Definition, realization and evaluation of a software reference architecture for use in space applications

A recent initiative of the European Space Agency (ESA) aims at the definition and adoption of a software reference architecture for use in on-board software of future space missions. Our PhD project placed in the context of that effort. At the outset of our work we gathered all the industrial needs relevant to ESA and all the main European space stakeholders and we were able to consolidate a set of technical high-level requirements for the fulfillment of them. The conclusion we reached from that phase confirmed that the adoption of a software reference architecture was indeed the best solution for the fulfillment of the high-level requirements. The software reference architecture we set on building rests on four constituents: (i) a component model, to design the software as a composition of individually verifiable and reusable software units; (ii) a computational model, to ensure that the architectural description of the software is statically analyzable; (iii) a programming model, to ensure that the implementation of the design entities conforms with the semantics, the assumptions and the constraints of the computational model; (iv) a conforming execution platform, to actively preserve at run time the properties asserted by static analysis. The nature, feasibility and fitness of constituents (ii), (iii) and (iv), were already proved by the author in an international project that preceded the commencement of the PhD work. The core of the PhD project was therefore centered on the design and prototype implementation of constituent (i), a component model. Our proposed component model is centered on: (i) rigorous separation of concerns, achieved with the support for design views and by careful allocation of concerns to the dedicated software entities; (ii) the support for specification and model-based analysis of extra-functional properties; (iii) the inclusion space-specific concerns.

The Right to Voice: Its Realization by Estonian and American Parents in Public Schools

Investigating parents’ formal engagement opportunities in public schools serves well to characterize the relationship between states and societies. While the relationship between parental involvement and students’ academic success has been thoroughly investigated, rarely has it been seen to indicate countries’ governing regimes. The researcher was curious to see whether and how does parents’ voice differ in different democracies. The hypothesis was that in mature regimes, institutional opportunities for formal parental engagement are plenty and parents are actively involved; while in young democracies there are less opportunities and the engagement is lower. The assumption was also that parental deliberation in expressing their dissatisfaction with schools differs across democracies: where it is more intense, there it translates to higher engagement. Parents’ informedness on relevant regulations and agendas was assumed to be equally average, and their demographic background to have similar effects on engagement. The comparative, most different systems design was employed where public middle schools last graders’ parents in Tartu, Estonia and in Huntsville, Alabama the United States served as a sample. The multidimensional study includes the theoretical review, country and community analyses, institutional analysis in terms of formal parental involvement, and parents’ survey. The findings revealed sizeable differences between parents’ engagement levels in Huntsville and Tartu. The results indicate passivity in both communities, while in Tartu the engagement seems to be alarmingly low. Furthermore, Tartu parents have much less institutional opportunities to engage. In the United States, multilevel efforts to engage parents are visible from local to federal level, in Estonia similar intentions seem to be missing and meaningful parental organizations do not exist. In terms of civic education there is much room for development in both countries. The road will be longer for a young democracy Estonia in transforming its institutional systems from formally democratic to inherently inclusive.