Software Engineering Education Needs More Engineering

To what extent is “software engineering” really “engineering” as this term is commonly understood? A hallmark of the products of the traditional engineering disciplines is trustworthiness based on dependability. But in his keynote presentation at ICSE 2006 Barry Boehm pointed out that individuals’, systems’, and peoples’ dependency on software is becoming increasingly critical, yet that dependability is generally not the top priority for software intensive system producers. Continuing in an uncharacteristic pessimistic vein, Professor Boehm said that this situation will likely continue until a major software-induced system catastrophe similar in impact to the 9/11 World Trade Center catastrophe stimulates action toward establishing accountability for software dependability. He predicts that it is highly likely that such a software-induced catastrophe will occur between now and 2025. It is widely understood that software, i.e., computer programs, are intrinsically different from traditionally engineered products, but in one aspect they are identical: the extent to which the well-being of individuals, organizations, and society in general increasingly depend on software. As wardens of the future through our mentoring of the next generation of software developers, we believe that it is our responsibility to at least address Professor Boehm’s predicted catastrophe. Traditional engineering has, and continually addresses its social responsibility through the evolution of the education, practice, and professional certification/licensing of professional engineers. To be included in the fraternity of professional engineers, software engineering must do the same. To get a rough idea of where software engineering currently stands on some of these issues we conducted two surveys. Our main survey was sent to software engineering academics in the U.S., Canada, and Australia. Among other items it sought detail information on their software engineering programs. Our auxiliary survey was sent to U.S. engineering institutions to get some idea about how software engineering programs compared with those in established engineering disciplines of Civil, Electrical, and Mechanical Engineering. Summaries of our findings can be found in the last two sections of our paper.

Effects of Standard Labor-Wear on Swimming and Treading Water

We tested the hypothesis that occupational clothing would impair performance during swimming. The sub questions included: (1) Will the standard work wear of a railway worker or laborer impede swimming ability? (2) Will this clothing impact the individual’s ability to tread water? We addressed the research questions with three hypotheses. Analysis showed statistically significant p-values and all three null hypotheses were rejected in favor of the three research hypotheses, showing strong evidence that standard labor wear had adverse effects on 11.43 meter/12.5 yard swim time, water treading time and rate of perceived exertion (RPE) during water treading. The mean swim time more than doubled when the subjects wore standard labor-wear and their average rate of perceived exertion increased from 11.6 in standard swim wear to 17.1 in standard laborwear. It may be beneficial for those workers who work near water to be exposed to educational programs that allow in-water experiences so they develop an understanding of their abilities in, and respect for, the water.