{"title":"课程设计:方法论和生命周期","authors":"G. Roy","doi":"10.1109/SEEP.1996.534039","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"While it can be generally accepted that curriculum design is a key issue in software engineering education it is not so clear what constitutes its essential ingredients and to what extent specific methods and process models should play in its design. The tasks set for this workshop included: what degree of exposure to various methodologies is necessary for student understanding; is more necessarily better; are life cycle models adequate process representations; and is programming overemphasized.","PeriodicalId":416862,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings 1996 International Conference Software Engineering: Education and Practice","volume":"82 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1996-01-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Curriculum design: methodologies and life cycles\",\"authors\":\"G. Roy\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/SEEP.1996.534039\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"While it can be generally accepted that curriculum design is a key issue in software engineering education it is not so clear what constitutes its essential ingredients and to what extent specific methods and process models should play in its design. The tasks set for this workshop included: what degree of exposure to various methodologies is necessary for student understanding; is more necessarily better; are life cycle models adequate process representations; and is programming overemphasized.\",\"PeriodicalId\":416862,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Proceedings 1996 International Conference Software Engineering: Education and Practice\",\"volume\":\"82 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1996-01-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Proceedings 1996 International Conference Software Engineering: Education and Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/SEEP.1996.534039\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings 1996 International Conference Software Engineering: Education and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/SEEP.1996.534039","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
While it can be generally accepted that curriculum design is a key issue in software engineering education it is not so clear what constitutes its essential ingredients and to what extent specific methods and process models should play in its design. The tasks set for this workshop included: what degree of exposure to various methodologies is necessary for student understanding; is more necessarily better; are life cycle models adequate process representations; and is programming overemphasized.