868 subscribers
Note: If you have problems with the format of this document,
try
<http://www.cs.ttu.edu/fase/v9n10.txt>
An HTML version of this issue is available at
<http://www.cs.ttu.edu/fase/v9n10.html>
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Table of Contents
Letter
from the Academic Editor: FASE-TALK Archive and Email Change
This
Month's Topic: Distance Learning and Internet Education
November 1999 Topic:
The Relationship Between Software Engineering
and
Other Disciplines
December 1999 Topic:
Top Ten Events of the Century
January 2000 Topic:
Coping with the Faculty Shortage
February 2000 Topic:
Top Ten Events - The Readers' Picks
Call
for Guest Editors and Topic Suggestions
News Items
Licensing
Update
Canadian
Lawsuit Discontinued
Software
Engineering Accreditation Approved in Ontario
Engineering
Times Articles
Response
to DeMarco's Comments Published
Accreditation
Update
Doris
Lidtke Named Abet Adjunct Accreditation Director for
Computing
Calls for Participation
ICSE
2000 SEAT Track (second listing)
Position Openings
Texas
Tech University
Contact
and General Information about FASE
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
From: Don Bagert (Academic/Misc Editor)
Letter from the Academic Editor: FASE-TALK Archive and Email Change
There is now an archive of FASE-TALK emails at
http://www.cs.ttu.edu/fase/fase-talk.htm.
Thanks to Tom Horton for
the suggestion.
Early next year, my university is going to a standardized
format
for email address names. In anticipation of that, my email
alias has
changed to Don.Bagert@ttu.edu.
The old address of bagert@ttu.edu
will still work until 1 September 2000.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
This Month's Topic: Distance Learning and Internet
Education
Guest Editors:
Joe Kasser, University of Maryland University College
(UMUC)
A Rajagopal, Tata Infotech Limited
Bruce Schafer, Oregon College of Engineering and Computer
Science
Ahmed Seffah, Centre de recherche informatique de
Montreal (CRIM)
Software Engineering Education at the Age of the Web Fever:
Promising Applications and Challenging Obstacles
The rise of Internet technology has created an infrastructure that
has
the potential to provide the software engineering education and
training with new tools and innovative means of sharing skills
and
delivering just-in-time learning resources anywhere. In this special
issue, the following authors discuss the potential applications
and
obstacles of the Internet as a medium for SE education and training:
- Booksites: Web-based Dynamic Supplements to Software Engineering
Books by Roger Chapman
- Teaching Software Maintenance Online via (Mostly) Asynchronous
Distance Learning by Joseph Kasser and Steve Kerby
- The Web as Medium for Learners-Centered Education by Ahmed Seffah
- Internet-based Software Engineering Education at Murdoch University
(Australia) by Geoffrey G. Roy, Jocelyn Armarego, Terry Woodings
and
Peng Lam
- Distance Education Program at Central Queensland University
(Australia) by Dave Oliver
- Is Internet-Based Software Engineering Education and Training
Cost-
Effective? By Ahmed Seffah
######################################################################
Booksites: Web-based Dynamic Supplements to Software Engineering Books
Roger Chapman
Booksite Director for Ben Shneiderman's, "Designing the User
Interface"
http://www.aw.com/dtui/
The Ohio State University Department of Industrial and Systems
Engineering
Email: roger.chapman@acm.org
Introduction
Web-based resources can productively supplement software-engineering
books. No matter how well a book describes the state of the field
when
it is written, over time new topics will emerge and valuable resources
will become available. In contrast to the static pages of a book,
the
pages of a Web site can be highly dynamic and potentially always
up-
to-date. A Web site dedicated to supplementing a book, referred
to as
a 'Booksite', therefore offers a particularly valuable additional
resource to authors and users of software engineering books in
this
age of the Internet.
Booksite Advantages
A booksite can:
1. Provide potential readers of the book a preview of the material
it
contains and the ability to order a copy on-line;
2. Provide instructors with supplementary materials such as
examination questions, projects, lecture notes, teaching tips,
and
links to related resources on the Web.
3. Provide students with supplementary materials such as practice
examination questions, study guides, on-line demonstrations, and
links
to related resources on the Web.
4. Provide both instructors and students with a convenient method
for
giving feedback on the book.
5. Provide additional insight into what users are interested in
via
automated page hit counting.
6. Facilitate communication within a community of those interested
in
the book.
7. Allow booksite visitors to quickly search the site for material
on
a particular topic.
Booksite Design
The kind of booksite described here is not produced by simply taking
an electronic version of a book and using a conversion utility
to
transform it to html. At the same time, the book metaphor
and the
particular material covered by a book provide useful frames of
reference that should be considered when designing the booksite.
For
instance, a textbook typically has a preface, table of contents
and is
divided into chapters containing subtopics within the main theme
of
the book. A booksite's home page might be created as a table of
contents with links to the same set of sub-level topics as the
book
itself plus sub-levels for additional topics only found at the
booksite. Some additional topics can be submitted syllabi, a list
of
contributors to the booksite, links to Web resources related to
the
overall theme of the book, or a page for requesting a copy of the
book. A book will also have an index, and the booksite might
have
something similar, but the larger the booksite becomes the more
useful it will be to have a search feature on the home page.
Practical Considerations
One example of a booksite is the one for Ben Shneiderman's, "Designing
the User Interface" (DTUI) at http://www.aw.com/dtui,
which was
originally designed by Blaise Liffick at Millersville University
and
is now being developed further by Roger Chapman at The Ohio State
University.
Experience with this booksite has taught us that while a booksite
can
be a very useful supplement to a book, it is a dynamic up-to-date
resource only to the extent that people are able to make it so.
For
instance, a person or persons are needed to:
1. Provide access to, and support for, a Web server to host the
booksite; In the case of the DTUI booksite this is provided by
the
book publisher, Addison Wesley Longman, itself. This demonstrates
that publishers may recognize that a booksite can make the book
more
attractive to potential buyers and therefore increases sales.
Having
a publisher host the Web pages can complicate updating the booksite
if
that is not done by the publisher, although it should be possible
for
updates to take place via ftp transfers.
2. Develop the supplementary materials. The author of the book may
develop these, but there is also the potential to involve users
of the
book by including material such as their syllabi, examination
questions, projects, teaching tips or studying tips. These
may be
stored on the machine hosting the booksite or links to the material
developers' pages may be used. In the case of the DTUI booksite
much
of this type of material is kept on the machine hosting the booksite,
but links are used for the more dynamic material, such as descriptions
for courses where the book is used.
3. Design and implement the interface to the booksite; Good booksite
design requires a person with skills in both HCI and a language
or
tool that can be used to implement that design on the Web.
The author
of the book may have those skills, but prefer to see someone else
assume this responsibility, as is the case with the DTUI booksite.
4. Keep any Web links to remote sites maintained. When there is
much
material elsewhere on the Web related to the material of a book,
it is
a service to the user to organize links that material and connects
them appropriately to the organization of the book and booksite.
At
the DTUI booksite there are a large number of links organized by
the
chapters of the book and the subtopics within those chapters.
It is
a significant amount of work to maintain these links as pages are
moved on or removed from the Web, and new relevant pages are added.
A
person or persons may be assigned this responsibility, but if the
community of book users also contribute in this effort it helps
tremendously. There are software programs for automatically
checking
for broken links, which helps reduce the workload, but finding
quality
new resources is much more labor intensive.
5. Interact with the users of the booksite. Like any other reasonably
sophisticated Web site the visitors to a booksite expect to be
able to
find an email address on the site for situations when they have
a
comment, question or suggestion for those maintaining that site.
A
person or persons are therefore needed to respond to these messages.
A Discussion List for the Book and Booksite
Discussion between users of a book or booksite can be supported
by a
mailing list dedicated to this purpose. This also provides
a
convenient method for distributing announcements about the book
or
booksite to its users. Experience with the mailing list for
the DTUI
booksite has shown that it is useful for such a list to be restricted
so that only those on a list of accepted subscribers may post
messages.
The main reason for this being to avoid the increasing number of
spam
messages appearing on the Internet.
Potential users of both a booksite and discussion list can be made
aware of these resources by referring to them in the associated
book,
assuming the addresses are unlikely to change for quite some time.
Their addresses can also be posted on search engines or requests
can
be made to relate sites to reference them.
Conclusion
A well-supported dynamic booksite has much to offer as a supplement
to
a static book. However, it is important not to underestimate the
workload and financial resources that will be needed to make a
booksite a useful complement and not simply a less static supplement.
######################################################################
Teaching Software Maintenance Online via (Mostly) Asynchronous
Distance Learning
Joseph Kasser and Steve Kerby
Graduate School of Management and Technology
University of Maryland
University Boulevard at Adelphi Road
College Park, MD 20742-1614
Telephone 301 985 4616, Fax 301 985 4611
Email: jkasser@umuc.edu and
skerby@umuc.edu
Introduction
The Graduate Department of Information and Telecommunication Studies
at the University of Maryland University College
<http://www.umuc.edu/index.html>
(UMUC) in College Park, Maryland
offers a Software Development Management
<http://www.umuc.edu/prog/gsmt/csmn.html>
(SDM) track in its Master of
Science in Computer Systems Management
<http://www.umuc.edu/prog/gsmt/mswe.html>
degree. The SDM track is
designed for software development professionals and technical managers
who are interested in the software life-cycle process. CSMN648
<http://www.umuc.edu/prog/gsmt/csmncat.html>,
the capstone course in
the track, focuses primarily on the issues of software maintenance,
but also considers such matters as software evolution, process,
performance, planning, and change. In the past, CSMN648 was taught
in
the classroom synchronously in real time on the College Park campus
via the traditional lecture and discussion method. Students also
worked on individual papers and group projects as part of the course.
Conversion to on-line Dr. Joseph Kasser
<http://www.umuc.edu/~jkasser/>
re-designed the course for
asynchronous on-line delivery via UMUC's WebTycho distance learning
software platform. He did it in such as way as to use the best
of both
synchronous and asynchronous techniques duplicating the lectures
that
had been delivered synchronously and making them available in multiple
asynchronous options. Several of Dr. Kasser's colleagues questioned
this approach, suggesting that it would be more effective to design
something new that played to the Web's strengths (i.e. interactivity,
collaboration, and synchronicity), rather than trying to duplicate
what happens in the traditional Face-to-face classroom lecture.
Dr.
Kasser, however, argued that the lecture experience was valuable
and
entirely appropriate for CSMN 648 On-line, and that he was indeed
using the Web to its best advantage by making the lecture available
asynchronously and in multiple formats. Further, he pointed
out that
the lecture was only one component of the class, that the weekly
discussions (which take place in WebTycho) and the group projects
(supported by the Study Group section of WebTycho) add the
collaborative and interactive component to the class.
One of CSMN 648 On-line's unique features is that it offers
asynchronous delivery of the lectures in multiple options. Further,
not only do the students have the option of viewing / hearing /
reading the text on-line, they can download the files for viewing
/ hearing / reading on their own computers.
How the Technology Affects the Students' Learning
The various lecture options have at least two purposes:
- To match the instruction with the technology. The lectures
are
delivered in more than one technical format. So if, for instance,
a
student has restricted Internet access, a slow CPU, and/or a slow
modem, they can either access the RealPresenter presentation without
streaming or simply read the lecture while viewing the transparencies.
- To match the instruction with different ways of learning.
The
lectures are delivered in more than one instructional format. So
if,
for instance, a student learns better aurally, visually,
audio-
visually, or through some combination of them all, CSMN648 On-line
gives that student those opportunities.
Not only do the multiple formats give students technological and
instructional options, the formats also give students the opportunity
to gather the lecture information repeatedly (in more than one
way.)
Although this particular course design is only currently undergoing
formal evaluation and testing, the anecdotal evidence is encouraging
(positive student feedback), and it is almost certain that the
multiple opportunities to learn significantly facilitate the students'
learning experience.
In the third semester of CSMN 648 On-line, Dr. Kasser gave the
students the option of delivering their presentations in the same
format as his lectures. Twenty-one out of fifty students chose
to
provide audio accompaniment to their PowerPoint slides. The
presentations were viewed and rated in an asynchronous conference
developed by Dr. Kasser's software engineering students in another
class in spring 1999. The asynchronous conference also allows the
students to post, and respond to, questions about the presentation.
This conference may be previewed by accessing Dr. Kasser's Web
page at http://www.umuc.edu/~jkasser
and clicking on the link to the
Experimental Asynchronous Web Conference.
The design approach
Much has been written about the objectivist and constructivist
approaches to instructional design [1]. The objectivist approach
is
based on the assumption that there is a real, objective, and knowable
world, and that the instructor's primary duty is to convey that
knowledge to the students. The constructivist approach, on
the
other hand, is based on the assumption that knowledge is constructed
by the learner, that learning is active and collaborative and that
the
instructor's primary duty is to provide a context whereby the student
can discover his or her own "constructed" knowledge. CSMN 648 on-line
nods to both objectivist and constructivist theories of learning
by
combining: the traditional lecture (teacher centered) with the
highly
interactive and collaborative On-line Conferencing and Study Group
features (student centered).
Dr. Kasser's lecture nods to the objectivist philosophy. It is assumed
that there is real, objective, and knowable information about software
maintenance, so the instructor "imparts" his information to his
students. On the other hand, if there is indeed objective
and
knowable information, it is also assumed that there is constructed
knowledge--knowledge that is acquired actively, collaboratively,
and
on the students' own initiative. The study groups, class
conferencing, and asynchronous delivery provide the context for
individual and collaborative discovery.
Communicating with the Instructor
Students communicate with the Dr. Kasser in several ways including:
- Synchronously via the telephone or Internet voice using PhoneFree
software (available as shareware at http://www.phonefree.com).
- Asynchronously using audio via the telephone answering machine
or
PhoneFree's voice mail.
- Asynchronously using text via E-mail or in the discussion groups.
In an asynchronous class structure, it is important that class
communication be made available to all students. Dr. Kasser's
rule of
thumb for student questions is: If the question
- would be asked out loud in a "real" classroom, then the students
are
expected to post it in the appropriate discussion thread in the
relevant conference area of the class.
- is of a personal nature -- the kind of question a student might
ask
in a private meeting with the professor -- then the students may
E-mail the professor privately.
It is important to stress that on-line instruction is a highly
interactive, highly collaborative medium. E-mail is discouraged
for
all but the most private matters.
The conversion process and results
Dr. Kasser began creating the on-line course with an established
baseline of a set of PowerPoint slides that had been used in his
classroom lectures. In the conversion from face-to-face to
on-line,
he had to supplement these PowerPoint slides with full text notes
(which became the audio component of the Real Media Presenter).
The first time the class ran, preparation time averaged approximately
10 hours per session. This dropped to about 1.5 hours per
session
when the course ran the second time. For the third offering
of the
class, preparation time is averaging about 30 minutes per session.
Remember that in an on-line class, there are no classroom hours.
Preparation time is teaching time. Dr. Kasser has found that
this
"re-use" approach allows him to spend increasing amounts of time
interacting with students.
Summary
In summary, the primary way that on-line technology affects student
learning is that the lecture (indeed, the class itself) is available
to students regardless of time and distance. A student who
lives and
works in Korea, for instance, has just as much access to the UMUC
teacher, class materials, and class discussion as a student who
lives in Washington DC. This asynchronous element of on-line class
delivery is crucial. No doubt, it is the central reason why
on-line
class delivery is becoming so widespread. Quality education may
not be
more affordable, but it is becoming more available to working adults
(as well as to full-time students).
In CSMN 648 On-line, not only are students presented with a blend
of
traditional and on-line methods of instruction in multiple options,
the instructional design itself spans the philosophical spectrum
of
learning theory. The point is that no matter how a student learns,
or
how knowledge is "constructed," CSMN 648 On-line has something
substantial to offer. You are welcome to take a look at the
preview
and comment. Access is via
http://polaris.umuc.edu/~skerby/wit/wit_presentation.htm
Notes:
1. Urban Nulden's "Designing Environments for Reflection and
Collaborative Learning,"
2. Mart Laanpere's "Underlying Theories of Learning and Instruction,"
3. John Vargo's "Evaluating the Effectiveness of Internet Delivered
Coursework," and Constructivism and computer-mediated communication
in
distance education by David Jonassen, et al.
######################################################################
The Web as Medium for Learners-Centered Education
Ahmed Seffah
Computer Research Institute of Montreal
550 Sherbrooke St. W, Montreal, Canada H3A 2N4
Tel: (514) 840-1234 - Fax: (514) 840-1244
E-mail: aseffah@crim.ca -
http://www.crim.ca/~aseffah
A revolution is taking place in academic and continuing education,
one
that deals with the philosophy of teaching and learning, the
relationship between educators and learners, the way classrooms
are
structured, and the nature of curriculum. This new approach, termed
learner-centered education [Norman-96 and Denning-96], focus on
the
needs, skills and interests of the learner rather than on the
organization of the curriculum content. The following are the
fundamentals steps of our approach that combine the power of the
emerging education paradigm and Internet technologies and tools:
- Presenting students with a set of relevant resources and information
- Encouraging students to added their own resources and share their
ideas
- Inviting students to collaboratively share and comment their
projects
- Making the bridge between academic education and industry best
practices
- Improving the personal learning process by integrating self-
assessment and mentoring strategies
Step 1: Presenting students with an initial set of relevant resources
and information
A typical environment that a professor can establish as a starting
point towards an Internet-based training environment include different
types of resources that can be used to either achieve a greater
understanding of a concept or to obtain further information about
it.
The following are example of these resources:
- Overheads
- Course outline
- Objectives
- Assigned readings an references
- Assignment list
- Frequently Asked Questions
- Bibliography
- Tutorials
Step 2: Encouraging students to added their own resources and share
their ideas
The infrastructure also supports communication between students
and/or
instructors through newsgroups and mail tools. Communication tools
are
powerful for the following
- Professor comments
- Students ideas
- Personalized questions/answers
- Training follow-up
- Corrected exams
- Experts to consult
- Personal information
- Students personal resources
- Class projects and accomplishments
Step 3: Inviting students to critique each other's projects
We had our students publish their projects, making them available
for
all other students in the class. Students were anxious that their
work
would be so visible, but it does seem to push them along to polish
their projects more than in the past. The following is the scenario
that have experimented in an object-oriented modeling and design
issues of user interfaces:
- Each team put their first OO design model on the FTP server with
an
anonymous name several weeks before the final due date.
- Students are invited to comment and criticize other students
design
models through a newsgroup especially established for this purpose.
The professor acted as a moderator of the newsgroup.
- Each team was invited to submit by email a compilation of all
comments made by other students about their works.
- The professor graded this compilation and gave the students time
to
make changes and/or extend their model.
Step 4: Making the bridge between academic education and industry
best
practices
Learning resources listed in step 2 can introduce concepts and present
simple case studies in an attempt to help with the understanding
of
those concepts. Students' projects and achievements are also limited
and constrained in their scope to reflect true-life experiences.
In
this step, the professor should add to the environment obtained
during
step 3, learning resources that can help students develop skills
they
will use in the real world in as realistic a way as possible [Denning-
92]. Examples of such learning resources for object-oriented
technology education and training are: (1) examples [Hermann-96],
(2) complex problems [Guzdial-96], (3) pedagogical design patterns
[Manns-96] and, (4) scaffolded examples [Rosson-96]. These resources
are the essence of learner-centered education in the sense that
they
are picked to fit the interests and needs of learners. For example
scaffolded examples are sample problems of realistic size whose
complexity is gradually revealed in steps that leverage and
reinforce the intrinsic structure of the problem-solving process.
Scaffolding enables learners to build their understanding through
a
process of successive elaboration and integration.
Step 5: Improving the personal learning process by integrating self-
assessment and mentoring strategies
From a learner perspective, the environment obtained during step
4 has
the potential to offer a flexible structure allowing self-directed,
self-paced instruction on any topic. However, we believe that in
order
to take advantage of this potential, one must concurrently adapt
existing object-oriented education approaches with new methods
of
apprenticeship capable of empowering and sustaining the act of
self-
learning. A priori, we need to anticipate and identify the end-user's
unique and self-paced exploration of the given materials and then
respond to their need for insight, alternatives and new directions
by
providing embedded questions, and correct, summative self-evaluation
instruments. Once a learner profile has been established, we can
confidently design the assessment strategies.
- Suggested Readings
- Alvaraz-Rubio, J. Leon-Serrano, G. "An introduction to a C++ course:
on-site and distance teaching." ECOOP'96 Educator's Symposium.
- Bagert, D et al (1999) "Guidelines for Software Engineering
Education: version 1.0", Working group on SE Education and Training
- Capell, P. (1995). "Distance Learning Technologies". CMU/SEI-95-TR-
004. Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University.
- Denning, P.J. (1992). Educating the new engineers. Communications
of the ACM 35.
- Dupuis, R et al (1998) "A Guide to the Software Engineering Body
of
Knowledge: a Straw Man version", IEEE Computer Society
- Guzdial, M. Kolodner, J. Hmelo, C. "Computer Support for Learning
Through Complex Problem Solving." Communications of the ACM. 39(4).
- Hermann, H. Metz, I. (1996). "Teaching OO Software Engineering
by
Examples" ECOOP'96 Educator's Symposium.
- John Vargo's "Evaluating the Effectiveness of Internet Delivered
Coursework," and Constructivism and computer-mediated communication
in
distance education by David Jonassen, and all.
- Lato, k. Drechsler, A. Effective Training in OOT: Learn by doing.
Journal of Object-Oriented Programming. 9(6)
- Maly, Kurt, Hussein Abdel-Wahab, C. Michael Overstreet, J. Christian
Wild, Ajay K. Gupta, Alaa Youssef, Emilia Stoica, Ehab S. Al-Shaer.
"Interactive Distance Learning over Intranets". IEEE Internet
Computing, Volume 1(1).
- Manns M.L Pedagogical Patterns Successes in Teaching Object
Technology. ECOOP'96 Educator's Symposium
- Mart Laanpere's "Underlying Theories of Learning and Instruction,"
- Norman, D.A. Spohrer, J.C (1996). "Learner-Centered Education."
Communications of the ACM. 39(4).
- Seffah Ahmed, Michel Desmarais, and Ramzan Khuwaja. Mastering
Object-Oriented Technology Using a Web-Based Training and Assessment
System. Computer Applications in Engineering Education Journal.
Wiley
and Sons, 1999.
- Seffah, Ahmed. "Involving Learners in an Object-Oriented Technology
Teaching Process: Five Web-Based Steps for Success." Workshops
Reader,
Lecture Notes in Computer Science 1543, Springer Verlag. European
Conference on Object-Oriented Programming, Brussels, Belgium, July
20-24, 1998. - Urban Nulden's "Designing Environments for Reflection
and Collaborative Learning,"
######################################################################
Internet-based Software Engineering Education at Murdoch University
Geoffrey G. Roy, Professor of Software Engineering
Jocelyn Armarego, Lecturer
Terry Woodings Associate Professor
Peng Lam, Senior Lecturer
Lynne Fowler, Lecturer
Contact: Geoffrey G. Roy
Email: geoff@eng.murdoch.edu.au
Background
In 1996 Murdoch University established a new School of Engineering
with two specialists Bachelor of Engineering (BE) degree programs,
one
in Instrumentation and Control Engineering and the other in Software
Engineering (SE). At that time there was only one other undergraduate
SE degree program in Australia (at the University of Melbourne).
Since, several new BE SE courses have commenced or are currently
being
planned.
In Australia, the Bachelor of Engineering degree is a professional
engineering qualification taken over 4 years and would normally
be
expect to be accredited by the Institution of Engineers, Australia
(IEAust). This could be considered equivalent to the ABET
accreditation in the USA. There are, of course, a wide range
of
computing or IT degree programs that contain courses in Software
Engineering, perhaps as majors, but these would not normally be
accredited as a professional engineering qualification.
Our teaching objectives are focused on producing graduate professional
engineers with a special skill in Software Engineering. This
implies
that we will expect our graduates to find career opportunities
in both
traditional engineering industries which have a strong interest
in
software as well as the full range of IT disciplines where the
design
and implementation of quality software is considered a priority.
The development of our BE (SE) program naturally preceded the
publication of the Software Engineering Body of Knowledge (SWEBOK)
[Dupuis-98], but in review we are reasonably well satisfied that
our
course conforms to these proposals. It is also closely
aligned with
the recently published sample curricula as proposed by the Working
Group Software engineering Education and Training [Bagert-99],
which
can be found at (http://faculty.db.erau.edu/hilburn/se-educ)
Curriculum Delivery Strategies
Given that we were starting from scratch in 1996, opportunities
to use
the Internet as a primary delivery mode were available. At
that time
the teaching facilities available were crude, and our approaches
to
delivery are still evolving as new tools and capabilities become
available. Our initial thoughts were driven by two key objectives:
1. To develop efficient means of delivery for both on- and off-campus
students. From the outset we were intending to provide our
courses
via distance education -- distance education is a significant element
of teaching for our University.
2. To provide a means of documenting a complete curriculum that
is
not fully dependent on individual staff interests and capabilities.
This might seem a little strange, but we know from experience that
many university courses are very dependent on individual staff.
The
"collective memory" is often limited, and replacing a lecturer
may
often imply re-writing the courses previously taught.
Developing Web-based curricula does appear to offer a reasonable
approach to achieving both of these objectives.
While there might still be debate on the required SWEBOK, the real
problems in delivering a course on the Internet are more relating
to
teaching and learning paradigms rather than the actual content.
This is not to diminish the importance of content (as will expand
on
later), but it is important that there is a reasonable model for
teaching and learning. That is, it is not just sufficient
to provide
a copy of either a textbook or lecture overhead transparencies
translated onto the Web and expect that the learning outcomes will
be
achieved.
In addition we have presumed that the same teaching resources will
be
available to both on- and off-campus students. We do accept
that on-
campus students will have access to additional tutorial sessions
and
that off-campus students will have to rely more on personal email
communications to provide supplementary learning resources.
Course Content
The development of our Web-based courses is proceeding as fast the
available resources will allow, and at the moment we have most
of the
core SE units up and running. These include (except as noted):
At year 1:
- Engineering Computing I (Introduction to programming and problem
solving using Java)
- Engineering Computing II (Java programming)
At year 2:
- Engineering Computing III (Introduction to Unix, C++ programming
and
Data Structures)
- Engineering Computing IV (Unix and C++ programming)
- Requirements Engineering (An O-O approach)
- Databases (not yet online)
- Data Communications (not yet online)
At year 3:
- Software Engineering I (an overview of SE with an emphasis on
the
software process)
- Software Engineering II (software management and certification
for
quality)
- User Interface Design (requirements, design implementation and
evaluation)
- Advanced Software Design I (architectural design and formalisms)
- Software Engineering Project (not online)
At year 4:
- Software Engineering III (metrics and quality assurance)
- Software Engineering IV (SE tools, organizational and professional
issues)
- Advanced Software Design II (detailed design)
- Software Engineering Thesis (not online, industry based)
Each of these courses constitute 3 to 4 semester-hours of work for
the
student, or in our own measure about 8 to 10 hours of work time
(including in and out of class time) each week, over a 13 week
semester, with four normal courses taken each semester. The
4th year thesis is three times the size of a normal course.
The
remainder of the curriculum includes a range of Mathematics, Applied
Science and Management units to constitute a complete engineering
study program.
Design Principles
Since setting out on this enterprise we have learned a lot about
Web-
based delivery -- we are still learning as we see the results of
our
approach through the feedback from our students, their performance
and
expressed interest. We already know there are some golden
rules.
Here are some of them:
1. For the student, a session with a browser must result in the
acquisition of new knowledge. While the student is expected
to read
and understand the content provided, a simple read-the-screen paradigm
will only hold their attention for a few minutes.
2. The learning activities should involve some interaction with
the
Web page, i.e. the Web page should contain, or refer to, activities
to
be done. This might be achieved though interactive elements embedded
in the Web page, pointers to other Web pages which offer a different
perspective on the subject matter of the topic in question, or
even activities that must be completed away from the Web environment
(exercises, projects and the like).
3. Where interactive tools are provided within the Web page itself,
they should encourage the student to explore the concepts being
delivered. Learning by experience and experimentation should not
be
under rated.
4. For students in their first (and perhaps second year of the
course)
considerable help must be provided to assist them in planning and
monitoring their study program. For senior students with
more
developed study habits, greater flexibility can be provided in
allowing the students to complete elements of a course at their
own
pace, and perhaps even with some degree of choice as to the order
in
which topics are studied.
Delivering Core SE Courses on the Web
While we have developed a range of Web-based courses in the BE (SE)
program, we will focus our attention here on a sequence which goes
by
the title "Software Engineering" These courses cover most of the
classical SE content which relates to software processes, software
project management, measurement and testing. They correspond
to
the courses Software Engineering I, II, III and IV as outlined
above.
These are offered in four sequential semesters in years 3 and 4
of our
program. They encompass a body of knowledge, and require
a maturing
approach to these elements of SE. As such it was not clear
to us, at
the outset, which particular topics should be delivered when, but
we
did know that knowledge was required at the end of the sequence.
We
therefore set out to design a Web-based environment along the
following lines:
1. The Body of Knowledge was classified into a small number of
sections using the analogy of a software factory. Each Section
being
likened to a "department" within the factory where special interests,
or capabilities, are provided. The chosen sections are:
- Software Process
- Basic Techniques
- Project Management
- Quality Assurance
- Process Improvement Reliability and Risk
- Human Factors
- Strategic Management
Within each section we then proceeded to define sets of Topics,
each
representing a body of work that could be undertaken in a "session"
(perhaps 2 to 3 hours work).
2. These Topics exist at varying levels of detail and complexity
with
the intention that some are to be completed early in the study
program, while others will depend on these and require a more
sophisticated approach that might be better appreciated by a
more senior student.
3. For each semester course of study, we can then select a package
of
Topics, and define any required sequencing, by a "production line".
This is represented by graphical "map" showing which topics should
be
done when (in relation to each other).
This "production line" facility also has the capability of recording
and displaying a student's progress as each Topic is attempted
and
completed.
Each Topic is accompanied by a short video presentation (about 1
to 2
minutes) which is recorded by one of our staff. This provides
a
"personal" introduction to the Topic, and is aimed at softening
what
might otherwise be seen as rather impersonal teaching environment.
The videos are available in low resolution for off-campus
students (about 2.M bytes of mpeg) and in medium resolution (about
15
Mbytes) for on-campus students.
The key to this approach relies on the design of the Topics.
Each
must be self-contained, and in our case, conform to a standard
design.
We provide templates for the key Web pages, along with a set of
standard graphic icons to each person developing the Topic.
This
ensures a measure of consistency, both in terms of the stylistic
approach as well as the content structure, across various staff
working on the curricula, which allows a very flexible approach
to
course packaging. That is, we can reliably design "production
lines"
on the basis of the stated content of Topics without being too
concerned about how it is presented.
One of the very nice features of this approach is that it is possible
to package, or re-package, complete courses with minimal effort.
It
is just necessary to define a new "production line" using the
underlying common pool of Topics as required. It is also
possible to
package easily short courses based on special subsets of Topics
and
make these available on the Web.
Challenges
Obviously this approach to teaching/learning provides us with some
challenges:
1. Ensuring off-campus students are included in a collaborative
learning environment without face-to-face contact.
2. Ensuring students are not swamped with information -- that
objectives and outcomes for each course can be discerned without
face-
to-face cues from academic staff.
3. Shortcomings in the evaluation of student learning from online
courses -- student feedback provides us with some information.
We are working towards addressing these issues.
Access to Web Site
A demonstration of some of the teaching tools can be found from
http://eng.murdoch.edu.au
FASE readers are invited to email Geoff Roy (geoff@eng.murdoch.edu.au)
for a user id/password to access the Web site where the Units are
located.
######################################################################
Distance Education Program at Central Queensland University
Dave Oliver
Senior Lecturer in Computing
School of Computing and Information Systems
Central Queensland University Rockhampton Queensland 4702 Australia
Phone +61 7 49 30 94 25
Fax +61 7 49 30 97 29
Mail: d.oliver@cqu.edu.au
Central Queensland University (CQU) has been providing distance
education programs in applied computing since the 70's, back in
the
days when punch cards were used for input. The turnaround time
for a
compile would have been a couple of weeks -- a state of affairs
difficult for those more recently arrived on the IT scene to imagine
(even professional programmers often had to wait 24 hours).
Realistically the only way distance students could complete practical
assignments was by attending residential schools. Now everybody
has a
PC and residential schools are a thing of the past. Currently
we have
around 1000 IT students enrolled in each of the campus based and
distance education modes of attendance. About one third of these
students follow a software engineering stream.
At CQU distance education courses and campus-based courses continue
to
have identical assessment tasks. This practice was adopted to counter
perceptions of inferiority with respect to the distance course.
Now it has become well established, distance education tends to
be the
prime consideration in course design. This is because it is generally
easier to replicate on campus teaching strategies designed for
a
distance, rather than the other way round. To this extent campus
students benefit from relatively well prepared course materials
produced for distance students. Various quality checks are in place
to
eliminate errors and inconsistencies in course materials, which
is
important for distance delivery. These materials are
usually paper-
based but can extend to video; CD-ROM or Web-located materials.
Modern communication technologies, particularly e-mail, have a great
impact in the current teaching environment. Lecturers are not always
easily accessible to students even at a campus and distance students
can find communicating with their lecturer even more difficult.
E-mail
enables a distance student to communicate conveniently with the
lecturer and fellow students wherever they may be. It also makes
it
relatively easy for the lecturer to keep in touch with a large
class
of hundreds of students.
CQU does not yet have a comprehensive system for on-line assignment
submission. This may seem a glaring omission in the present climate
but there are a number of difficult issues. These include
authenticity (print-based assignments require a signature of
authorship), viruses, and the cost of printing the assignment
unless it can easily be assessed on line. However, I believe other
Australian Universities involved in distance education have systems
in place for electronic assignment submission.
Project subjects seem to suit distance education quite well. As
the
distance student is usually engaged in some form of employment
this
often opens up project opportunities. The usual practice is to
have
both a workplace and an academic supervisor.
Students studying by distance education generally study part-time,
which means two subjects per term instead of four. This may make
the
overall time to complete a degree fairly long. One factor that
will
alleviate this is the new policy of CQU to introduce an additional
term.
Generally the work required by a lecturer to prepare and teach a
subject for both modes of delivery is well in excess of that required
for a campus-based class. This is due to the need to prepare materials
well in advance, the need for more extensive quality checking,
the
increased class size and the additional communication requirements.
######################################################################
Is Internet-Based Software Engineering Education and
Training
Cost-Effective?
Ahmed Seffah
Computer Research Institute of Montreal
550 Sherbrooke St. W, Montreal, Canada H3A 2N4
Tel: (514) 840-1234 - Fax: (514) 840-1244
E-mail: aseffah@crim.ca -
http://www.crim.ca/~aseffah
According to several studies [Capell-95, Canada-96] and experiments
[Alvarez-96 and Malay-97], Internet tools can provide a less costly
and more efficient environment compared to classical continuing
education approaches, particularly classrooms. Internet-based learning
is also expected to shorten the time required for newly hired
employees to become fully productive. Furthermore, Internet technology
is considered an ideal medium to help software developers perform
their jobs and at the same time:
(1) assess their knowledge and skills, (2) collectively share and
exchange their individual expertise and pertinent learning resources.
At its most basic level, the Internet-based distance education
environment can be used to distribute learning resources and to
support communication between learners and educators. Given these
two
services, it is possible to develop cost-effective online tutorials.
This kinds of tutorial allows students to browse freely through
learning resources that are available in two delivery modes:
synchronous (real-time) and asynchronous (download). However, current
Internet technologies such as plug-ins and Java database connectivity,
facilitate the development of advanced training environments. From
a
technical perspective, these settings are characterized in part
by highly interactive and portable Java-based interfaces and a
gateway-enabling Web browsers to access external databases and
tools.
This technical integration can now lead us to promising learning
outcomes supported by a wide range of pedagogical strategies and
cognitive tools.
As an example, the following prototypes we developed are examples
of
such advanced training environments. These environments allow software
developers and students when accomplishing their tasks to
collaboratively learn and share their individual expertise and
pertinent learning resources.
- Learning how to develop using software libraries. Many standardized
software libraries and components are available to increase developer
productivity and improve software quality. In most cases, however,
these libraries are neither correctly used nor effectively reused.
One
of the major reasons is that learning how to use correctly such
libraries properly is a long and difficult task, even for experienced
software programmers. In this experiment, we outlined and developed
an
Internet-based training system that can increase software library
learnability by providing continuous on-the-job advice and examples.
The system facilitates best-practices sharing between experts and
beginners. It runs independently of any software development
environment or API.
- Empowering object-oriented technology. Our second experiment
addressed the training problems facing corporations in their effort
to
migrate to new software development methods and environments. The
main
goal of the experiment was to offer an environment in which concepts
and skills can be self-assessed and self-learned in order to
facilitate an effective and efficient transition towards object-
oriented technology and its practice. The Internet-based environment
we developed displays course contents in a hierarchical browser
that
presents the course structure in an easy-to-internalize format.
In
addition to presenting the course contents, the system provides
the
user with a list of learning resources. For a course item, such
as
"How to Write an Applet," this list includes links to relevant
URLs
available through the Internet/intranet, a list of selected examples,
tutorials and more. The system also provides learners with
opportunities to evaluate their knowledge of the course. This
diagnosis is presented in a variety of ways so that both an overall
and a detailed view of the student's progress learning is made
clear.
- Supporting the training associated within software engineering
process-oriented standards and models (ISO-9001, CMM(SM), and IEEE).
(Note: (SM)CMM is a service mark of Carnegie Mellon University.)
Such standards and models are presented as a solution that
improves
software developers' performance, and increases both quality and
customer satisfaction. However, the frustrating reality is that
the
learning period for a quality system is long and arduous, partly
because software developers little time to devote to mastering
such
standards. Our Visual 3P (Visual Panel for Performance in Process)
allows users to browse freely within the documentation associated
with
the standard. It allows information and resources to be displayed
from
several views such groups that includes specific procedures and
forms
targeted to specific group and what news. The system also assists
users wishing to improve their skills by providing several resources,
tutorials, books, journals, URLs, and e-mail addresses of an expert
who may be contacted for further information).
The following experiments made by others colleagues highlighted
also
others directions in which Internet technology is a cost-effective
solution for dissemination and sharing learning resources and skills
between professors, and/or students, and/or industry educators
and/or
practitioners:
- Web sites that disseminate complementary resources about software
engineering books. The reader is invited to read in this issue
the
paper prepared by Roger Chapman or visit http://www.aw.com/dtui.
I
think that the many professors who used the Pressman book in their
software engineering introductory course can develop the same
experience.
- The pedagogical patterns project: successes in teaching object
technology (PROTO-PATTERNS). While many good pedagogical ideas
are
presented at OO conferences and published in proceedings and journals
each year, very little has been done to collate the effective
practices of many OO educators into one publication. The purpose
of the pedagogical patterns project is do just that over a Web
site.
The Web site aims to create a publication, which is similar to
what
Susan Lilly (in 1/96 Object Magazine) refers to as "reusable
pedagogical design patterns". See the following URL for further
information about the project see
http://www lifia.info.unlp.edu.ar/ppp/
- Oracle Learning Architecture (OLA), proposed by Oracle, allows
educators and software engineers to access and customize training
courses via an intuitive Web-based user interface. OLA courses
are
available in two delivery modes: synchronous (real-time) and
asynchronous (download) courses. Over 300 courses are available
including such topics as Novell networking, Lotus Notes
Internet/intranet, HTML, and Java. We believe that OLA is the most
advanced Internet-based training environment developed and used
at
large by a software development organization. Further information
about Oracle Learning Architecture is available at
http://ola.us.oracle.com.
- LearnShare is a new concept in business education - a consortium
of
major non-competing corporations joining forces to better utilize
learning resources. Member companies share existing training courses
and facilities, jointly fund the purchase of additional training
programs, and collaborate to develop new training content. The
concept introduced by LearnShare can be thought of as a virtual
broker
of education. Universities or the software industry could
develop the
same concept for software engineering education.
Regarding the prototypes that we presented, the following are the
main
factors that makes the Internet infrastructure better suited or
more
appropriate than the current training solutions supported by text
book
and classroom presentations.
- Consistency: All learning resources and information are accessible
through the same user-friendly interface -- generally a Web browser-
based interface.
- Portability: The Internet infrastructure is independent of hardware
and operating systems.
- Extensibility: Starting with a simple resource, the environment
can
evolve with successive extensions without compromising the existing
resources.
- Complementarity: Establishing an Internet-based training environment
does not mean replacing existing training tools, computer-based
or
otherwise. It also does not imply rethinking the complete training
process.
- Scalability: The Internet-based environment answers the corporate
training needs of any large international group, as well as those
of a
small business. The cost, especially the initial capital investment
of
equipment and installation, is very affordable for SME when compared
to other classical continuing education approaches.
However, several questions, which require a clear and coherent
response, must be addressed before implementing an Internet-based
training environment:
- What are the training needs and objectives that justify the
implementation of an Internet platform?
- What are the required training resources and how will they be
designed and/or integrated?
- What is the cost of production and delivery of the identified
learning resources and information?
- Which technological architecture is best suited to implementing
an
Internet infrastructure, given the budget and restrictions?
- Does the organization's personnel possess the qualifications
and
aptitudes needed to master the new training environment?
- Which strategies will facilitate the migration of the existing
training setting to an Internet technology-based environment and
favor
the 'buy in' of its employees?
- What kind of organizational changes will the corporation undergo?
- Will the existing equipment and network support the Internet
solution?
- Which hardware and software will be needed to ensure security
and
confidentiality within the intranet/extranet environment?
- How can the Intranet be successfully integrated within the existing
corporate training system?
- What are the important legal aspects to consider (intellectual
property, access to information and learning resources)?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
November 1999 Topic: Software Engineering Body of
Knowledge (Update):
The Relationship Between Software
Engineering and Other Disciplines
Guest Editors: Robert Dupuis <dupuis.robert@uqam.ca>
Pierre Bourque <bourque.pierre@uqam.ca>
Universite du Quebec a Montreal
The guest editors have offered themselves as co-editors of the
November issue on the topic of the relationship of between software
engineering and other disciplines. This is of course an important
issue for the Guide to the SWEBOK project and one on which they
have
worked on in the past and on which the 10 "knowledge area specialists"
of the SWEBOK project (see FASE, March 1999) are currently pursuing.
If you wish to contribute to this issue, please contact the guest
editors at the addresses above.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
December 1999 Topic: Top Ten Events of the Century
Guest Panelists: TOP SECRET
Every other magazine is doing it - why not FASE? To celebrate
the
end of both the century and the millennium, the December 1999 issue
will have a panel of top people in the software engineering
education, training, and professional (SEET&P) issue communities
who
would name the top ten events of the century in the area of SEET&P.
As for your opinions, see the February 2000 topic!
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
January 2000 Topic: Coping with the Faculty Shortage
Topic Editor: Don Bagert, Texas Tech University
Don.Bagert@ttu.edu
As work of the IEEE-CS/ACM Software Engineering Coordinating
Committee (SWECC) and its related groups progress, attention is
increasingly shifting to implementation. A major roadblock
to the
implementation of software engineering degree programs is the lack
of qualified full-time faculty. This issue will focus on
the problem,
and suggest solutions.
If you are interested in participating, please contact Don Bagert
via Don.Bagert@ttu.edu.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
February 2000 Topic: Top Ten Events - The Readers'
Picks
Topic Editor: Don Bagert, Texas Tech University
Don.Bagert@ttu.edu
In December 1999, some of the experts will give their opinions -
now
it's time for the most important people - our readers - to give
us
their views on what are the top ten events of the century in the
area
of software engineering education, training, and professional (SEET&P)
issues. Details on how the (unscientific) poll will be conducted
will appear in the December issue...but that doesn't mean that
you
can't start preparing your list now!
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
By: Don Bagert (Academic/Misc Editor)
Call for Guest Editors and Topic Suggestions
If you are interested in being a guest editor, or have any suggestions
for future topics, please contact me at Don.Bagert@ttu.edu.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
######################################################################
######################################################################
From: Dennis Frailey <d-frailey@raytheon.com>
via Pierre Bourque
Canadian Lawsuit Discontinued
___
Association of Universities and Colleges of Canada
Council of Professional Engineers
Communique
Software Engineering Lawsuit Discontinued
OTTAWA (September 24,1999) -- The Canadian Council of Professional
Engineers has discontinued its lawsuit regarding the use of the
term
"software engineering" against Memorial University of Newfoundland,
as a result of an agreement with the Association of Universities
and
Colleges of Canada and Memorial.
Under the terms of the agreement, an independent panel will be
established to make non-binding recommendations on the appropriate
use of the term "software engineering" by Canadian
universities. Once the panel delivers its report, AUCC and CCPE
have
pledged to use their best efforts to arrive at a mutually acceptable
resolution.
CCPE will now cease all litigation against Memorial University of
Newfoundland over its use of the term "software engineering" and
has
agreed not to commence litigation against any AUCC member university,
in respect of its official marks engineer, engineering,
ingenieur, ingenierie or genie for a period of five years after
the
tabling of the panel's report.
Memorial University will abandon the official mark on the term
"software engineering" which it obtained in 1997. For its part,
AUCC
will recommend to its member universities that they take immediate
steps to ensure that students are not confused by the use of the
term "software engineering" to describe undergraduate level programs
or specializations offered outside of an engineering faculty.
The four-member panel to be established under the agreement will
consist of representatives of science academia, engineering
academia, the engineering profession and the information processing
profession. In addition, an impartial chair with extensive
involvement in university affairs will be appointed jointly by
CCPE
and AUCC. The panel will deliver a consensus-based report within
one
year.
Comments from CEOs:
"Our key concern was the potential for public confusion regarding
the term 'software engineering'. The agreement addresses this
concern and establishes a process that is far more likely than
a
federal court litigation to achieve a resolution to the issue of
how the term software engineering should be used in the undergraduate
university community," said CCPE President and CEO Dan Levert,
P.Eng.
"For AUCC, it was essential that an agreement to end the court case
respect the principles of academic freedom and institutional
autonomy. This agreement does so," stated Robert J. Giroux,
AUCC President and CEO. "At the same time, we're hopeful that the
panel process set out in the agreement will lead to constructive
and
positive dialogue on university campuses about software engineering
programs."
____
CCPE is the national organization of the 12 provincial and
territorial associations/ordre that regulate the practice of
engineering in Canada and license the country's 152,000 professional
engineers.
AUCC represents Canada's 89 universities and degree-granting
colleges at home and abroad. Its mandate is to foster and promote
the interests of higher education.
Sources:
Jeanne Thibault
Chief, Media and Public Relations
Association of Universities and Colleges of Canada
600-350 Albert
Ottawa, Ontario K1R 1B1
Tel (613) 563-3961, ext. 236
Terence Davis
Manager, Communications
Council of Professional Engineers
401-116 Albert>
Ottawa, Ontario K1P 5G3
Tel (613) 232-2474, ext. 238
######################################################################
From: Don Bagert via Jamie Andrews <andrews@csd.uwo.ca>
Software Engineering Accreditation Approved in Ontario
From a September 7, 1999 Media Release:
"Professional Engineers Ontario (PEO), the regulatory body for
engineering in Ontario, announced today it will license as
professional engineers, software practitioners who meet specific
criteria."
For more information, see
http://peo.on.ca/Communications/Software_release.htm
######################################################################
Engineering Times Articles
Engineering Times, a publication of the U.S.-based
National Society
of Professional Engineers, continues to spotlight software
engineering. The October 1999 issue's lead article is entitled
"Software Engineering Faces Growing Pains". It focused mainly
on the
Texas Board of Professional Engineers 1998 recognition of software
engineering as an engineering discipline, and the subsequent
licensing of Professional Engineers in that discipline. There
also
were sidebar articles on both FASE Co-Editor Don Bagert and Dr.
Ben
A. Calloni of Lockheed Martin in Fort Worth, who have both been
licensed as PEs in software engineering.
######################################################################
Response to DeMarco's Comments Published
The July 1999 FASE contained an article ("DeMarco Denounces
SE
Licensing and Certification Efforts") quoting a letter from Tom
DeMarco which critized an previous article written by FASE Academic
Editor Don Bagert for Communications of the ACM (CACM). The
October
issue of CACM contains (on page 14) some comments by William Adams
of
Springfield, Virginia (USA) which are critical DeMarco's remarks.
Adams writes: "State licensing of professionals has
a sound basis,
extending it to software engineers forces vendors to provide better
and more reliable products..."
######################################################################
Accreditation Update
######################################################################
From: Doris Lidtke <lidtke@SABER.TOWSON.EDU>
Doris Lidtke Named Abet Adjunct Accreditation Director for Computing
September 22, 1999 (Baltimore, MD) -- The Accreditation
Board for
Engineering and Technology, Inc. (ABET) announces the appointment
of
Doris K. Lidtke, Ph.D., as Adjunct Accreditation Director for
Computing, effective September 1, 1999. As a first step toward
integration, the Computing Sciences Accreditation Board (CSB) has
contracted with ABET to provide staff support for the Computer
Science
Accreditation Commission (CSAC) on behalf of CSAB. According
to Dr.
Lidtke, a past CSAB President, her primary focus will be "to integrate
the cultures", providing a bridge between the ABET and CSAB/CSAC
accreditation communities during the transition period.
Among her responsibilities, Dr. Lidtke will provide
guidance
during the transition to those institutions with programs seeking
initial accreditation or continuing accreditation with CSAC. She
will
assist in the development of the new ABET Computing Accreditation
Commission (CAC) and will coordinate implementation of the new
CSAC
criteria for evaluating computing programs, such as training, pilot
visits, and institution orientation. She will provide the ABET
staff
with assistance and background information on CSAC, CSAB, and the
computing community and will represent ABET to the CSAB and CSAC
communities.
Lidtke is Professor of Computer & Information Sciences
at Towson
University, Towson, MD. she has served on the CSAB as President
from
1995-97 and as a Representative Director for the Association for
Computing Machinery (ACM) from 1991-97. Lidtke received the
ACM
Distinguished Service Award in 1995 and is a Golden Core Member
of
the IEEE Computer Society, receiving that designation in 1996.
She
has been a Program Director in the Division of Undergraduate Education
at the National Science Foundation and has published many technical
and educational papers focused on computing science.
ABET has also created a full-time administrative assistant
position supporting computer science accreditation activities.
Rebecca Hancock currently fills this position.
In parallel with the addition of staff, ABET has undertaken
initial planning to create a new commission which will assume
responsibility for accrediation in computing-related disciplines.
As
part of the process CSAB has applied to become a Participating
Body of
ABET. These steps reflect the Memorandum of Understanding signed
by
the Presidents of ABET and CSAB on October 31, 1998. Additional
ABET/CSAC integration activities include an exchange of observers
at
the ABET and CSAC commission meetings this summer and campus visits
this fall. Representatives from each organization are familiarizing
themselves with the other's accreditation processes.
All inquiries regarding the Computing Science Accreditation
Commission should be addressed to CSAC, 111 Market Place, Suite
1050,
Baltimore, MD 21202-4012, Tel: 410/347-7701, Fax: 410/625-2238,
or
E-mail: csac@abet.org
####
Dr. Doris K. Lidtke
Tel. 410 830-2981
Computer & Information Sciences
Fax 410 830-3868
Towson University
E-mail lidtke@towson.edu
8000 York Road
lidtke@acm.org
Baltimore, MD 21252-0001
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Calls for Participation
######################################################################
Call for Contributions
Software Engineering Education & Training (SEAT) Track
The 22nd International Conference on Software Engineering
4-11 June 2000, Limerick, Ireland
SEAT: http://www.ul.ie/~icse2000/softeng.html
ICSE-2000: http://www.ul.ie/~icse2000
Please consider making a contribution to SEAT in one or more of
these
areas:
1. Technical Papers
Describing novel research in software engineering
education and
training.
Submission deadline: 11th November 1999
2. Teaching Demos
Demonstrations of innovative approaches supporting
new forms of
software engineering teaching and learning.
Submission deadline: 25th February 2000
3. Doctoral Workshop
Presentations of research-in-progress by doctoral
students to a
panel of experts.
Submission deadline: 25th February 2000
4. Education Panels
Panels to discuss current open issues in software
engineering
education & training.
Submission deadline: 11th November 1999
For more information and submission guidelines, please see conference
website or contact:
Bashar Nuseibeh
Chair, ICSE-2000 SEAT
Department of Computing
Imperial College
London SW7 2BZ, UK
Email: ban@doc.ic.ac.uk
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Position Openings
######################################################################
From: Daniel E. Cooke <dcooke@coe.ttu.edu>
Texas Tech University
Computer Science Department
The Department of Computer Science at Texas Tech University is
committed to being a nationally recognized program in the computing
field. We invite applications for several positions
at all levels
to begin employment in the Fall 2000. We will begin
reviewing
applications on January 15, 2000. Priority will be given
to
applicants whose areas of interest include databases, distributed
and
high performance computing, and software engineering. Our
plans are
to hire one person in each of these areas. Applicants at
the
assistant professor level must have the requirements for the Ph.D.
in
Computer Science or related field completed before employment,
and
should demonstrate clear potential for effective teaching and
research. Applicants at other ranks should also have a proven
record
of scholarly accomplishments, including a strong record of
publications, and funded research commensurate with rank.
The Department of Computer Science is within the College of
Engineering, and offers BS, MS, and Ph.D. degrees in Computer
Science
and a new MS degree in Software Engineering. The department
participates in both an EE/CS dual degree program and a Computer
Engineering program in conjunction with the Department of Electrical
Engineering, as well as dual degrees with both Chemical Engineering
and Mathematics. At present, there are over 500 undergraduate and
fifty graduate students in computer science degree programs.
The
graduate program offers specialties in computer engineering,
software engineering, and intelligent systems.
Faculty perform scholarly and funded research in many areas,
including: distributed computing and modeling, graphics and haptics,
high performance computing, multimedia systems, neural networks,
knowledge representation, real-time systems, software methodologies,
computer languages, logic programming, robotics, image processing,
and
software metrics. Applicants should send a letter expressing interest
in the position, a detailed resume, and the names and addresses
of
three professional references to: Daniel E. Cooke, Chairperson,
Department of Computer Science, PO Box 43104, Texas Tech University,
Lubbock TX 79409-3104. For additional information, see our website:
http://www.cs.ttu.edu/FacSearch/.
All questions should be directed to dcooke@coe.ttu.edu.
Applications
will be reviewed as they are received, until the positions
are
filled. Applicants must be able to lawfully accept employment
in the
United States.
Texas Tech University is an Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action
Employer.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Contact and General Information about FASE
The Forum for Advancing Software engineering Education (FASE) is
published on the 15th of each month by the FASE editorial board.
Send newsletter articles to one of the editors, preferably by
category: Articles pertinent to corporate and government training
to
Kathy Beckman <kbeckman1@erols.com>;
Academic education, and all
other categories to Don Bagert <Don.Bagert@ttu.edu>.
If the article
for a FASE topic where there is a guest editor, the submission
should
instead be to that person. 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
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).
[NEW SUBSCRIBE/UNSCRIBE INFORMATION - September 15, 1998]
Everyone that is receiving this is on the FASE mailing list.
If you
wish to leave this list, write 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
subscribe fase <Your Name>
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 <Your Name>
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 and training; 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.
FASE-TALK is also used by the editors for "breaking stories" i.e.
news
that we feel that you would want to hear about before the next
issue
of FASE comes out. (We do this sparingly, though.)
As always, there is no cost for subscribing to either FASE or
FASE-TALK!
Back issues (dating from the very first issue) can be found on the
web (with each Table of Contents) at
<http://www.cs.ttu.edu/fase/archive.htm>
in chronological order,
<http://www.cs.ttu.edu/fase/reverse.htm>
in reverse order, or
through ftp at
<ftp://www.cs.ttu.edu/fase/archive>.
The FASE Staff:
Don Bagert, P.E. -- Academic/Misc Editor, ListMaster, and Archivist
Dept. 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
Kathy Beckman -- Corporate/Government Editor
Computer Data Systems
One Curie Ct.
Rockville MD 20850 USA
Phone: 301-921-7027
Fax: 301-921-1004
Email: kbeckman1@erols.com
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