Forum for Advancing Software engineering Education Volume 6 Number 4 Wednesday, February 21, 1996 Contents: TCSE Chair Nominations Purchasing Training for a Software Organization CMM Version 2 Upgrade Training The Power of Small Teams Function Points List Server A Market for SE Educators CFP: Should U.S. software engineers be licensed? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 20 Feb 1996 13:03:53 -0600 From: James Cross Subject: TCSE Chair Nominations This is a call for recommendations to the Nominations Committee for the next Chair of the IEEE-CS Technical Council on Software Engineering (TCSE). The TCSE Chair is a two-year term beginning July 1, eligible for re-election once. The present Chair is completing his second (final) term. Qualifications and information can be found on the TCSE web site at http://www.tcse.org/election Recommendations to the Nominations Committee are due by February 29 via the TCSE Secretary. James H. Cross II TCSE Secretary Computer Science and Engineering office: (334) 844-6315 107 Dunstan Hall fax: (334) 844-6329 Auburn University, AL 36849 email: cross@eng.auburn.edu ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 21 Feb 1996 14:33:10 -0600 Subject: Purchasing Training for a Software Organization From: Maribeth B. Carpenter (mbc@sei.cmu.edu) The SEI has released a new technical report entitled "Training Guidelines: Purchasing Training for a Software Organization" by Maribeth B. Carpenter and Harvey K. Hallman. The guidelines focus on issues surrounding the purchasing of software engineering training: - determining whether a training solution is appropriate - determining whether it is appropriate to purchase training - specifying the subject matter to be taught - information a candidate training vendor should supply - what you should provide training vendors - selecting a training vendor Appendices illustrate the specification of training needs. The subject matter of software architecture development is used as an example. The report is available on line at: http://www.sei.cmu.edu/products/publications/95.reports/95.tr.010.html To obtain a bound copy of the report, ask for document CMU/SEI-95-TR-010 when ordering from: Research Access Inc. 800 Vinial Street Pittsburgh, PA 15212 requests@rai.com Toll Free: (800) 685-6510 Voice: (412) 321-2992 FAX: (412) 321-2994 URL: http://www.rai.com/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 20 Feb 1996 08:11:28 -0600 From: "Kathy Beckman" Subject: CMM Version 2 Upgrade Training Time to Begin Planning for CMM Version 2 Upgrade Training A February 5, 1996 memo from Mark Paulk, SEI's CMM v2 Product Manager, to the CMM Correspondence Group details the CMM v2 revision and release strategy. According to the memo, the tentative timetable is: Release v2.0 in first quarter 1997 Release v2.1 in 199. The memo identifies Version 2 as potentially a "major revision" of the CMM. The areas for revision currently under study are: additional Key Process Areas, architecture, and harmonizing with other process standards (SPICE and ISO9000). V2.0 may contain several new Key Process Areas; those mentioned in the memo are: Risk Management, Software Test Management, Software Reuse, and Requirements Elicitation. Its architecture may also be revised from the current staged architecture to a continuous architecture, such as that used by SPICE and the Systems Engineering CMM. Harmonizing with other process standards will be used to address gaps in coverage between the CMM and those standards, such as software delivery and installation. All these potential revisions have a significant impact on CMM- based training programs. New courses will need to be developed or acquired for the new KPAs. Existing courses will need to be updated with the new CMM architecture and all new material added to address gaps between the CMM and other process standards. To receive updates on v2, send your name and address to: CMMv2 c/o Carolyn Tady Software Engineering Institute Carnegie Mellon University Pittsburgh, PA 15213-3890 Internet: cmt@sei.cmu.edu Files can also be downloaded via ftp at: ftp://ftp.sei.cmu.edu/pub/cmm/v2 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 12 Feb 1996 14:22:38 -0600 From: kpierce@d.umn.edu (Keith Pierce) Subject: The Power of Small Teams NEWS - From Edupage THE POWER OF SMALL TEAMS: Sun Microsystems chief technology officer Eric Schmidt favors small teams and a focused approach to technical problems: "The proper arrangement at a company is a very large number of very small businesses. The best things were done by very small engineering teams, because a small engineering team is forced to make tradeoffs to do only one thing. They are very committed... But small teams go against human nature. Human nature is to build bigger and bigger enterprises." He cites examples to bolster his argument: "Unix was developed by two people. Java was done by a team of less than five, Mosaic was done by two to four people and the Mac system was done by about 12 people. Even DOS was actually developed by only two people." (Investor's Business Daily 17 Jan 96 A1) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 13 Feb 1996 08:53:06 -0600 From: kpierce@d.umn.edu (Keith Pierce) Subject: Function Points List Server This LISTSERV on Function Points is managed by CIM, an Interest group on software metrics based in Montreal, Quebec, CANADA. There are now more than 300 subscribers. Each mail sent to the mailing list is re-routed through the mailing list to all addresses of subscribers to the mailing list. To subscribe, send mail to CIM@CRIM.CA with EMPTY subject line and message body SUB FUNCTION.POINT.LIST "Your name" To post a message, write to FUNCTION.POINT.LIST@CRIM.CA For more information, contact Denis St-Pierre Computer Research Institute of Montreal (CRIM) Denis.St-Pierre@CRIM.CA ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 21 Feb 1996 08:27:30 -0600 From: kpierce@d.umn.edu (Keith Pierce) Subject: A Market for SE Educators From Edupage: PROGRAMMERS NEEDED The Software Human Resources Council says Canada faces a disturbing shortage of programmers and predicts an overall shortage of 20,000 workers by 1999. (Ottawa Citizen 20 Feb 96 C1) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 12 Feb 1996 14:19:36 -0600 From: Elliot Chikofsky Subject: CFP: Should U.S. software engineers be licensed? The National Software Council invites you to participate in a conference to examine a significant policy issue for U.S. industry In its role as a facilitator of national discussion, the NSC sponsors forums to examine software issues that affect the U.S. economy and society. The NSC does not have a "position" on this issue. NSC Forum: "SHOULD U.S. SOFTWARE ENGINEERS BE LICENSED ?" Call for Presentations 25-26 June 1996 St. Louis, Missouri Professionals, such as doctors, lawyers, and civil engineers, are personally accountable for work they perform and are expected to be demonstrably conversant with the body of knowledge in their fields. Shouldn't software engineers be so too? The job title "software engineer" is ill-defined and ambiguous as used in industrial practice across the United States. In some States, it is unlawful to use the term "software engineer" for people who are not registered professional engineers. There are professional registration or recognition mechanisms already in place for software professionals in various countries. IEEE and ACM have had a joint task force studying this topic. Advocates claim that, sooner or later, the States, the U.S. Government, other national governments, and/or the European Community are going to require that the design of critical software be certified for safety/efficacy/utility by those already judged to be competent to do so. The proponents say that the software industry must establish appropriate machinery to judge competence in the software engineering field or it will be done for us by others. Whether professional registration practices, such as licensing and certification, are needed, desirable, or even practical is a matter of debate. There are many unanswered questions. Do we know enough about the requisite body of knowledge? Are the key principles of software engineering sufficiently known and agreed? What would be the likely impact on education, training, employment, liability insurance, economics of software development and maintenance, and on the marketplace for software-dependent goods and services? In this NSC Forum, speakers and panel discussions will review and debate the issues surrounding licensing of software engineers and its effect on the U.S. software industry. Presentations, panels, session proposals and tutorials are invited on all aspects of this issue, and representing all sides of the debate. Topics include: -- Professional registration -- Thresholds of competency -- Certification -- Impact on hiring practices -- Licensing -- Role of software process -- Program accreditation -- Principles of software engr -- Safety-critical systems -- Requisite body of knowledge -- Liability -- Ethics -- Legal responsibilities -- Identifying best practices -- Economic impact -- Standards -- Professional code of conduct -- Opening Pandora's Box Presentation and session proposals are due by March 15, 1996. Papers are not required. Presentation slides, submitted later, will be published in the meeting notes. Submit a 1 to 2 page description to: NSC Forum, P.O. Box 400, Burlington, MA 01803 forum@nscusa.org fax 617-272-8464 For more information: http://www.nscusa.org/forum96 General Chair: Elliot Chikofsky, DMR Group, 404 Wyman Street, Suite 450, Waltham, MA 02154 617-487-9000 x157; e.chikofsky@computer.org Forum Advisory Committee: Andrew Chruscicki, Rome Laboratory - USAF John Marciniak, Kaman Sciences others tba The NSC Forum will be held along with the 5th Reengineering Forum conference (27-28 June). For information on REF 1996, see the Web site: http://www.reengineer.org/forum Cooperation pending with several national and international computing societes and professional organizations E------------------------------------------------------------------- FASE Volume 6 Number 4 Send newsletter articles to one of the editors, preferably by category: Articles pertinent to corporate and government training to Kathy Beckman, sdmce@access.digex.net; Academic education, and all other categories, to Keith Pierce, kpierce@d.umn.edu (Messages routed to fase-submit@d.umn.edu still go to Keith) 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 or through WWW at URL http://ricis.cl.uh.edu/FASE/ Keith Pierce -- Academic/Misc Editor and ListMaster University of Minnesota Duluth, Duluth, MN 55812-2496 USA Phone: 218- 726-7194 Fax: 218-726-6360 Email: kpierce@d.umn.edu Kathy Beckman -- Corporate/Government Editor Computer Data Systems One Curie Ct., Rockville MD 20850 USA Phone: 301-921-7027 Fax: 301-921-1004 Email: sdmce@access.digex.net David Eichmann -- FASE Archivist University of Houston - Clear Lake Box 113, 2700 Bay Area Blvd., Houston, TX 77058 USA Web: http://ricis.cl.uh.edu/eichmann/ Phone: 713-283-3875 Fax: 713-283-3810 Email: eichmann@rbse.jsc.nasa.gov or eichmann@cl.uh.edu Laurie Werth -- Advisory Committee Taylor Hall 2.124 University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas 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