Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [scrumdevelopment] Digest Number 327

Expand Messages
  • Jeff Sutherland
    I think the consus of this group would be the same as I believe ACM has taken. SWEBOK is attempting to promote processes on which there is no consensus and
    Message 1 of 5 , Jun 5, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      I think the consus of this group would be the same as I believe ACM has
      taken. SWEBOK is attempting to promote processes on which there is no
      consensus and where substantial data exists to demonstrate that many
      proposed approaches do not work.

      The ACM and leaders in software development today do not support SWEBOK
      does not accurately reflects the current consensus.

      The June issue of IEEE Computer has an article which documents the failed
      DOD standard promoting the waterfall method that cost the military about
      $100B in abandoned or broken projects. The author of the standard said he
      used consultants and textbooks to draft the standard. He had no real world
      experience in building production software and would have proposed
      iterative incremental development, had he known what was really going on at
      NASA and IBM. It has taken more than a decade for a review committee led by
      Fred Brooks to repair the damage.

      It has also led to curriculum development in universities which has been
      largely irrelevant to production software development. I gave a talk at
      Brown University a few years ago on modern software techniques used in real
      businesses today. A Ph.D. candidate got up and stated to the entire
      conference that virtually everything he had learned about software
      development at Brown was largely irrelevant to modern methods.

      I don't want to fault Brown because I was on an advisory committee to the
      University of Massachusetts and they were even worse. They agreed with the
      industrial advisory committee about what to do about the problem and then
      failed to implement it teaching the same old things that were not relevant
      to product development.

      Jeff Sutherland


      At 01:55 PM 6/4/2003 +0000, you wrote:

      >Message: 1
      > Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2003 07:30:37 -0600
      > From: "Alleman, Glen B." <glen.alleman@...>
      >Subject: RE: IEEE SWEBOK Is Looking for Reviewers--They Don't Even Mention
      >XP, Agile, etc.
      >
      >Mike,
      >
      >As a reviewer of SWEBOK this is a problem in a larger context. SWEBOK is
      >an academic framework for the teaching of Software Engineering. The
      >first thought is that XP and agile method are transitory in the
      >engineering world. Meaning they are the "current" methods and describing
      >them in a "body of knowledge" is risky. Not because of their value to
      >the software world but because they are too far down in the food chain.
      >It would belike teaching GIS methods for waste water remediation in an
      >environmental engineering Body of Knowledge - critically important but
      >only so once you reach the field.
    • Mike Cohn
      Good points, Jeff. I was on a similar industry advisory committee to a university with the exact same results. This was about 10 years ago and pretty much
      Message 2 of 5 , Jun 5, 2003
      • 0 Attachment
        Good points, Jeff.

        I was on a similar industry advisory committee to a university with the
        exact same results. This was about 10 years ago and pretty much everything
        we suggested was ignored and rather than start teaching anything about
        client/server and distributed computing and more PC-based programming they
        continued to insist on mainframe programming classes for everyone,
        structured analysis, and kept COBOL as the official language of the
        department.

        I'm tempted to suggest that we should find a way to propose some form of
        agile curriculum but I don't know how we get universities to listen. With
        the poor economy I've met so many people who have decided that "if only I
        had a [better] degree, I'd be employable." Yet when I talk to them about the
        things they're learning I can't see how it helps them.

        -Mike


        -----Original Message-----
        From: Jeff Sutherland [mailto:jeff.sutherland@...]
        Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2003 8:20 AM
        To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
        Subject: Re: [scrumdevelopment] Digest Number 327

        I think the consus of this group would be the same as I believe ACM has
        taken. SWEBOK is attempting to promote processes on which there is no
        consensus and where substantial data exists to demonstrate that many
        proposed approaches do not work.

        The ACM and leaders in software development today do not support SWEBOK
        does not accurately reflects the current consensus.

        The June issue of IEEE Computer has an article which documents the failed
        DOD standard promoting the waterfall method that cost the military about
        $100B in abandoned or broken projects. The author of the standard said he
        used consultants and textbooks to draft the standard. He had no real world
        experience in building production software and would have proposed
        iterative incremental development, had he known what was really going on at
        NASA and IBM. It has taken more than a decade for a review committee led by
        Fred Brooks to repair the damage.

        It has also led to curriculum development in universities which has been
        largely irrelevant to production software development. I gave a talk at
        Brown University a few years ago on modern software techniques used in real
        businesses today. A Ph.D. candidate got up and stated to the entire
        conference that virtually everything he had learned about software
        development at Brown was largely irrelevant to modern methods.

        I don't want to fault Brown because I was on an advisory committee to the
        University of Massachusetts and they were even worse. They agreed with the
        industrial advisory committee about what to do about the problem and then
        failed to implement it teaching the same old things that were not relevant
        to product development.

        Jeff Sutherland


        At 01:55 PM 6/4/2003 +0000, you wrote:

        >Message: 1
        > Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2003 07:30:37 -0600
        > From: "Alleman, Glen B." <glen.alleman@...>
        >Subject: RE: IEEE SWEBOK Is Looking for Reviewers--They Don't Even Mention
        >XP, Agile, etc.
        >
        >Mike,
        >
        >As a reviewer of SWEBOK this is a problem in a larger context. SWEBOK is
        >an academic framework for the teaching of Software Engineering. The
        >first thought is that XP and agile method are transitory in the
        >engineering world. Meaning they are the "current" methods and describing
        >them in a "body of knowledge" is risky. Not because of their value to
        >the software world but because they are too far down in the food chain.
        >It would belike teaching GIS methods for waste water remediation in an
        >environmental engineering Body of Knowledge - critically important but
        >only so once you reach the field.




        To Post a message, send it to: scrumdevelopment@...
        To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to:
        scrumdevelopment-unsubscribe@...

        Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
      • David J. Anderson
        Mike, There appears to be a basic conflict in academia between the needs of the academics and the institutions and those of the employers of the graduates.
        Message 3 of 5 , Jun 5, 2003
        • 0 Attachment
          Mike,

          There appears to be a basic conflict in academia
          between the needs of the academics and the
          institutions and those of the employers of the
          graduates.

          Then UK used to solve this problem with a 2-tier
          college structure: Universities which were purely
          academic; and Polytechnics which were more strongly
          vocational in nature. This 2-tier system was destroyed
          in a democratization of the college structure in order
          to reduce costs associated with the state funding
          students who had to travel farther to the academic
          institutions of which there were far fewer (around 25
          as opposed to 200).

          There were one or two academic universities which
          preferred to focus on commercial success - including
          my alma mater the University of Strathclyde. As a
          result such schools wallowed in what was considered a
          poor academic record of published papers but scored
          highly with major employers such as BP who
          consistently ranked it in the top 8 schools in the UK.

          In addition, commercially focused schools tended to
          operate at break-even or even at a profit whilst
          highly academic schools continually relied on the tax
          payer to subsidize them.

          The Net-Net of this is that larger employers get to
          learn the good schools with high standards and
          applicable curriculums whilst the students must decide
          before embarking on college study whether they prefer
          a career in industry or a post-graduate life as an
          academic. In my opinion, most students entering
          college at 17 or 18 years of age are too inexperienced
          to make such a call.

          Regards,

          David



          --- Mike Cohn <mike@...> wrote:

          I'm tempted to suggest that we should find a way to
          propose some form of
          agile curriculum but I don't know how we get
          universities to listen. With
          the poor economy I've met so many people who have
          decided that "if only I
          had a [better] degree, I'd be employable." Yet when I
          talk to them about the
          things they're learning I can't see how it helps them.

          -Mike




          __________________________________
          Do you Yahoo!?
          Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM).
          http://calendar.yahoo.com
        • Deb
          ... everything ... programming they ... With ... only I ... about the ... Would immersion be the best training in Agile? Taking on co-op students would allow
          Message 4 of 5 , Jun 6, 2003
          • 0 Attachment
            --- In scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Cohn" <mike@m...> wrote:
            > Good points, Jeff.
            >
            > I was on a similar industry advisory committee to a university with the
            > exact same results. This was about 10 years ago and pretty much
            everything
            > we suggested was ignored and rather than start teaching anything about
            > client/server and distributed computing and more PC-based
            programming they
            > continued to insist on mainframe programming classes for everyone,
            > structured analysis, and kept COBOL as the official language of the
            > department.
            >
            > I'm tempted to suggest that we should find a way to propose some form of
            > agile curriculum but I don't know how we get universities to listen.
            With
            > the poor economy I've met so many people who have decided that "if
            only I
            > had a [better] degree, I'd be employable." Yet when I talk to them
            about the
            > things they're learning I can't see how it helps them.
            >
            > -Mike

            Would immersion be the best training in Agile? Taking on co-op
            students would allow this, without getting involved in curriculum...
          • Mike Cohn
            Yes, hands-on is probably the best way to really learn it. But it would still be useful for schools to teach some of the specifics--why does agile work, how to
            Message 5 of 5 , Jun 6, 2003
            • 0 Attachment
              Yes, hands-on is probably the best way to really learn it. But it would
              still be useful for schools to teach some of the specifics--why does agile
              work, how to plan agile projects, test-driven development, refactoring, etc.
              would all make great college classes (or minimally portions of a class).
              Additionally, universities at some point have to stop teaching things that
              run counter to reality (e.g., we can write down all the requirements
              upfront).

              -Mike

              -----Original Message-----
              From: Deb [mailto:deborah@...]
              Sent: Friday, June 06, 2003 12:07 PM
              To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
              Subject: [scrumdevelopment] Re: Digest Number 327

              --- In scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Cohn" <mike@m...> wrote:
              > Good points, Jeff.
              >
              > I was on a similar industry advisory committee to a university with the
              > exact same results. This was about 10 years ago and pretty much
              everything
              > we suggested was ignored and rather than start teaching anything about
              > client/server and distributed computing and more PC-based
              programming they
              > continued to insist on mainframe programming classes for everyone,
              > structured analysis, and kept COBOL as the official language of the
              > department.
              >
              > I'm tempted to suggest that we should find a way to propose some form of
              > agile curriculum but I don't know how we get universities to listen.
              With
              > the poor economy I've met so many people who have decided that "if
              only I
              > had a [better] degree, I'd be employable." Yet when I talk to them
              about the
              > things they're learning I can't see how it helps them.
              >
              > -Mike

              Would immersion be the best training in Agile? Taking on co-op
              students would allow this, without getting involved in curriculum...



              To Post a message, send it to: scrumdevelopment@...
              To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to:
              scrumdevelopment-unsubscribe@...

              Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.