Over the past several years we have collaborated with a variety of industrial partners to carry out applied research and capstone design projects in cooperation with our students. Although the projects have varied widely, more often than not, success or failure lies within the students' ability to see beyond the technical challenges into the subtleties of the business and the meaning of value. Looking back at our traditional software engineering curriculum it is not so surprising that gaps in technical skills are not typically the source of problems. With a strong traditional focus on the construction of software, we have been producing graduates who can build relatively complex stand-alone systems. Unfortunately, in today's world, being able to build software is only a small, albeit necessary, skill for software engineers and it is miles away from being sufficient [1, 2]. The challenges inherent in providing a portfolio of innovative, integrated, and strategic IT services are well beyond any of the techniques or conceptual frameworks historically taught in many software engineering curriculums [3-5], including our own. To address these shortcomings we have recently begun experimenting with a new curriculum that presents software engineering in its larger context as a strategic business function. We are also beginning to stress the importance of using a set of analytic frameworks to guide the evolution and development of software systems starting with the business and its context, through the architecture and design stages, and finally into implementation and support. To create materials for this curriculum we have gone back to the original voice of the problem and are attempting to assemble learning materials from the projects that industry has championed for us in the past. Our goal is not merely to showcase the software that was built, but rather to expose the reasons behind their conception and the frameworks used to make critical decisions throughout the process.
[1]
Mary Shaw,et al.
Deciding what to design: closing a gap in software engineering education
,
2005,
Proceedings. 27th International Conference on Software Engineering, 2005. ICSE 2005..
[2]
William T. Freeman,et al.
Teaching applied computing without programming: a case-based introductory course for general education
,
2001,
SIGCSE '01.
[3]
Barry Boehm,et al.
Balancing agility and discipline
,
2004
.
[4]
Daniel J. Moore,et al.
Curriculum for an engineering renaissance
,
2003,
IEEE Trans. Educ..
[5]
Mary Shaw,et al.
Software engineering education: a roadmap
,
2000,
ICSE '00.
[6]
C. F. Herreid.
Case Studies in Science--A Novel Method of Science Education.
,
1994
.
[7]
Paul P. Maglio,et al.
Service systems, service scientists, SSME, and innovation
,
2006,
CACM.
[8]
James C. Spohrer,et al.
A research manifesto for services science
,
2006,
CACM.
[9]
Klaus Krippendorff,et al.
Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology
,
1980
.
[10]
Bryan Hattingh,et al.
The competitive advantage
,
2007
.
[11]
JOHN M. CARROLL,et al.
Usability Engineering : Design Rationale , Development , and Classroom Experience
,
2005
.
[12]
Marcia C. Linn,et al.
Case studies in the classroom
,
1992,
SIGCSE '92.
[13]
Klaus Krippendorff,et al.
Answering the Call for a Standard Reliability Measure for Coding Data
,
2007
.
[14]
Mary Beth Rosson,et al.
Case studies for teaching usability engineering
,
2004,
SIGCSE '04.