BKCASE Workshop V

of 26
All materials on our website are shared by users. If you have any questions about copyright issues, please report us to resolve them. We are always happy to assist you.
Information Report
Category:

Documents

Published:

Views: 89 | Pages: 26

Extension: PDF | Download: 0

Share
Description
BKCASE Workshop VHilton Garden InnPhoenix, ArizonaJanuary 26-28, 2011Some Thoughts from Reviewers“As a non-SE, this material contributed to my understanding and…
Transcript
BKCASE Workshop VHilton Garden InnPhoenix, ArizonaJanuary 26-28, 2011Some Thoughts from Reviewers
  • “As a non-SE, this material contributed to my understanding and knowledge.   Coming from an ILS background . . . it was worth my time to read the chapters and it will be an excellent reference source.”
  • “It is obvious that much thought and effort has gone into producing this first draft of the SEBoK document.”
  • “KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK.  Very encouraging piece of work.  I can not imagine how difficult it is trying to get to "one voice”.”
  • “This is a huge and tremendous work accomplished in a very short time. I would like to thank the authors and show them my admiration. Good luck for the next steps!”
  • “An excellent first draft - I look forward to seeing the next version.”
  • As a Reminder…3What is BKCASE?
  • Project to create:
  • Systems Engineering Body of Knowledge
  • Graduate Reference Curriculum in Systems Engineering (GRCSETM – pronounced “Gracie”)
  • Started in September 2009 by Stevens Institute of Technology and Naval Postgraduate School with primary support from Department of Defense
  • Project will run through 2012
  • Intended for world-wide use
  • 4What is the SEBoK?Describes the boundaries, terminology, content, and structure of SE that are needed to systematically and consistently support:Guide to the literature, not all the content of the literature5What is in GRCSE?
  • Guidance for Constructing and Maintaining the Reference Curriculum: the fundamental principles, assumptions, and context for the reference curriculum authors
  • Entrance Expectations: what students should be capable of and have experienced before they enter a graduate program
  • Outcomes: what students should achieve by graduation
  • Architecture: the structure of a curriculum to accommodate core material, university-specific material, and elective material
  • Core Body of Knowledge: material that all students should master in a graduate SE program
  • Not specific courses. Not specific packaging. Adaption and selective adoption expected and encouraged.6BKCASE Vision and Objectives“Systems Engineering competency models, certification programs, textbooks, graduate programs, and related workforce development initiatives around the world align with BKCASE.”VisionObjectivesCreate the SEBoK and have it be globally recognized by the SE community as the authoritative guide to the body of knowledge for the SE discipline.Create GRCSE and have it be globally recognized by the SE community as the authoritative guidance for graduate programs in SE.Facilitate the global alignment of related workforce development initiatives with SEBoK and GRCSE.Transfer stewardship of SEBoK and GRCSE to INCOSE and the IEEE after BKCASE publishes version 1.0 of those products, including possible integration into their certification, accreditation, and other workforce development and education initiatives.7Our PartnersUnder considerationUnder considerationRemain as ObserversRules for BKCASE Activities
  • Products generated by the authors, not the sponsor or partners
  • Even though the Department of Defense is the sponsor, it does not have any authority over the content of the products, nor are the products slanted towards defense systems development and acquisition
  • Volunteer authors do the bulk of the writing
  • Core Team from Stevens and Naval Postgraduate School provides stable labor and direction
  • Core Team responsible for final integration, technical editing, and clean up of products
  • 9And Now for Today’s Workshop…10Workshop Rules
  • First two days are in plenary session
  • Everyone has a voice
  • Record decisions and major points in real-time on slides that all can see
  • Strive for consensus on all substantive matters
  • Expect courtesy and professional behavior at all times
  • Record extensive minutes and publish them after each workshop
  • Workshop Objectives
  • Review and resolve major/global SEBoK 0.25 review comments and issues
  • Complete a draft development plan for SEBoK 0.5
  • Review wiki business cases and determine forward strategy for wiki development of BKCASE 0.5
  • Review GRCSE 0.25 release process and resolve residual issues
  • Determine BKCASE staffing for SEBoK, GRCSE, wiki, and Case Studies
  • Review specific BKCASE outreach opportunities (conferences, articles, …) and obtain author volunteers for development of papers and presentations
  • Review status of coordination efforts with IEEE and INCOSE
  • Wednesday’s AgendaThursday’s AgendaFriday’s Tentative AgendaPART LEADS/CORE TEAMALL AUTHORSSEBoK Review Art Pyster16Overall SEBoK Status
  • More than 3000 comments from more than 100 reviewers. Wow! Many more than we had expected. Terrific response from the community.
  • Many really excellent thoughtful comments
  • All comments captured in an adjudication matrix – Nicole will go over this later today
  • Core Team spent two days last week understanding the major points raised by the reviewers and preparing recommendations for your consideration today
  • 17Top 10 Issues
  • SEBoK Structure/Organization isn’t clean; too many independent chapters, no cross-linkages, no graphical “map” to help people navigate
  • Too much detail for many of the topics – should have less discourse and more references
  • Doesn’t always strike the right balance between prescriptive and descriptive material
  • Chapters 1 to 3 need to be more aligned and consistent
  • Chapters 6 and 7 need to be more aligned and consistent
  • Chapters 9 to 12 need to be more aligned and consistent
  • References are erratic: 2-level system confusing; some stated that there were too many references to be useful; too much BKCASE author work
  • Methodology for selecting what is in the glossary was unclear and many people were surprised at what was left out
  • No clear rationale for deciding what should be in Chapter 14 (Cross-Cutting); the term “cross-cutting” was confusing to many
  • Many style inconsistencies and need for stronger technical editing
  • Issue #1: Restructuring
  • Many reviewers said the long linear sequence of chapters wasn’t easy to follow. Too many components without a logical structure.
  • One reviewer suggested grouping chapters into “Parts” or “Sections” to provide that structure and aid comprehension. The Core Team agrees and recommends:
  • Part 1: Beginnings
  • Part 2: System Taxonomy
  • Part 3: Engineering Across the Life Cycle
  • Part 4: Engineering In and Across Organizations
  • Part 5: Domain Specific Examples
  • 19Issue #1: Parts and Chapters
  • Part 1: Beginnings
  • Introduction, System Concepts and Thinking, General Overview of SE and its Value
  • Part 2: System Taxonomy
  • Product Systems (new), Service Systems, Enterprise Systems
  • Part 3: Engineering Across the Life Cycle
  • Life Cycles, System Definition, System Realization, System Deployment and Use, Life Management, Cross-Cutting
  • Part 4: Engineering In and Across Organizations
  • Enabling SE in the Organization, SE Management, Agreement, Competency, SE in the Global Context/Across Cultures (new)
  • Part 5: Domain Specific Examples
  • Case Studies in Different Domains and Applications
  • 20Issues #1: Staffing Approach
  • Development of each Part led by an author + a Core Team member
  • Each chapter within a Part is led by an author
  • Each chapter has additional authors who contribute writing
  • Each Part lead author + Core Team member is responsible for working with author teams to:
  • Shape author teams to contribute material
  • Adjudicate review comments – to include possible restructuring of chapters within a part
  • Get the right depth, style, substance, length, consistency, prescriptiveness vs. descriptiveness
  • Have the right references
  • Also addresses Issues 2-6 21Issue #1: Proposed Part Lead Authorsand Core Team MembersPart 1: Beginnings – Barry Boehm and Art PysterPart 2: System Taxonomy – Rick Adcock and Nicole HutchisonPart 3: Engineering Across the Life Cycle – Bud Lawson and Dave OlwellPart 4: Engineering In and Across Organizations – Garry Roedler and Alice SquiresPart 5: Domain Specific Examples – Heidi Davidz and Alice SquiresChapter leader and chapter author assignments still to be decided – people can stay with assignments from 0.25 or move elsewhere22Issue #7: References
  • Confusion about the categories for references - need new approach to focus on recommended readings and citations
  • For each topic within chapter:
  • Works cited but not recommended; perhaps historical document
  • Top 10 recommended readings for everyone to understand topic
  • For each chapter within Part:
  • Top 10 recommended readings for everyone to understand chapter
  • For Part:
  • Top 10 recommended readings for everyone to understand Part
  • For SEBoK
  • Top 10 recommended readings for all of SE
  • All recommended readings must be annotated
  • 1-2 short paragraphs explaining the primary benefits
  • Guidance to novices about what’s important in the field and how to navigate with additional insights for people with more experience
  • 23Issue #7: Recommended ReadingsAlignmentRecommended readings will be analyzed with respect to alignment with SEBoK topics
  • help identify where additional readings are needed (e.g. Part 2, Chapter 1, Topic 1 below)
  • help identify where a recommended reading may not be appropriate for inclusion at a higher level (e.g., Recommended Reading 1 may not be appropriate for inclusion in the Top 10 readings for a chapter even though it is recommended for Part 1, Chapter 1, Topic 1 below)
  • 24Issue #8: Glossary/Terminology
  • Many reviewers said that even though it can be useful to have multiple definitions, it can also be quite confusing
  • General Recommendation: SEBoK should provide 1 definition wherever possible
  • Approach
  • Identify “primary” terms which require consistent definition
  • Author team will strive for consensus on definitions for primary terms (method TBD)
  • Primary terms to be highlighted in both text and glossary
  • Wherever possible, primary terms will include referenced definitions
  • It is acceptable to explain the existence of additional definitions, provided the key differences are explained and the references are appropriately cited.
  • 25Issue #9: Cross-Cutting
  • Purpose of what was Chapter 14 in SEBoK 0.25 is to capture “specialty” engineering that permeates across all other chapters
  • Often called “non-functional” topics, such as reliability, security, and safety
  • For SEBoK 0.5, will pick top TBD topics to include
  • For 0.5, will provide a template for all included topics to provide for common structure, style, content, and length
  • Will try to include only non-functional topics that are common across multiple domains
  • Other chapters should address non-functional topics lightly and point to cross-cutting chapter; conversely, cross-cutting chapter should point to other chapters
  • Well-suited for wiki structure
  • Name “cross-cutting” not well-accepted. Need another name
  • 26
    We Need Your Support
    Thank you for visiting our website and your interest in our free products and services. We are nonprofit website to share and download documents. To the running of this website, we need your help to support us.

    Thanks to everyone for your continued support.

    No, Thanks
    SAVE OUR EARTH

    We need your sign to support Project to invent "SMART AND CONTROLLABLE REFLECTIVE BALLOONS" to cover the Sun and Save Our Earth.

    More details...

    Sign Now!

    We are very appreciated for your Prompt Action!

    x