Forum for Academic Software Engineering Volume 4, Number 20, Mon Nov 21 15:55:15 CST 1994 Topics: Book Announcement: Programming and Problem Solving with Ada Task Force on the Core Body of Knowledge for Software Engineering Preliminary Announcement: 8th Conference on SE Education A------------------------------------------------------- From: John McCormick Subject: Book Announcement: Programming and Problem Solving with Ada Programming and Problem Solving with Ada by Nell Dale, Chip Weems, and John McCormick D.C. Heath and Co., 1994 (800) 235-3565 ISBN 0-669-29360-1 Ada's support of software engineering principles is far greater than that available from most other programming languages. Its unprecedented standardization stands in sharp contrast to Pascal's and C++'s many variations. Over 100 schools currently teach Ada in their CS1 or CS2 courses. Programming and Problem Solving with Ada is a CS1 textbook that takes full advantage of Ada's support of software engineering. It puts programming into perspective with regard to the software life cycle. The needs for accurate data modeling, information hiding, reuse, and encapsulation provided by Ada's strong typing, packages, generic units, and private types are motivated by discussions of programming at many scales. A basic philosophy of the book is use before write. Students use packages and subprograms from the start. They learn to write subprograms and packages only when their designs reach a level that is aided by these abstractions. The book contains 35 case studies to support its consistent emphasis on effective problem solving by taking students through the entire process of software development. Testing and debugging sections in each chapter provide the extra help that many students need and help them incorporate testing as a systematic part of their work. Four kinds of exercises are included: Quick Check questions; Exam Preparation Exercises; Programming Warm-up Exercises; and Programming Problems. Each chapter contains approximately 50 exercises. Four types of special sections include Theoretical Foundations, detailing essential theory; Software Engineering Tips, discussing methods of making programs more reliable and maintainable; Matters of Style, emphasizing good programming style; and Background Information, including biographies and topics of general interest. While Programming and Problem Solving with Ada is firmly rooted in the successful pedagogy of the Dale/Weems Pascal text, it is not simply an Ada version. More than half the material is completely new. The remaining material has been extensively rewritten to exploit Ada's software engineering features. The manuscript underwent two years of classroom testing to ensure that students can understand the subjects introduced. A------------------------------------------------------- From: lwerth@cs.utexas.edu (Laurie Werth) Subject: Task Force on the Core Body of Knowledge for Software Engineering The ACM and the IEEE Computer Society have formed a task force to help define the core body of knowledge for software engineering. This is an important activity that is expected to influence academic curricula, professional registration, and even legal definitions in this field. Recently the ASQC project to develop professional certification for software quality engineering has joined forces in this effort. A key element of the process is a survey of practicing software engineers that will be distributed some time in 1995. Currently, the task force is defining the questions that will go on the survey. An important part of the process is community involvement in the question definition process. The survey task force will hold a series of 5 meetings around the U.S. to help develop survey questions and provide additional information to those interested in helping out. Dallas/Austin has been selected as a pilot site for these meetings. On December 8, several members of the task force, including Gary Ford from SEI, Pat Douglas of IBM, and Dennis Frailey, will come to Dallas to hold a two hour meeting whose purpose is as follows: 1) To explain the survey and its methodology 2) To conduct a short question-generation session, illustrating the process for generating questions that fit the survey format 3) To assign groups of questions to small teams of people with expertise in specific areas. Said teams will then go off and develop questions (on their own schedule). The task force members will be available after the meeting to answer questions on the survey and the efforts of the task force. Note: those who wish to receive the survey but do NOT wish to geneerate questions need not attend, but you should notify me that you wish to receive the survey. You may want to come for the first hour just to find out more. The Process: The survey requires that questions be formulated in a particular way in order to make data analysis more accurate. The process for generating these questions is as follows: a) attend overview session and briefing on survey structure (This is the first hour of the meeting) b) participate with large group, during briefing, to go through a question generation process. (This is the second hour) c) Break up into small (2-3 person) teams to formulate a group of questions in an assigned topic area. In general, all members of each team will be from the same organization in order to simplify the process. d) Teams meet at their convenience to formulate questions (This should take no more than a few hours). e) Submit questions to task force for further refinement and merger with questions generated elsewhere. (will be due 2 weeks after the meeting) Special Note to people in other cities who cannot participate in the process described. If you have a group of software engineering professionals that would like to participate in this process, there are two options: a) If you are in a major U.S. metropolitan area and are willing to take on the job of setting up a meeting like the one described above, you may be selected as one of the five sites. b) Otherwise, we can supply you with the materials necessary to conduct an introductory session (a,b) on your own. Please let me know if that is your preference. Note: both sessions will be open to all software engineering professionals in the area, not just those working for the host companies. If you have associates at other companies who would like to participate, please have them send this information to me at the email address listed above. Regards, DJF frailey@dseg.ti.com 214-952-2511 A------------------------------------------------------- From: Linda Ibrahim Subject: Preliminary Announcement: 8th Conference on SE Education Conference on Software Engineering Education March 29 through April 1, 1995 New Orleans, Louisiana Preliminary Program You are invited to participate in the 8th Conference on Software Engineering Education (CSEE). Educators, trainers, managers, and administrators gather together to exchange ideas about how to enhance software engineering training and education. The CSEE attracts international participation and attendees come from industry, academia, and government. Our purpose is to influence educational directions, stimulate new approaches, promote collaboration, and generate interactive exchanges among all educational stakeholders. The program includes keynote speakers, refereed papers, panel discussions, free tutorials, workshops, and facilitated discussion groups. There will be opportunities to organize additional meetings, workshops, or birds-of-a-feather sessions while you are there. A variety of educational materials will be on display. Proceedings will be published by Springer-Verlag and distributed to each attendee. CONFERENCE CHAIR: Rosalind (Linda) L. Ibrahim Software Engineering Institute rli@sei.cmu.edu PROGRAM COMMITTEE: Bernd Bruegge, Carnegie Mellon University David Carter, Texas Instruments Jorge Diaz-Herrera, Software Engineering Institute Chuck Engle, Florida Institute of Technology Anthony Hall, Praxis Rosalind (Linda) L. Ibrahim, Software Engineering Institute Soheil Khajenoori, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University Jerome Pesant, Applied Software Engineering Centre Keith R. Pierce, University of Minnesota, Duluth Ron Radice, Software Engineering Institute Robert Steigerwald, US Air Force Academy Philip Trudeau, The MITRE Corporation Steve Wartik, Software Productivity Consortium Laurie Honour Werth, University of Texas at Austin Industry-University Initiative CSEE has established an Industry-University Initiative for Software Engineering Education as a catalyst for bringing together university educators and nearby industry and government organizations. We encourage industry to sponsor a faculty member's participation in the 8th CSEE, with the hope of stimulating further collaboration and interest in understanding one another's needs. If you are interested in participating, contact Carol Sledge, 412 / 268-7708 email cas@sei.cmu.edu The Software Engineering Institute is a federally funded research and development center funded by the Department of Defense and operated by Carnegie Mellon University. Sponsored by the SEI in cooperation with the IEEE Computer Society and the ACM. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Keynote Address | Wednesday, March 29 Richard E. Fairley, Ph.D. Software Engineering Management Associates, Inc. Woodland Park Colorado 80866-0728 Some Hard Questions for Software Engineering Educators Judging by the quantity and quality of journals, conferences, academic programs, and industrial training courses, the intellectual discipline of software engineering has made great strides in recent years. Despite these advances, software engineering is far from a mature discipline. In this presentation, we consider the following questions for software engineering educators: > In what sense is software engineering an engineering discipline? > Is there any difference between software engineering and applied computer science? Between software engineering and information systems technology? > Should there be different software engineering curricula for the engineering school, the business school, the sciences, and the various application areas? Is there a core of common material appropriate for all? > How do we differentiate undergraduate curricula in software engineering from graduate curricula? Are undergraduate programs appropriate? > Are our resource materials (texts, case studies, software tools, artifacts) sufficient to support our curricula? Are they appropriate? > How do we teach large-scale industrial issues in small-scale (classroom-laboratory) settings? > Are there any useful lessons to be learned in a software engineering project course? i.e., do we know how to train students to be software designers or leaders of technical teams? Does a project course contribute to these goals? > Is the professional school approach (course modules taught in intensive blocks) a better model for software engineering education than the traditional lecture-laboratory format? > Do industrial training courses in software engineering provide any lasting value for the attendees? > Can training narrow the gap between industrial state-of-the-practice and the state-of-the-art in software engineering? Dr. Richard E. (Dick) Fairley is the founder and principal associate of Software Engineering Management Associates, Inc., a firm specializing in consulting services and training in software systems engineering, software project management, software cost estimation, project planning and control techniques, software risk management, and software process improvement. Dr. Fairley has more than 20 years experience as a university professor, researcher, consultant, and lecturer in software engineering. He has designed and implemented educational programs in universities and in industry, and has headed research programs in software engineering. In addition to directing his company, Dr. Fairley is currently a Distinguished Visiting Professor of Software Engineering at Drexel University. From 1983 through 1987, Dr. Fairley was the academic director of the Wang Institutes Masters Program in Software Engineering. From 1987 through 1989, he was a Professor of Software Systems Engineering and Director of the Center for Software Systems Engineering at George Mason University. While at GMU, he established a masters program in software engineering. Dr. Fairley has consulted with, and lectured to, many companies in the United States and internationally. He has helped numerous companies introduce software engineering methods and tools, project management techniques, cost estimation procedures, and risk management programs. In 1988-89, Dr. Fairley held a two year appointment as a Distinguished Visiting Scientist at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory and consultant to the NASA Headquarters software quality group. He is past chairman of the advisory committee to the Education Division of the Software Engineering Institute. From 1984 through 1993 he was chairman of the COCOMO Cost Estimation Users Group and program chair for the groups annual meetings. He is a member of the Board of Directors of the Rocky Mountain Institute of Software Engineering, and a member of the program committee for the annual Software Engineering Institute Conference on Software Risk. Dr. Fairley is author of the text book Software Engineering Concepts, editor of three texts, author/presenter of several videotape series in software engineering, and a principal author of ANSI/IEEE Standard 1058.1 for Software Project Management Plans. He is also an author of the Data Item Description for Operational Concept Documents in the proposed MIL-STD-498 of the Department of Defense. He is the author of numerous research papers on a variety of topics in computer science and software engineering. Dr. Fairley has Bachelors and Masters degrees in Electrical Engineering. His Ph.D. in computer science is from UCLA. Prior to obtaining his Ph.D., Dr. Fairley worked in industry as an electrical engineer and computer programmer. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Keynote Address | Thursday, March 30 Dr. Ray O. Waddoups Vice President, Chief Technical Officer Motorola University Director, Western Region Education--The World's Best Investment In February, 1946, the information age was born as the ENIAC was christened--the world's first electronic computer. The five decades since then have witnessed the most rapid advancement of capability in history with a million times improvement in the span of a single career. That rate of change proscribes that all workers in the field will be obsolete in only a few years after graduation unless education and training continue as a way of life. Both the employer and employee must take responsibility for skills updates. Early software professionals were self taught converts from other careers because they loved computer work or were the only people available to do the work. Even now when universities offer degrees in software engineering, many hardware engineers reorient their careers to software. Some companies have introduced special training programs to facilitate conversion to software engineering. Experience with one such course indicates that to succeed, candidates should be carefully selected high performers in the early part of their career. For the 1990s and beyond, the minds of the people are the great source of wealth. The individuals, communities, companies, and countries with the best trained minds will be wealthy. Education is the world's best investment. Your computer can be upgraded. Can you? As Chief Technical Officer for Motorola University, Ray guides Motorola University in the technology of the future to prepare to provide training and education and strategies needed. He is responsible for the university's Quality and Evaluation as a continuous improvement culture. As Director, Western Region, Ray directs the planning, development, and delivery of Motorola University training for the 20,000 employees in Arizona. His objective is to provide a training culture that will lead Motorola employees and those of our suppliers and customers to be a strategic competence to achieve business objectives. Training emphasis includes quality, team development, personnel growth, and technical excellence. In his previous assignment as Vice President and Director, Research and Development, Ray directed all research and development activities within the Government Electronics Group and worked closely with the managers of the engineering departments for the Communications Division, the Radar Systems Division, the Strategic Electronics Division, and the Tactical Electronics Division (TED). Prior to this position, Ray was engineering department manager for the missile fuze office within TED. Ray previously served as chief engineer for the tactical systems office where he was responsible for technical auditing of department activities, concept and design reviews, research and development administration, patent committee activities, and personnel development. He has also gained experience as a section manager and a project leader. Prior to joining Motorola in 1977, Ray gained experience at ITT Gilfillan as a member of the technical staff. He also worked on the technical staff at Goodyear Aerospace, was a graduate assistant for Electro Dynamics Lab, and an engineer for LEPCO Division of Block Engineering. Ray received his bachelor's, master's, and PhD degrees in physics from Utah State University in 1963, 1964, and 1968, respectively. Ray holds five patents and has authored numerous articles for trade and professional publications. In addition, he has served as a chapter secretary for the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics and has been a member of the Arizona Board of American Electronic Association and the Arizona Governor's Council for Science and Technology. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Keynote Address | Friday, March 31 Miriam F. Browning Director of Army Information Office of the Secretary of the Army Washington, D.C. 20310-0107 Endangered Species? The Irony of the Technical Information Worker There is no doubt of the necessity for educating more software engineers and information technology workers. The successful performance of complex, large scale systems and the competitive strength of the United States as a global power depend on the growth and cultivation of this type of brain power. Yet, this initial and continuing education is incomplete if it concentrates solely on technical matters. Battalions of narrowly focused information technicians are becoming obsolete. Information technology innovations such as automatic code generators, reusable objects and code, and CASE tools are increasingly being advocated and used. These innovations can reduce the number of people and improve the quality of work involved in the production of goods, systems, and services. Concurrently, offshore software and information technology labor markets will continue to flourish because they, too, are productivity and bottom line enhancers. Lastly, the world of information technology is changing. Everyone is becoming a computer literate end user and distributed computer/communications networks coupled with decentralized operations and decision making are causing large software design and information technology centers to become remnants of the past. Ironically, the very technical brilliance which creates these better ways of doing business also demands of its communities constant change and renewal. As corporations and governments restructure and rightsize, those individuals who are multiskilled and multitalented will survive best. Therefore, the "value added" of the software engineer or the information technology worker is not solely in her or his technical prowess but in the total person package that individual brings to the immediate job and the strategic goals of the organization. Mrs. Miriam F. Browning is the Director of Army Information. She is responsible for the policy and oversight of the Army's information mission area (IMA) consisting of automation, telecommunications, records management, visual information, printing and publications, and libraries. In addition, she is the Director of the IMA Integration and Analysis Center (IIAC) which has the mission to assure the innovative and economical delivery of IMA systems and services to the Army. Mrs. Browning was born and raised in Baltimore, MD. She holds a Bachelor of Arts degree from the Ohio State University and a Masters degree in information technology from the George Washington University. She is a 1986 graduate of the Federal Executive Institute in Charlottesville, VA, a 1987 graduate of the Army War College at Carlisle, PA, and a 1993 graduate of the National and International security management program at the JFK School, Harvard University. Appointed to the Senior Executive Service in 1988 as the Deputy Assistant Inspector General for Administration and Information Management, Department of Defense, Office of the Inspector General, Mrs. Browning was responsible for the policy and operations for DODIG financial management, computers and communications, personnel, security, and facilities. In 1990, she became the Vice Director for Information Management in the ODISC4 and, in 1992, the Director of Army Information. Mrs. Browning began her government career in 1966 at Fort Ord, CA and worked from 1967 to 1969 for the US Army 66th Military Intelligence Group in West Berlin, Germany. Initial Pentagon assignments, 1969-1978, included positions of increasing responsibility in information systems management and comptrollership. She worked in the Office of the Assistant Chief of Staff for Force Development, the Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations, and the Office of the Chief of Staff of the Army. Shortly after the Department of Energy was created in 1978, Mrs. Browning joined that organization and served as a program manager for the development of the Department's integrated payroll and personnel system. In 1980, she moved to Atlanta, GA and became the Chief of Computer Services for the Center for Infectious Diseases in the Centers for Disease Control. In 1982, she rejoined the Army at Headquarters Forces Command at Fort McPherson, Ga. From 1982 to 1986, she worked in senior management positions as the Director of Management in the Deputy Chief of Staff for Comptroller and as the Deputy Director for the US Army Information Systems Command at Forces Command. Mrs. Browning is a member of the Armed Forces Communications and Electronics Association and the American Society of Military Comptrollers. She is an officer for the DOD Senior Executives Association. Mrs. Browning is a member and key sponsor of the Software Engineering Institute's national advisory board to develop the People Management Maturity Model. Earlier honors include the Army Meritorious Civilian Service Award, Army Pace Award Runner-Up, and Co-Chairman of the Computer Science Advisory Committee for the Centers for Disease Control. . . . . . . . . . . . Wednesday, March 29 . . . . . 7:15-8:45 REGISTRATION AND CONTINENTAL BREAKFAST . . . . . 8:45-10:00 KEYNOTE/OPENING REMARKS Some Hard Questions for Software Engineering Educators Richard E. Fairley Founder and Principal Associate Software Engineering Management Associates, Inc. . . . . . 10:00-10:30 BREAK AND NETWORKING . . . . . 10:30-12:00 GOALS--WHAT SHOULD WE BE TEACHING Essential Knowledge for the Practising Software Engineer and the Responsibilities of University and Industry for Her Education Lin Zucconi Collaborative Information Technology Institute Computer Productivity Initiative: Past, Present, and Future Michael Overstreet Kurt J. Maly Dennis E. Ray J. Christian Wild Irwin B. Levinstein Stephan Olariu Deane Sibol George Panayides Old Dominion University Nageswara S.V. Rao Center for Engineering Systems Advanced Research Software Engineering Education: A Dragging Through Approach Janusz Gorski The Franco-Polish School of New Information and Communication Technologies (EFP) . . . . . 12:00-1:30 LUNCH . . . . . 1:30-3:00 PANEL Establishing Software Engineering as a Profession Moderator: Mario Barbacci SEI Chair of the Joint IEEE-CS/ACM Steering Committee Panelists: Doris Carver Louisiana State University Co-chair of the curriculum task force Patricia Douglas IBM Skills Dynamics Chair of the practices task force Donald Gotterbarn East Tennessee State University Co-chair of the ethics task force Robert Melford R.J. Melford & Associates Co-chair of the ethics task force John Werth University of Texas at Austin Co-chair of the curriculum task force . . . . . 3:00-3:30 BREAK AND NETWORKING . . . . . 3:30-5:30 CURRICULUM ISSUES Industry Involvement in Undergraduate Curricula: Reinforcing Learning by Applying the Principles Geoffrey N. Dick Stuart F. Jones The University of New South Wales The CMU Master of Software Engineering Core Curriculum David Garlan Alan Brown Daniel Jackson Jim Tomayko Jeannette Wing Carnegie Mellon University The Integration of Software Engineering into a Computer Science Curriculum Thomas B. Hilburn Iraj Hirmanpour Andrew Kornecki Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University An Evolution of a Software Engineering Curriculum Colin Atkinson David Eichmann Charles Mckay Software Engineering at UH-Clear Lake . . . . . 6:00-9:00 EVENING SESSIONS WORKSHOP Object-Oriented Technology Education and Training: Bridging the Gap Between Academia and Industry Mary Lynn Manns University of North Carolina at Asheville Gretchen I. Puhr University of Colorado This workshop will bring together academic and corporate personnel who are facing the challenge of object-oriented technology education/training. The primary objectives are as follows: a) to identify the OO education/training goals and needs of the academic and corporate groups, b) to identify opportunities for the groups to collaborate in order to address their education/training needs. All academic, industry, and government personnel who are involved in object-oriented technology are encouraged to attend. ROUNDTABLE CMM-Based Software Process Improvement Training: The First Year Kathy Beckman Reg Burd Computer Data Systems, Inc. Join us for an evening roundtable where we can share successful approaches in the crucial first year of CMM-based software process management training. Computer Data Systems, Inc. (CDSI), a Rockville, M.D., professional services firm with software development contracts nationwide, will lead off with a presentation on its inaugural training year. CDSI will describe how its SEPG developed and delivered internal software process management training on the 6 CMM/level 2 key process areas to 150 CDSI software managers. The CDSI presentation will address: how we got started, our initial results, how we're measuring training effectiveness, and lessons learned. Presenters from 2-3 other organizations will make similar presentations. After a brief question and answer period, the program will shift to a structured networking session where audience members and presenters will continue exchanging training information in small groups. BIRDS-OF-A-FEATHER . . . . . . . . . . . Thursday, March 30 . . . . . 8:00-9:00 CONTINENTAL BREAKFAST . . . . . 9:00-10:00 KEYNOTE Education-The World's Best Investment Ray O. Waddoups Vice President, Chief Technical Officer, Motorola University . . . . . 10:00-10:30 BREAK AND NETWORKING . . . . . 10:30-12:00 PROCESS ISSUES Process Improvement in the Classroom Melody M. Moore Terry Brennan Georgia Institute of Technology Personal Software Process: An Experiment Report Soheil Khajenoori Iraj Hirmanpour Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University The Process of Teaching Process Jean-Pierre Jacquot Universite' de Nancy . . . . . 12:00-1:30 LUNCH . . . . . 1:30-2:30 PANEL Managing Software Engineering Education in Diverse Environments Moderator: Nancy Mead SEI Panelists: Norm Gibbs SEI David Carter Texas Instruments Iraj Hirmanpour Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University Miriam Browning Department of the Army . . . . . 1:30-5:00 FREE TUTORIAL An Instructional System Development Process Model for the Development of University Software Engineering Curricula John Robinson Air Force Institute of Technology (AFIT) Corporate leaders, legislators, taxpayers, and educators themselves have been taking a strong look at the quality of the education they pay for. How do you measure curricula quality? How do you ensure consistency among different offerings of the course and still balance it against the academic freedom of the instructor? We must define a process that allows for improvement and defines the roles and responsibilities of faculty and administration alike. Developing an integrated curriculum for a degreed program has an amazing similarity to software development. Similar phases and activities must be performed and--as in software process--there is always room for improvement in the process. In addition, metrics will be a vital element in establishing a quality process model. The tutor will concentrate on these issues and provide a brief process model that compensates for the rapidly changing field of software engineering. The purpose is to provide a high-quality program that increases student capability while continually improving the educational development process. . . . . . 2:30-3:30 SOFTWARE ENGINEERING IN SPECIAL DOMAINS The Role of the Software Engineer in Real-Time Software Development: An Introductory Course Carol L. Hoover Carnegie Mellon University Parallel and Distributed Computing Education: A Software Engineering Approach Janusz Zalewski Marcin Paprzycki University of Texas-Permian Basin Ryszard Wasniowski Central Missouri State University . . . . . 3:30-4:00 BREAK AND NETWORKING . . . . . 4:00-5:30 REQUIREMENTS AND DESIGN Understanding the Role of Formal Specification Techniques in Requirements Engineering Robert B. France Maria M. Larrondo-Petrie Florida Atlantic University An Integrated Approach to Teaching Requirements Modelling Pat Allen University of Huddersfield Lesley Semmens Leeds Metropolitan University Is Teaching Software Design a "Wicked" Problem Too? David Budgen Keele University . . . . . 6:00-8:00 RECEPTION . . . . . 8:00-10:00 EVENING SESSIONS SPIG BOARD GAME Software Process Improvement Game Robert Holeman Advanced Systems Technology The presenter introduces a unique training concept for software process improvement: the Software Process Improvement Game (SPIG). Following an introductory briefing about Level 2 of the SEI capability maturity model (CMM) and SPIG, participants are invited to actually play a game of SPIG. Carnegie Mellon University's Software Engineering Institute produced the CMM framework to help organizations evolve from ad hoc processes to mature, disciplined ones. SPIG is a boxed board game. Four players will compete at each board. Players represent software projects competing to see who will achieve Level 2 of the CMM first. During play, participants enter key process areas (KPAs), complete top-level activities, and accumulate KPA goal cards to achieve Level 2. DISCUSSION Academic Freedom Versus Quality Assurance Michael C. Stinson Central Michigan University There are a number of new and innovative ways to teach software engineering. These include extended learning, distance learning and Internet (Mosaic based) learning. While each of these has merit, they are certainly drifting from traditional department based techniques for assuring and maintaining the levels of quality in the classroom. Traditionally faculty have been reticent to allow too much direction of their approach in the classroom owing to academic freedom. However if classes and students are to be in new and untested formats it would seem beneficial to allow a great deal direction in these new approaches. The question of how we test and assure whether the students are receiving and equal education becomes a matter of contention as to academic freedom versus the faculty being directed in the techniques and testing mechanisms of the new technology. The discussion will revolve around the question: how can we allow a maximal amount of academic freedom while requiring the capability of assuring quality under the new teaching formats? BIRDS-OF-A-FEATHER . . . . . . . . . . . Friday, March 31 . . . . . 8:00-9:00 CONTINENTAL BREAKFAST . . . . . 9:00-10:00 KEYNOTE Endangered Species? The Irony of the Technical Information Worker Miriam F. Browning Director of Army Information, Office of the Secretary of the Army . . . . . 10:00-10:30 BREAK AND NETWORKING . . . . . 10:30-12:00 PEOPLE, MANAGEMENT, AND LEADERSHIP SKILLS Experience in Teaching a Management-Oriented Capstone Software Engineering Course Allen S. Parrish David Brown David Cordes The University of Alabama Team Selection Methods for Student Programming Projects James H. Cross II Auburn University Thomas J. Scott Western Illinois University Developing Leadership Skills in Software Engineering Students Through an Undergraduate Research Program Ilene Burnstein C. Robert Carlson Illinois Institute of Technology . . . . . 12:00-1:30 LUNCH . . . . . 1:30-3:00 TECHNOLOGY ISSUES CARDS Training: Transferring Reuse Knowledge Kerrin E. Smith Azimuth, Inc. Teaching More Comprehensive Model-Based Software Engineering: Experience With Objectory's Use Case Approach Robert F. Coyne Allen Dutoit Bernd Bruegge David Rothenberger Carnegie Mellon University On Teaching Software Verification & Validation Terry Shepard Royal Military College of Canada FREE TUTORIAL Understanding, Using, and Designing for the World-Wide Web Bill Hefley SEI, Carnegie Mellon University This tutorial is intended for the audience that is acquainted with the Internet and its services, but are lacking detailed knowledge about World-Wide Web (WWW) concepts and uses. The tutorial is intended to give the student an understanding of WWW software, some background in understanding issues in designing information spaces and services, and an overview of designing and coding HTML (Hypertext Markup Language) pages. Examples from educational settings will be used throughout. . . . . . 3:00-3:30 Break and Networking . . . . . 3:30-5:30 EDUCATION/TRAINING--NEEDS AND TRENDS The Delphi Survey Methodology: An Approach to Determine Training Needs Joyce Geier Independent Consultants A Skills-Driven Process for Training Computer Professionals Sherrie Bayman Maurice H. Blumberg Harvey Cumm Cheryl Diallo Loral Federal Systems Is This Training? A Unique Approach to Software Process Training in Industry Pauline Fortin Christine Jeske John Lakey Kristin Urquhart Anthony Vea Texas Instruments Incorporated Education Trends and Their Impact on Management of Software Engineering Education Nancy R. Mead SEI, Carnegie Mellon University . . . . . 3:30-5:00 FREE TUTORIAL >From Learning to Training: The Reengineering of Training at DMR Group Inc. Isabelle Mahy DMR Group Inc. DMR Group Inc. is the leading Canadian provider of information technology consulting services. Since one of its strategic objectives is the development of new markets, its service offering had to be expanded. With this aim, an ambitious R&D project called DMR Macroscope was launched to develop new methods of information technology management consulting--along with associated techniques and tools-- representing thousands of hours of in-class training to be given to more than 2,000 consultants and the highest possible number of external clients. This tutorial will introduce DMR's learning system as a case study that will illustrate how reengineering training contributed to an organizational solution. The learning system will be explained from a management perspective, with a description of organizational problems, constraints of training engineering, and the new architecture developed. The presenter will also provide participants with the keys they need to develop such a system. . . . . . 5:30-6:00 CLOSING . . . . . 6:30-9:30 DISCUSSION GROUP Managing Quality in Course Staging: A Working Paper Samy Talbert L'Institut des informaticiens du governement We describe how the Institute for Government Informatics Professionals, an educational arm of the Federal Government of Canada, manages the quality of its university-level informatics and professional business courses. The focus is on Course Staging: Course Staging and Course Maintenance are the two service quality loops that the Institute and its partners, a Consortium of three Canadian Universities, use to model the course development process. This working paper serves as a basis for consultations with educators in like institutions, for sharing with them practical and proven approaches to managing quality in education. DISCUSSION GROUP A Russian Software Center Ascends the SEI Maturity: Education by Motorola University Janis Livingston Linda Shafer Kymme Wright Motorola University Motorola's Microcontroller Software Applications (MSA) organization is working with a Russian Software Center to jointly develop software applications for the 8-, 16- and 32-bit families of embedded systems. The goal is to produce high quality software that is an asset in the design, development and marketing of Motorola chips. MSA and Motorola University are supporting the effort through software education. The Software Engineering Institute (SEI) Capability Maturity Model (CMM) is used as an instrument for introducing the Motorola concepts of quality, productivity and continuous improvement. The model is also used as a measure of the effect of process on practice. We will discuss: > Goals of the training program in relation to product development; > Strategies for overcoming cultural, academic, language, and distance challenges; > Design of the training program; > Measuring the effect of training on practices and products. > A panel will include discussions of preparation of training materials, experiences during the delivery of the materials in Russia and postmortems to examine trend data. BIRDS-OF-A-FEATHER Saturday, April 1 . . . . . 7:30-8:30 CONTINENTAL BREAKFAST . . . . . 8:30-12:30 FREE TUTORIALS Teaching Practical Principles of Software Measurement David N. Card Software Productivity Solutions In this tutorial, the presenter examines the topic of software measurement from a practical perspective. He presents a general framework for studying the applications of measurement in industry and identifies key measurement concepts that should be communicated to students. These concepts are illustrated with examples from actual industry practice. Teaching Object Oriented Programming and Design with Eiffel James C. McKim, Jr. Hartford Graduate Center The object oriented (OO) paradigm is touted as a software development methodology that promotes reuse, models the problem space, facilitates maintenance, incorporates changes easily, shortens the development life cycle, encourages good software engineering techniques, and cures the common cold. A course in OO programming and design should address these claims. One way (perhaps the only way) for students of the paradigm to test such claims is to build a small but high-quality product as part of the course. The Eiffel language provides an ideal platform for such a course due to its simplicity, straightforward support of OO concepts, and support for software engineering concepts such as assertion checking. The presenter will also discuss how the course can be scaled down so that students can get the maximum benefit in the limited time allowed in industry settings. A number of case studies describing the experiences, benefits, and drawbacks of teaching OO programming and design will be presented. General knowledge of the rudiments of the paradigm (i.e. inheritance, encapsulation, polymorphism) is assumed. . . . . . 12:30-1:30 LUNCH . . . . . 1:30-5:30 FREE TUTORIALS The Personal Process in Software Engineering Watts S. Humphrey SEI, Carnegie Mellon University The personal software process (PSP) is a process-based method for teaching software engineering principles to software engineers. The presenter uses quality management principles and the SEI capability maturity model (CMM) to demonstrate the benefits of applying sound engineering principles to software work. During the PSP course offered at universities, students learn how to plan and manage their work and how to apply process definition and measurement to their personal tasks. The presenter outlines the need for improved personal discipline in developing software and describes the PSP course structure and contents, including principles and methods for improving software quality. The tutorial continues with descriptions of experiences in teaching this course at universities and in introducing PSP concepts in industrial organizations. The tutor suggests an approach for teaching the PSP in graduate and undergraduate curricula. Teaching hints, guidelines, and experiences are given, along with a description of PSP status, support materials, and plans. Research Methods in Computer Science Education Vicki L. Almstrum University of Texas at Austin Debra Burton Texas A&M University Corpus Christi Ann Fleury Aurora University This tutorial will include three components: (1) an overview of background concepts, including the process of designing educational research (qualitative as well as quantitative) and methods of analysis; (2) examples of good and bad research; and (3) small-group discussion of research topics suggested by or of interest to the participants. Throughout, concrete examples of published research related to software engineering education will be used to illustrate the concepts. The target audience for this tutorial is instructors interested in doing educational research while continuing to fulfill their many other responsibilities. Only a rudimentary background in educational research design and statistical methods is assumed. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Event Registration Return to: Wendy A. Rossi Software Engineering Institute Carnegie Mellon University Pittsburgh, PA 15213-3890 FAX: 412/268-7401 E-mail: pav@sei.cmu.edu Inquiries: If you have questions about registration or payment, contact Events 412/268-7388 or (e-mail) pav@sei.cmu.edu. If you have questions about the event, contact Charlene Rauber 412/268-3007 or (e-mail) car@sei.cmu.edu. Terms: The SEI will only accept registrations that are accompanied by payment or an acceptable authorization form. If you are unable to attend the event, send the SEI written notice of cancellation three weeks or more before the event. You may then send a substitute or request a refund. If you fail to cancel, you will be charged the full conference rate. You must inform the SEI in writing of the substitution. If you send the SEI written notice of cancellation less than three weeks before the event, you may send a substitute at no additional cost, but refunds are not available. The SEI will retain a processing fee equal to 20% of the registration fee from refunds of payments made by credit card and $100 from refunds of all other payment methods. Lodging Information: A block of rooms has been reserved at the Doubletree Hotel, 300 Canal Street, New Orleans, Louisiana 70140. The hotel will hold these rooms until February 28, 1995. To secure hotel accomodations, please contact the hotel directly at 504/581-1300. To receive the special rate of $119 per night, or the government rate of $66 per night, please mention the event name. Transportation Information: The hotel is approximately thirty minutes from Moissant International Airport. Take I-10 east to New Orleans Business District to Poydras street Exit 234B. Continue down Poydras towards the river, approximately 1.25 miles. Turn left on Tchoupitoulas. The hotel is on the right at the corner of Tchoupitoulas and Canal Street. -----------please fill in and return the following portion--------------- The 8th SEI Conference on March 29 - April 1, 1995 Software Engineering Education Doubletree Hotel Event Registration New Orleans, LA Payment Options (mark one): SEI Use Only agency authorization form (e.g., DD 1556) purchase order ____________ check (payable to SEI/CMU) Received MasterCard ____________ Visa Entered American Express ($250 & up) ____________ Check # Registration Fee (Mark one registration fee) : ____________ PO # The registration fee includes the conference materials, ____________ continental breakfasts, breaks, and one evening reception. J/E # ____________ PL App ____________ Amount Conference..................................$375 Discount....................................$325 (IEEE, ACM members, SEI Subscribers or U.S. Government Employees) Student.....................................$100 IEEE Membership Number ________________ ACM Membership Number ________________ SEI Subscriber Membership Number ________________ Student I.D. Number ________________ PARTICIPANT INFORMATION Last name: First name, middle initial (Mr., Mrs., Ms., Dr.): First name as you would like it to appear on name tag: Title/organization/company: Division: Street address: City: State: Zip: Business phone: FAX number: Emergency number: E-Mail address: Dietary/access requirements: Credit card number/expiration date: Signature: Are you a U.S. Citizen: Identify country where citizenship is held if not the U.S.: How did you hear about the event? E------------------------------------------------------------------- FASE Volume 4 Number 20 Send newsletter articles to fase-submit@d.umn.edu or fase@d.umn.edu Send requests to add, delete, or modify a subscription to fase-request@d.umn.edu Send problem reports, returned mail, or other correspondence about this newsletter to fase-owner@d.umn.edu or kpierce@d.umn.edu You can retrieve back issues by anonymous FTP from from ricis.cl.uh.edu. You can access them through WWW at URL http://ricis.cl.uh.edu/FASE/ Keith Pierce, Editor Laurie Werth, Advisory Committee Department of Computer Science Dept. of Computer Science University of Minnesota, Duluth Taylor Hall 2.124 Duluth, MN 55812-2496 University of Texas at Austin Telephone: (218) 726-7194 Austin, Texas 78712 Fax: (218) 726-6360 Telephone: (512) 471-9535 Email: kpierce@d.umn.edu Fax: (512)471-8885 Email: lwerth@cs.utexas.edu