? Why not use the areas defined in SWEBOK to assist comprehensibility? 7 Post-Workshop Meeting On the final evening of the conference the workshop organisers again met with members of the steering committee to review what had achieved at the workshop and discuss what activities should be undertaken within a planned full day "workshop" to be co-located at icse2002 (this "workshop" has been designated as International Summit on Software Engineering Education, SSEE and details can be found at: http://www.icse-conferences.org/2002/info/colocated.htm It was decided that the day should be devoted to considering learning objectives and the development of mappings between knowledge areas and learning objectives. This will be done within the context of a range of software engineering undergraduate provisions (such as standard BS in Software Engineering as could be found in the USA, or degree-level programs approved by relevant national professional bodies - such as the Indian Computer Society). 8 Acknowledgements We would like to thank the all conference delegates who participated in all, or part, of the workshop and those who provided feedback on the report. 8.1 Workshop Attendees "Requirements" Group -------------------- Keith B Olsen Massood Towhidnejad Wing Lam Dennis Frailey Lynda Thomas "Design" Group -------------- Norm Cregg Richard Conn John W Fendrich Heikki Saoslamoinen Jim McDonald David Umphress "Quality" Group --------------- Elizabeth Hawthorne Michael Ryan Ellen Walker Dermot Shinners-Kennedy Jocelyn Armarego Ian Newman "Process" Group --------------- Orit Hazzan Jim Kiper Cindy Tanur Dick Lytle Rob Hasker Peter Henderson Nabeel Al-Fayoumi CC2001 SE Steering Committee ---------------------------- Rich LeBlanc Tom Hilburn Ann Sobel Jorge Diaz-Herrera Workshop Organisers ------------------- Barrie Thompson Helen Edwards 9 References [1] Thompson J. B. and Edwards H. M. (2002): Workshop on Developing the Software Engineering Courses using Computing Curriculum 2001 (CC2001) Documentation, 15th Conference on Software Engineering Education and Training (CSEE&T 2002), February 25-27, 2002, Covington, Kentucky, proceedings: IEEE-CS, Los Alamitos, pp.260-261. [2] Defining Computing Curricula for the Modern Age, Computer, June 2001, pp. 75-77. [3] Computing Curriculum 2001 (CC20011) development details and documentation available at: computer.org/education/cc2001 [4] Software Engineering Volume Volunteer Groups available at: computer.org/education/cc2001/Sevolunteer.htm ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ News Items ###################################################################### From: Jorge Diaz-Herrera WGSEET Email List Changed We have changed the WGSEET (Working Group in Software Engineering Education and Training) mail list - it will now be hosted at Embry- Riddle Aeronautical University (ERAU). - The mail address of the ERAU mail list server is "listserv@erau.edu" - The name of the WGSEET mail list is "ml_db_edwork" - To send a message to the WG, address it to "ml_db_edwork@erau.edu" - The following are some command listserv commands (along with proper email format): TO: listserv@erau.edu SUBJECT: MESSAGE: SUBscribe ml_db_edwork UNSubscribe ml_db_edwork REView ml_db_edwork HELp INF0 ###################################################################### By: Don Bagert (Professional Issues Editor) NSPE Engineering Times Has Article on SE Certification Exam Engineering Times, a newsletter of the US-based National Society of Professional Engineers, published in its March 2002 issue (Volume 24, Number 3) "Professional Certification Sets Standards for Software Experts" on page 24 (the back page). This is an article concerning the new Certified Software Development Professional (CSDP) Program offered by the IEEE Computer Society (see "IEEE Computer Society Develops Competency Recognition Program" and "IEEE Approves Certified Software Development Professional Program" in the September 2001 and January 2002 issues of FASE, respectively, as well as the CSDP web site at http://www.computer.org/certification). The article provided information (without editorial comment) about the program to its membership, which mostly consists of Professional Engineers licensed somewhere in the United States. ###################################################################### By: Don Bagert (Professional Issues Editor) IEEE-USA Announces New Electrical and Computer Engineering PE Exam IEEE-USA, an organizational unit of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc. (IEEE) which supports the career and public policy interests of its US-members, recently announced in the February 2002 issue of its newsletter "News and Views" that the new Electrical and Computer Engineering (ECE) Examination, created by the National Council of Examiners for Engineering and Surveying (NCEES), will be first used in April 2002. This exam replaces the previous Electrical Engineering Examination offered by NCEES, which had no computer engineering exam. (IEEE-USA is involved in the preparation of the exam.) It is intended as the Principles and Practices of Engineering (PE) exam for those working in ECE, and with passage of the exam being one of the last steps required to becoming a Professional Engineer in the United States. The morning session of the ECE exam will cover the breadth of the field in electrical and computer engineering; in the afternoon, the candidates will select one of three depth modules: computer engineering, electronics and power engineering. 35% of the computer engineering module covers software issues. As reported in the March 2001 FASE ("Software PEs Work on Questions for Revised NCEES Licensing Exam"), NCEES sponsored an Item Writing Workshop earlier that month in Arlington, Texas. This workshop was intended to do the first draft of some of the software items for the computer engineering module, and was intended by more than half of the licensed Professional Engineers in software engineering that existed in Texas and the US at that time. An overview of the Electrical and Computer Engineering Examination can be found at http://www.ncees.org/professional/pp_electrical.shtml ###################################################################### By: Don Bagert (Managing Editor) 4th Annual List of Countries with Subscribers to FASE There are currently there are subscribers to FASE from 54 countries and provinces on six continents, according to Internet domain codes Country Subscribers ------- ----------- Argentina 7 Australia 3 Austria 5 Belgium 4 Brazil 16 Brunei Darussalam 2 Bulgaria 1 Canada 30 Chile 3 China 2 Croatia 1 Cuba 1 Denmark 1 Finland 3 France 3 Germany 16 Hong Kong 5 Iceland 2 India 4 Indonesia 1 Ireland 7 Israel 3 Italy 10 Japan 4 Korea, South 1 Kuwait 1 Lithuania 4 Madagascar 1 Malaysia 1 Mexico 2 Netherlands 3 New Zealand 7 Norway 3 Pakistan 4 Poland 5 Portugal 5 Russian Federation 2 Saudi Arabia 2 Singapore 3 Slovak Republic 3 Slovenia 1 Spain 21 Sweden 10 Switzerland 1 Taiwan 2 Tunisia 1 Turkey 3 Ukraine 1 United Arab Emirates 1 United Kingdom 55 United States 569 (see note below) Uruguay 3 Viet Nam 3 Zimbabwe 1 [Editor's Note: Hong Kong is a province of the People's Republic of China, and the status of Taiwan is best left to the politicians. No international incidents, please!] Since the last such listing (in the March 2001 FASE), there are now subscribers in Cuba and United Arab Emirates, while there are no longer subscribers in Bahrain, Latvia, South Africa, Thailand and Yugoslavia. The number of 569 for the United States comes from summing the subscribers using the following domains: edu 326 com 175 net 27 org 27 mil 9 gov 4 us 1 However, it is likely that many of these subscribers (for instance, those who use the acm.org alias) are from other countries. If your country was omitted from the list for this or any other reason, please contact me at Don.Bagert@ttu.edu. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Calls for Participation ###################################################################### From: Barrie Thompson International Summit on Software Engineering Education (SSEE) One day event to be held on Tuesday May 21st 2002 Co-Located with the International Conference on Software Engineering Orlando, Florida, USA, May 19-25, 2002 Chairs: Barrie Thompson and Helen Edwards School of Computing Engineering and Technology University of Sunderland, St Peter's Way, Sunderland SR6 0DD, United Kingdom. Further information from: barrie.thompson@sunderland.ac.uk helen.edwards@sunderland.ac.uk Currently a joint task force of the IEEE Computer Society and the ACM are engaged in producing undergraduate curricula and associated documentation known as Computing Curriculum 2001 (CC 2001). The volume relating to Computer Science was released on December 15th 2001 and now work is progressing on the volume relating to Software Engineering. This event has been organised to provide a forum for the widest involvement by the Software Engineering community in the development of their volume by co- locating it with the premier Software Engineering conference. There is a clear need to develop Software Engineering programmes to meet local, national and international needs. For the Software Engineering volume of CC2001 to be accepted across the globe there needs to be involvement by the international community in its development. One of the eleven principles laid down for CC2001 is that "CC2001 must strive to be international in scope" and further, within that principle, that "CC2001 is intended to be useful to computing educators throughout the world". In sessions concerned with the Computer Science volume at the Seventh IFIP World Conference on Computers in Education (29th July to 3rd August 2001, Copenhagen, Denmark) it was clear that many of the attendees did not believe that the Computer Science material was sufficiently international in scope. All efforts must be made to ensure that the same view is not made of the material in the Software Engineering volume. The organisers of this summit met with members of the steering committee for the Software Engineering volume during the Conference on Software Engineering Education and Training (CSEE&T 2002) which was held in Covington Kentucky in February 2002. A very successful workshop related to the development of the Software Engineering volume was held at CSEE&TT as reported in this issue of FASE. The summit at ICSE has been planned to provide even wider involvement by the international community. By the time of the summit the steering committee intend that Foundation Units will have been defined, a theoretical model underpinning the curricula will be finalised, Knowledge Areas with descriptions will be available, and for each Knowledge Area their will be an initial list of Knowledge Units each with a short description. The summit in May will be devoted to considering learning objectives and the development of mappings between knowledge areas and learning objectives. This will be done within the context of a range of software engineering undergraduate provisions (such as standard BS in Software Engineering as could be found in the USA, or degree-level programs approved by relevant national professional bodies - such as the Indian Computer Society). Thus the workshop will need to identify: * The learning objectives for differing Software Engineering programs, * Mappings between the Knowledge Areas (and their units that have been developed so far) and the various sets of leaning objectives, * Gaps in learning objectives and more importantly gaps in Knowledge Areas and their Units The summit will provide an excellent opportunity for not only for the voluntary members of the Knowledge Area Focus Group and the voluntary members of the Pedagogy Area Focus Group to meet with the members of steering committee for the project. It will also allow for any Software Engineering educators and those interested in Software Engineering education to become involved in the production of the Software engineering volume. Are you interested? If so please contact Barrie Thompson or Helen Edwards for more details. You can also visit www.icse-conferences.org/2002/info/colocated.htm ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Position Openings ###################################################################### From: Catherine Beise POSITION ANNOUNCEMENT Assistant/Associate Professor of Computer Science Florida Gulf Coast University Fort Myers, Florida, USA Florida Gulf Coast University invites applications for a full-time position as Assistant/Associate Professor of Computer Science. This position provides a unique opportunity to live and work where others vacation, to contribute to a new dynamic state university, and to take the lead in the design of an applied computer science (CS) degree program located in the College of Business at Florida Gulf Coast University. The ideal applicant will have a doctoral degree in CS and an interest in hands-on practice-oriented teaching, object- oriented programming and development, software engineering, applied CS research, and cross-disciplinary collaboration with faculty from Arts and Sciences, Business, Engineering, and other areas. Practical industry experience is also desirable and valued. Florida Gulf Coast University (FGCU), located between Fort Myers and Naples, FL, opened in 1997 as one of eleven state universities. Southwest Florida offers a rich variety of recreational and cultural opportunities, including beaches, boating, fishing, golfing, birding, nature, arts, and music. Housing, including waterfront, is plentiful and affordable. FGCU has approximately 2000 residential and commuter students in a variety of undergraduate and graduate programs, and is expected to grow to 3000 by 2005. FGCU is dedicated to quality education. All faculty are expected to be excellent teachers, responsive to changing professional needs; committed to innovative delivery of instruction resulting in improved student learning; able to deal effectively with a diverse range of learners; committed to effective use of technology including distance learning; and value continued scholarship and service to the college, university, and community. For more information about the positions contact Dr. Catherine Beise, CS Search Committee Chair, cbeise@fgcu.edu, 941-590-7343. Note that the College of Business offers bachelors' degrees in both Computer Science (CS) and Computer Information Systems (CIS). HOW TO APPLY: Submit two packages (one original and one photocopy) to FLORIDA GULF COAST UNIVERSITY, Pos. #12914, HR, 10501 FGCU Blvd. South, Ft. Myers, FL 33965-6565. Each package must include a letter of interest, curriculum vitae and a list of five references. The position is Open Until Filled (review of materials will begin on March 6, 2002 and continue until the position is filled). Finalists will be req'd to provide official transcripts. Visit our website at www.fgcu.edu or call the 24-hr jobline at 941-590-1111 for add'l info. FGCU is an EO/EA/AAI, which has a commitment to cultural, racial, and ethnic communities and encourages women and minorities to apply. It is expected that successful candidates share this commitment. ###################################################################### From: John Dooley Knox College Department of Computer Science Computer Science Tenure-track Teaching Position The Department of Computer Science invites applications for a tenure-track position at any level (including Instructor) to begin Sept. 1, 2002. We seek candidates with the potential for excellence in teaching and research in a liberal arts institution. While all areas of specialization will be considered, the following areas would be particularly complementary to the current faculty: database management systems, graphics and visualization, theory of computation, or software engineering. A Master's degree in Computer Science is required, a PhD is preferred. The Department offers a Bachelors in Computer Science as well as minors with concentrations in Applied Computer Science, Theory of Computing, and Computing Systems. Departmental computing facilities include new student Linux laboratories, a student independent research laboratory, Sun Microsystems' Solaris machines, and access to the College's MS Windows and Apple Macintosh laboratories. The College operates a dedicated help desk and computer support center independent of the Department. Knox is a highly selective independent liberal arts college with students from 47 states and 41 countries. The college is consistently ranked as one of the "Best Values" among national liberal arts colleges in the U.S. News & World Report survey of quality and price in higher education. Small classes, a strong advising system, and an emphasis on independent research foster close student/faculty interaction. Please visit us at www.knox.edu for more information about the College, the department and our facilities. To apply, please send a curriculum vitae, a letter detailing your interests and goals, and contact information for three references to: John F. Dooley, Associate Professor; Department of Computer Science; Knox College #138; 2 East South Street; Galesburg, IL 61401-4999 (e-mail: jdooley@knox.edu). Review of applications will begin as soon as they are complete and will continue until the position is filled. Knox College is an affirmative action, equal opportunity employer. In keeping with its 164-year commitment to equal rights, the College particularly welcomes applications from individuals in under- represented groups. ###################################################################### From: J. F. Naveda Rochester Institute of Technology Department of Software Engineering Applications are invited for full-time, tenure track positions in software engineering beginning in September, 2002. RIT was the first US University to offer a baccalaureate degree in software engineering, which currently enrolls 260 students. The first class graduated in May 2001. The program is designed to meet general ABET requirements for engineering programs, as well as the proposed program criteria for software engineering. The department will seek accreditation in the Fall of 2002. The department is part of RIT's newest college: The Golisano College of Computing and Information Sciences (http://www.rit.edu/~gccis/), which will move into its new facility in the Spring of 2003. Applicants must have deep interest in professional education and curriculum development in software engineering, as well as a strong commitment to continued professional growth. A PhD in a related computing discipline is strongly preferred, and industrial experience is highly desirable; rank and salary commensurate with experience. For further information, send email to jfnics@rit.edu. RIT is an EOE/AA employer and invites and encourages applications from women and minorities. Dr. J. Fernando Naveda, Chair Dept. of Software Engineering Rochester Institute of Technology Rochester NY 14623 Phone: (585) 475-5048 e-fax: (208) 247-3698 fax: (585) 475-7909 ###################################################################### From: Susan Mengel Texas Tech University Department of Computer Science New Graduate Extension in Abilene The Department of Computer Science at Texas Tech University has a new initiative to establish a graduate extension, including software engineering, in Abilene, Texas. A renovated three story building in downtown Abilene will house a state-of-the-art graduate education and research operation. The city of Abilene and Texas Tech University are providing significant resources to support this new program. In addition to a large Air Force Base and other industry, Abilene has three excellent private undergraduate universities, with which the Texas Tech University extension will collaborate. State-of-the-art two-way video instructional facilities will allow the Lubbock and Abilene sites to exchange course offerings and to conduct collaborative faculty and committee meetings. Abilene is situated roughly halfway between Lubbock and the Dallas-Fort Worth metroplex. Texas Tech University offers a Ph.D. and an M.S. in Computer Science and an M.S. in Software Engineering. The Department of Computer Science invites applications for up to five tenure track positions at all levels for the academic year 2002-03. Among the five positions, we will hire one associate chair. The associate chair will work closely with the Chair of Computer Science at Texas Tech's main campus. A critical need is for people in software engineering. However, individuals in other areas of specialization are encouraged to apply. Applicants must have an earned Ph.D. degree in computer science or a closely related field. Faculty members are expected to teach existing graduate courses, develop new courses, and contribute to the research mission of the university. We offer competitive salaries, a friendly and cooperative environment, and excellent research facilities. Applicants should send a resume, including a brief statement of research interests, and the names of at least three references to Professor Daniel Cooke, Chair Department of Computer Science Texas Tech University, Box 43104 Lubbock, TX 79409-3104 Email: dcooke@coe.ttu.edu Website: http://www.cs.ttu.edu/ Review of applications will begin as soon as they are received. Applications will be accepted until the positions are filled. Candidates must be eligible to work in the United States. Texas Tech University is an equal opportunity/affirmative action employer and actively seeks the candidacy of women and minorities. ###################################################################### From: Meledath Damodaran UNIVERSITY OF HOUSTON-VICTORIA SCHOOL OF ARTS & SCIENCE ASSISTANT PROFESSOR OF COMPUTER SCIENCE Tenure track faculty position in computer science beginning in August 2002. The appointee will teach a variety of undergraduate courses in computer science and computer information systems, and possibly some beginning level graduate courses. Doctorate in computer science or information systems and strong evidence of teaching and scholarly abilities required. Summer teaching is normally available at attractive rates. Programs are delivered in Victoria and in Fort Bend County area, SW of Houston. It may be possible to schedule the main teaching load to be either in Fort Bend (for Houston-based faculty) or in Victoria. To apply, please send a letter of application, resume, three letters of recommendation, current teaching evaluations (if any), and copies of unofficial transcripts(s) of all graduate course work to: Laura L. Smith Human Resources Office University of Houston-Victoria 3007 N. Ben Wilson Victoria, TX 77901 Electronic submission of materials will also be accepted. Message subject must contain the phrase "CS SEARCH", sent to smithl@vic.uh.edu in Text, HTML, MS Word or PDF format. Review of applications will begin immediately and will continue until the position is filled. The University of Houston-Victoria is an upper division and graduate institution of approximately 2000 students and is one of four institutions of the University of Houston System. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Book Advertisements ###################################################################### From: Pankaj Jalote New Book on Software Project Management: ---------------------------------------- Title: SOFTWARE PROJECT MANAGEMENT IN PRACTICE Author: Pankaj Jalote Publisher: Addison Wesley For more info: www.awl.com/cseng/titles/0-201-73721-3/ This book covers the complete project management life cycle and describes how different project management tasks are actually peformed in Infosys - a highly successful and high-maturity software organization. It describes the processes Infosys uses for estimation, quality planning, monitoring, etc. The book also has a running case study for which the estimates, schedule, quality plan, CM plan, project management plan, monitoring plans etc. are given, along with sample outcomes for reviews, project monitoring, defect prevention, etc. The book should be very useful for a course on software project management, or for covering this topic in a general software engineering course. For those who want to consider the book for adoption, for desk copies: Within the US: send email to exam@awl.com or fax to 800-284-8292. Outside the US: send email to Robin.O'Brien@AWL.com. "Software Project Management in Practice" has 12 chapters: 1 Introduction 1.1 Processes and Project Management 1.2 Project Management and CMM(R) 1.3 Project Management at Infosys 1.4 Overview of the Case Study 2 Project Planning Infrastructure 2.1 Process Database 2.2 Process Capability Baseline 2.3 Process Assets and Body of Knowledge 3 Process Planning 3.1 Development Process 3.2 Requirement Change Management 3.3 Process Planning for ACIC Project 4 Effort Estimation and Scheduling 4.1 Estimation and Scheduling Concepts 4.2 Effort Estimation 4.3 Scheduling 5 Quality Planning 5.1 Quality Concepts 5.2 Quantitative Quality Management Planning 5.3 Defect Prevention Planning 5.4 Quality Plan of the ACIC Project 6 Risk Management 6.1 Risk Management Concepts 6.2 Risk Assessment 6.3 Risk Control 6.4 Examples 7 Measurement and Tracking Planning 7.1 Concepts in Metrics and Management 7.2 Measurements 7.3 Project Tracking 7.4 Measurement and Tracking Plan of ACIC Project 8 Project Management Plan 8.1 Team Management 8.3 Customer Communication and Issue Resolution 8.4 Project Management Plan Structure 8.5 Project Plan of the ACIC Project 9 Configuration Management 9.1 Configuration Management Concepts 9.2 Configuration Management Process 9.3 Configuration Management Plan of the ACIC Project 10 Reviews 10.1 Review Process 10.2 Data Collection 10.3 Monitoring and Control 10.4 Introduction of Reviews and the NAH Syndrome 11 Project Monitoring and Control 11.1 Project Tracking 11.2 Milestone Analysis 11.3 Activity Level Analysis using SPC 11.4 Defect Analysis and Prevention 11.5 Process Monitoring and Audit 12 Project Closure 12.1 Project Closure Analysis 12.2 Closure Analysis Report for ACIC Project (R) CMM is registered in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Contact and General Information about FASE ###################################################################### FASE is published on the 15th of each month by the FASE staff. Article and Faculty Ad Submission Guidelines Send newsletter articles to one of the editors, preferably by category: Articles pertinent to academic education to Tom Hilburn ; corporate and government training to David Carter ; professional issues, faculty ads, and all other categories, to Don Bagert . If the article is for a FASE topic where there is a guest editor, the submission should instead be to that person, according to the schedule provided. Items must be submitted by the 8th of the month in order to be considered for inclusion in that month's issue. Also, please see the submission guidelines immediately below. FASE submission format guidelines: All submissions must be in ASCII format, and contain no more than 70 characters per line (71 including trailing blanks and the new line character). This 70-character/line format must be viewable in a text editor such as Microsoft Notepad WITHOUT using a "word wrap" facility. All characters (outside of the newline) should in the ASCII code range from 32 to 126 (i.e. "printable" in DOS text mode). All articles contain the viewpoints of their respective authors, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the FASE staff. _____ Subscribe/Unsubscribe Information Everyone that is receiving this by email is on the FASE mailing list. If you wish to leave this list, send a message to and, in the text of your message (not the subject line), write: unsubscribe fase To rejoin (or have someone else join) the FASE mailing list, write to and, in the text of your message (not the subject line), write: subscribe fase For instance, if your name is Jane Smith, write: subscribe fase Jane Smith But what if you have something that you want to share with everyone else, before the next issue? For more real-time discussion, there is the FASE-TALK discussion list. It is our hope that it will be to FASE readers what the SIGCSE.members listserv is to that group. (For those of you that don't know, SIGCSE is the ACM Special Interest Group on Computer Science Education.) To subscribe to the FASE-TALK list, write to and, in the text of your message (not the subject line), write: subscribe fase-talk For instance, if your name is Jane Smith, write: subscribe fase-talk Jane Smith Please try to limit FASE-TALK to discussion items related to software engineering education, training and professional issues; CFPs and other such items can still be submitted to the editor for inclusion into FASE. Anyone that belongs to the FASE-TALK mailing list can post to it. As always, there is no cost for subscribing to either FASE or FASE-TALK! (Subscriptions can also be maintained through the Web via http://lyris.acs.ttu.edu. From there, click on "TTU Faculty Mailing Lists", and then either "fase" or "fase-talk", depending on which list you desire.) _____ Back issues (dating from the very first issue) can be found on the web (with each Table of Contents) at in chronological order, or in reverse order. _____ The FASE Staff: Tom Hilburn -- Academic Editor Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University Department of Computing and Mathematics Daytona Beach FL 32114 USA Phone: 904-226-6889 Fax: 904-226-6678 Email: hilburn@db.erau.edu URL: http://faculty.erau.edu/hilburn/ David Carter -- Corporate/Government Editor 807 Hwy 1204 #B-2 Pineville LA 71360 Phone: 318-641-0824 Email: dacarter@bayou.com Don Bagert, P.E. -- Managing Editor and Professional Issues Editor Department of Computer Science 8th and Boston Texas Tech University Lubbock TX 79409-3104 USA Phone: 806-742-1189 Fax: 806-742-3519 Email: Don.Bagert@ttu.edu URL: http://www.cs.ttu.edu/faculty/bagert.html Laurie Werth -- Advisory Committee Taylor Hall 2.124 University of Texas at Austin Austin TX 78712 USA Phone: 512-471-9535 Fax: 512-471-8885 Email: lwerth@cs.utexas.edu Nancy Mead -- Advisory Committee Software Engineering Institute 5000 Forbes Ave. Pittsburgh, PA 15213 USA Phone: 412-268-5756 Fax: 412-268-5758 Email: nrm@sei.cmu.edu