Notice: this Wiki will be going read only early in 2024 and edits will no longer be possible. Please see: https://gitlab.eclipse.org/eclipsefdn/helpdesk/-/wikis/Wiki-shutdown-plan for the plan.
Difference between revisions of "RMF/Teaching"
| Line 28: | Line 28: | ||
Systems Engineering or Requirements Engineering? A number of participants pointed out that RE as a stand-alone discipline is losing importance in favor of Systems Engineering, of which RE is a sub-discipline. Therefore, at a minimum we should look into RE in the context of overall SE. | Systems Engineering or Requirements Engineering? A number of participants pointed out that RE as a stand-alone discipline is losing importance in favor of Systems Engineering, of which RE is a sub-discipline. Therefore, at a minimum we should look into RE in the context of overall SE. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Next, the scope is clearly operational, not theoretical. The theory (methodology, process), should be given and can maybe be covered elsewhere. | ||
=== What is the means? === | === What is the means? === | ||
Revision as of 10:22, 13 July 2014
Requirements Management and Engineering (RE&M) is taught, both in industry and academia. The availability of open source RE-tools, and the RMF-based (fmStudio)[1] in particular, created some interest for using those tools for teaching.
During the initial discussions, two things became clear:
- RM&E cannot be taught without taking the wider systems engineering (SE) context into account. In other words, RM&E must be considered a subdiscipline of SE, and must be treated that way.
- A tool must follow the process/methodology, not the other way around. Therefore, the foundation for this effort must be a solid, leightweight SE develpment process that is appropriate for teaching and relevant in practice.
Contents
Objectives
- Collaboration of Industry, Service Providers and Academia: These three groups can benefit vastly from each other: Industry relies on academia for skilled labor, while service provider deliver expertise to industry in the form of knowledge (consultants) and tools (vendors).
- Standardization of basic RE (or SE) skills: Preparation of students with a basic set of skills that is relevant in industry, so employers know what to expect.
- Teaching Materials: Ideally, one outcome of this effort is a set of adaptable teaching materials.
Ideas
- Examples, Exercises, etc. (Herrmann) (Beispiel-Lastenhefte für die Lehre, Übungen und Musterlösungen.)
- Create a mind map, to understand the problem we're trying to solve (Daniel Gross)
- use REQB-Syllabus as a starting point
Join the Discussion
This discussion was initiated via email - a bad place to keep a conversation going. For the time being, we will start a new discussion thread on LinkedIn.
Open Questions
What is the Scope?
Systems Engineering or Requirements Engineering? A number of participants pointed out that RE as a stand-alone discipline is losing importance in favor of Systems Engineering, of which RE is a sub-discipline. Therefore, at a minimum we should look into RE in the context of overall SE.
Next, the scope is clearly operational, not theoretical. The theory (methodology, process), should be given and can maybe be covered elsewhere.
What is the means?
What can we produce that provides value for this group? Suggestions include:
- Templates (process-specific, for specific tools)
- Case Studies (with artifacts for specific tols)
- Tutorials (process-specific step-by-step instructions, for specific tools)
- Slides (for teaching)
- Reference Materials (e.g. tool-specific adaptation of a process)
- Project (high level description of a goal with instructions on how to realize it)
What process/methodology would be suitable?
Before answering this question, we need to understand the scope. We should look for a slim-lightweight process for MBSE and focus on the RE-part of it.
Interested Parties
- Formal Mind GmbH (Michael Jastram)
- Herrmann & Ehrlich (Andrea Herrmann)
- REArch Int. (Dusko Jovanovic)
- Daniel Gross
- Paul Jorgensen (University in Michigan)