Software requirements practices: some real data

Laplante, Phil; Neill, Colin J.; Jacobs, Corinna

doi:10.1109/sew.2002.1199458

Cited by 5 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We looked at the respondent's position and project duration (shown in Figures 7a and 7b) following questions raised by the audience when we presented preliminary results from this study at the 27th NASA/IEEE Software Engineering Workshop. 15 We can see that the managerial and technical staff generally had very similar perceptions regarding the end products' ease of use and suitability to customers. They had reasonably similar perceptions regarding the completion of projects on time and within budget, although the technical staff seemed slightly less positive about these.…”

Section: Project Success Indicatorsmentioning

confidence: 88%

Requirements engineering: The state of the practice

2003

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Project Success Indicatorsmentioning

confidence: 88%

Requirements engineering: The state of the practice

2003

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…It has been over 20 years since the need to standardize visual languages has been identified in software engineering [3]. Albeit natural language remains the most widely used form of documenting software engineering artifacts [14,18,19], conceptual models and visual notations are gaining importance for academia [4] and industry [19,22]. In fact, conceptual models play a significant role in aligning stakeholder needs for a system under development, guide requirements elicitation, negotiation, and validation, help in conceiving system architectures, enable code generation, and allow for formal verification [22].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

On the Syntactic, Semantic, and Pragmatic Quality of Students’ Conceptual Models

MacCreery¹,

Tenbergen

2019

Proceedings of the Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Visual notations and conceptual models, such as ER diagrams or UML diagrams aid in aligning stakeholder needs, defining and prioritizing processes and goals for the system under development, serve as a reference for requirements elicitation, negotiation, and enable validation as well as verification of artifacts. With such a ubiquitous presence and paramount importance, conceptual models have therefore been introduced in software engineering curricula far and wide. However, it is exceedingly difficult to teach and learn conceptual modeling. Not only does it require educators to instruct notation and syntax of the visual language, but also semantic intricacies. Similarly, students struggle with what differentiates a "good" conceptual model from an inadequate one, how to use conceptual models of different types in conjunction with one another in a meaningful way, or simply how to avoid ambiguity and vagueness. In this paper, we discuss the syntactic, semantic, and pragmatic quality of conceptual models in four courses from an undergraduate software engineering program. It is not our aim to present empirically rigorous results, but to contribute to the body of knowledge on the quality of typical novices' conceptual models. We seek to foster discussion in the community and present observations and results for comparison.

show abstract