Conference Session

Software Engineering Projects

Collection

2011 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Massood Towhidnejad, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, Daytona Beach; Thomas B. Hilburn, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, Daytona Beach; Joseph E. Urban, Texas Tech University; Gregory W. Hislop, Drexel University; Richard Stansbury, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, Daytona Beach

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

, Texas Tech UniversityGregory W Hislop, Drexel UniversityRichard Stansbury, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical Univ., Daytona Beach Richard S. Stansbury is an assistant professor of computer science and computer engineering at Embry- Riddle Aeronautical University in Daytona Beach, FL. His current research interests include unmanned aircraft, certification issues for unmanned aircraft, mobile robotics, and applied artificial intelligence. At Embry-Riddle, his teaching activities include the capstone senior design course for computer and software engineers. He received his BS and MS degrees in Computer Engineering (2002 and 2004 respectively) and PhD in Computer Science (2007) from the University of Kansas. As a graduate research

Conference Session

Software Engineering Outreach: Industry, K-12

Collection

2013 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Massood Towhidnejad, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical Univ., Daytona Beach; Thomas B Hilburn, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical Univ., Daytona Beach; Richard E Fairley, Software and Systems Engineering Associates (S2EA)

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

GSwE2009 Core Body of Knowledge (CBOK).• An architectural framework that supports a flexible curriculum implementation by allowing each university to fashion a program guided by its own specialties and culture. GSwE2009 Curriculum ArchitectureThe student outcomes guided and controlled the development of both the structure and content ofthe GSwE2009 curriculum. The structure of the GSwE2009 curriculum is represented in thearchitectural model depicted in Figure 1. It identifies, via the CBOK, the minimal material thatall programs should include and makes provisions for each institution to develop its owndistinctive program(s). The curriculum architecture is compatible with existing master‘sprograms, for which course and curriculum data are

Conference Session

Pedagogical Approaches for Software Engineering

Collection

2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Heidi J.C. Ellis, Western New England University; Gregory W. Hislop, Drexel University; Josephine Sears Rodriguez, Western New England University; Ralph Morelli, Trinity College

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

. A closer look at the impact of the humanitarian aspect of student involvement with aproject will shed light on the impact of participation in HFOSS versus participation in FOSS.Acknowledgement Page 25.1192.11This material is based on work supported by the National Science Foundation under GrantsDUE-0958204, DUE-0940925, CISE- 0722137, and CISE-0930934. Any opinions, findingsand conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and donot necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation (NSF).Bibliography1. Software Engineering 2004 – Curriculum Guidelines for Undergraduate Degree Programs in

Conference Session

Software Engineering Constituent Committee Division Technical Session 1

Collection

2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Raymond Scott Pettit, Abilene Christian University; John D. Homer, Abilene Christian University ; Kayla Michelle McMurry, Abilene Christian University; Nevan Simone, Abilene Christian University; Susan A. Mengel, Texas Tech University

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

Paper ID #13887Are automated assessment tools helpful in programming courses?Mr. Raymond Scott Pettit, Abilene Christian University Raymond S. Pettit teaches courses in programming, artificial intelligence, objected oriented design, al- gorithms, theory of computation, and related subjects in ACU’s School of Information Technology and Computing. Prior to joining the ACU faculty, he spent twenty years in software development, research, and training the Air Force Research Lab and NASA’s Langley Research Center as well as private indus- try. His current research focuses on how automated assessment tools interact with student

Conference Session

Software Engineering Constituent Committee Division Technical Session 2

Collection

2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Gustavo Lopez, Universidad de Costa Rica; Alexandra Martinez, Universidad de Costa Rica

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

Education, 2014 Use of Microsoft Testing Tools to Teach Software Testing: An Experience ReportAbstractThis paper reports our experience using Microsoft testing tools in both graduate and under-graduate Software Testing courses for four semesters. In particular, we used Microsoft Visu-al Studio Ultimate 2010 (including Microsoft Test Manager 2010) and Microsoft TeamFoundation Server 2010, which together offer an integrated and comprehensive environmentfor the application lifecycle management, including test planning, authoring, automation,execution, tracking, monitoring and managing. We assessed our experience in using thetools from the student`s and the teacher’s points of view. Based on students’ feedback

Conference Session

Software Engineering Teaching Methods and Practice

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Yung-Hsiang Lu, Purdue University; Mark C Johnson, Purdue University

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

steps. All five teams passedthe qualification procedure and entered the final competition. Every team was encouragedto post the latest program (executable without the source code) on their web site in thefifteenth week so that the other teams could test and improve. The final competition washeld on the last day of the fifteenth week. The sixteenth week was used for the students toanalyze their competition results and to finish the final reports. Page 11.1223.7 player 1 player 2 spectator(s) network game serverFigure 2: Two

Conference Session

Software Engineering Teaching Methods and Practice

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Eric Durant, Milwaukee School of Engineering

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

presentation that counts for 5% of thecourse grade. In this presentation, they summarize the goals and context diagram beforepresenting a few functional and non-functional requirements, with an emphasis on how therequirements can be traced back to use cases, goals, etc.In an effort to increase the actual and apparent objectivity of the evaluation of the presentation,and to let students know, very specifically, how they will be evaluated, a group presentationrubric was developed [Appendix A]. This rubric was created by modifying one that the authordeveloped for senior design presentations and which has been in use for nearly two years. Threerequirements-specific sections were added: Use Case(s), Functional and Non-functionalRequirements, and Postmortem

Conference Session

Software Engineering Outreach: Industry, K-12

Collection

2013 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Clare McInerney, Lero - the Irish Software Engineering Research Centre; Mike Hinchey, Lero-the Irish Software Engineering Reseaach Centre

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

y recomm mend the Cybercamp to o yourfriends?” The resultts indicate that t 45% said “Yes” annd 18% saidd “Absolutelly” when assked if thewould reecommend the t camp too their friendds. We conssider this too be very poositive. Figure 2. Would you recom mp to your friends? mmend thee Cybercam We also asked the students s whether they would w attendd a follow-uup camp nexxt summer. The resultssare show wn in Figuree 3. Fiigure 3. Woould you atttend a folloow-up cam mp next sum

Conference Session

Software Engineering Projects

Collection

2011 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Thomas Reichlmayr, Rochester Institute of Technology

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

common terminologyand practices. A description of the Agile Software Development course project using Scrum asthe development methodology for Android phone application development follows. The reportconcludes with the challenges and opportunities when using Scrum for student teams in softwareengineering courses and capstone projects.Scrum BackgroundScrum is an incremental and iterative process framework that, while typically associated withsoftware development, can be used for managing projects in a variety of domains. Scrum as asoftware development framework was jointly developed and introduced by Jeff Sutherland andKen Schwaber [11] in the early 1990’s. It was inspired by Hirotaka Takeuchi and Ikujiro Nonakain a 1986 publication [12] that

Conference Session

SE Tools and Techniques

Collection

2011 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Robert W. Hasker, University of Wisconsin, Platteville; Mike Rowe, University of Wisconsin, Platteville

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

. Fowler. UML Distilled: A Brief Guide to the Standard Object Modeling Language. Addison-Wesley, 3rd edition, 2004. [7] R. France. A problem-oriented analysis of basic UML static requirements modeling concepts. In Proceedings of the 14th ACM SIGPLAN Conference on Object-oriented Programming, Systems, Languages, and Applications, pages 57–69. ACM Press, 1999. [8] P. Gagnon, F. Mokhati, and M. Badri. Applying model checking to concurrent UML models. Journal of Object Technology, 7(1):59–84, Jan. 2008. [9] M. Genero, M. Piattini, and C. Calero. A survey of metrics for UML class diagrams. Journal of Object Technology, 4(9):61–92, 2005.[10] S. Johnson. Lint, a C program checker. Technical Report 65, Bell Laboratories, Dec. 1977.[11

Conference Session

SE Curriculum and Projects

Collection

2010 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Kevin Gary, Arizona State University; Harry Koehnemann, Arizona State University

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

thatstudents are making progress toward achieving the learning outcomes of the capstone project,and by extension progress toward degree program outcomes? This is a serious and difficultquestion often raised as “how do I assess the individual working within the project team?” [2][7].But it is more than how to arrive at a grade. For the instructor, s/he wants to provide formativefeedback early and often during the project to help the student understand the larger context of aspecific issue and how it applies in the real world. For the student, gaining an awareness of thecause-and-effect of her/his choices and actions within a team, and how those judgments translateto the real world is important. For example, consider a project that is falling behind

Conference Session

SE Curriculum and Course Management

Collection

2008 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

J. Scott Hawker, Rochester Institute of Technology; Ian Webber, Rochester Institute of Technology; Michael Starenko, Rochester Institute of Technology; Jeremiah Parry-Hill, Rochester Institute of Technology

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

, Collaborate, Teach, Collaborate, Teach, Retrieve, Assemble, Learn, Understand, Learn, Understand, Find, Discover, View, Edit, Annotate Create, Discover Create, Discover Extract, Organize Interact with Shared Content Interact with Shared Content Interaction and Collaboration Workspaces (“Documents”) brevitatem, 2 3 Description and Organization absolutionem, paucitatem s f 2

Conference Session

Software Engineering Teaching Techniques

Collection

2009 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Clifton Kussmaul, Muhlenberg College

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

Stucki, D. J. 2000. Design early considered harmful: Graduated exposure to complexity and structure based on levels of cognitive development. SIGCSE Bulletin 32, 1, 75-79. 5. Budd, T. 2009. A course in open source development. Integrating FOSS into the Undergraduate Computing Curriculum, Free and Open Source Software (FOSS) Symposium (Chattanooga, TN, Mar 4, 2009). 6. Cooper, R. G. 2001. Winning at New Products: Accelerating the Process from Idea to Launch. Perseus Books. 7. Fincher, S., Petre, M., and Clark, M. 2001. Computer Science Project Work: Principles and Pragmatics. Springer. 8. Gannod, B., Koehnemann, H., and Gary, K. 2006. The Software Enterprise: Facilitating the industry

Conference Session

Software Engineering Teaching Methods and Practice

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Frank Tsui, Southern Polytechnic State University; Orlando Karam, Southern Polytechnic State University

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

. 4. Dutoit, A.H. and Bruegge, B. (1998) “Communication Metrics for Software Development,” IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, vol. 24 no. 8, August 1998, pp 615-628. 5. Kaushik, S. (2001) “A Study of Attributes of Communications as They Relate to Software Development,” Master’s Research Project, Southern Polytechnic State University, 2001. 6. Cockburn, A. (2000) “Selecting A Project’s Methodology,” IEEE Software, July/August 2000, pp 64-71. 7. Roberts, T.L., Cheney, P.H., Sweeney, P.D. (2002), “Project Characteristics and Group Communication: An Investigation,” IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, vol.45, no.2, June, 2002, pp 84 – 96. 8. Hirschheim, R. and Newman, M

Conference Session

Software Engineering Constituent Committee Division Technical Session 1

Collection

2016 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

J. Scott Hawker, Rochester Institute of Technology (COE); Robert Kuehl, Rochester Institute of Technology; Mehdi Mirakhorli

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

ofabstraction.Bibliography1. Bashar Nuseibeh. "Weaving together requirements and architectures." IEEE Computer 34.3 (2001): 115-119.2. Jane Cleland-Huang,., Hanmer, R. S., Supakkul, S., & Mirakhorli, M., "The twin peaks of requirements and architecture." IEEE Software, 30.2 (2013): 24-29.3. Matthias Galster, Mehdi Mirakhorli et.al. “Views on Software Engineering from the Twin Peaks of Requirements and Architecture,” ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes, September 2013 Volume 38 Number 5, pp. 40-424. Karl Wiegers and Joy Beatty, Software Requirements, 3rd Edition, Microsoft Press, 2013.5. Len Bass, Paul Clements and Rick Kazman, Software Architecture in Practice, 3rd Edition, Addison-Wesley, 2013.

Conference Session

Software Engineering Constituent Committee Division Technical Session 3

Collection

2016 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Vignesh Subbian, University of Cincinnati; Nan Niu, University of Cincinnati; Carla C. Purdy, University of Cincinnati

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

student team consisted of 3-4 members with at least one graduate student and onestudent in the computer science program. The goal of the team project was to provide anopportunity for students to apply some specific testing techniques or tools to one or more chosenSystem Under Test(s) (SUTs) of interest (either open-source software, or software that theydeveloped for other projects). The minimum project requirements were: (1) including bothtesting and QA components, although it was up to each team to decide on the proportion of bothcomponents, (2) developing and executing a test plan, even if testing was a small part of theproject, and (3) performing a manual software inspection for selected modules or the whole SUT. Students were encouraged to

Conference Session

Tools and Support for Software Education

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Barbara Gannod, Arizona State University; Kevin Gary, Arizona State University; Harry Koehnemann, Arizona State University

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

A should review the reqs and the product knowledge to put consider follow-up questions. together a useful questionnaire. 7. Subgroup A re-interviews subgroup B to ask • Perform Research (Y): We all follow-up questions. researched OWL-S and WSDL 8. Subgroup A should review the requirements specifications in order to better understand Stakeholder for validity. requests

Conference Session

Software Engineering Pedagogical Approaches

Collection

2013 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Joanna F. DeFranco, Pennsylvania State University; Colin J. Neill, Pennsylvania State University

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

, S. S., & Stanne, M. E. (1999). Effects of small-group learning on undergraduates in science, mathematics, engineering and technology: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 69(1), 21–51. 5. Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology, Inc., “Criteria for Accrediting Engineering Programs”, www.abet.org, ABET, 2012. 6. DeFranco, J.F. Collaborative Problem Solving and Program Development Model, Ph.D. Dissertation, New Jersey Institute of Technology, 2002 7. Jonassen, D., Marra, R., “Concept Mapping and Other Formalisms as Mindtools for representing knowledge”, Association for Learning Technology Journal, Volume 2, Number 1, 1994

Conference Session

Software Engineering Topics

Collection

2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Lakshmi Ramachandran; Edward F. Gehringer, North Carolina State University

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

clearly describe the changes to be made to the system? Table 3: Rubric used for submissions of technical articles or papers. 1 Do the pages stick to the topic? 2 Are there an appropriate number of links to outside sources? 3 Does the analysis clearly identify the ethical issues? 4 Do the pages treat differing viewpoints fairly? 5 Is the organization of page(s) logical? 6 Do the pages identify several issues that are important in learning about the topic?For the analysis in this paper we collected project review data from two software projects.Students were asked to evaluate the entire project based on rubrics in Tables 1 and 2, one rubricfor each software project. We follow an informal, blind review process, where

Conference Session

Software Engineering Constituent Committee Technical Session 2

Collection

2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Heidi J. C. Ellis, Western New England University; Gregory W Hislop, Drexel University (Eng. & Eng. Tech.); Sarah Monisha Pulimood, The College of New Jersey; Becka Morgan, Western Oregon University; Ben Coleman, Moravian College

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

University. His scholarly interests span computing education research, information technology for teaching and learning, and software engineering. Prior to coming to Drexel, Dr. Hislop spent eighteen years working in government and industry where his efforts included software development and support, technology planning and evaluation, and development and delivery of technical education.Dr. Sarah Monisha Pulimood, The College of New Jersey S. Monisha Pulimood is on the faculty of the Department of Computer Science at The College of New Jersey. She has been successfully incorporating immersive learning experiences and multidisciplinary collaborative projects into her courses for several years; has published on undergraduate

Conference Session

Tools and Support for Software Education

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

J. Scott Hawker, Rochester Institute of Technology

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

absolutionem, paucitatem s f 2 3 brevitatem, absolutionem, s f paucitatem Views Content Metadata (descriptions, Ontologies brevitatem, 2 3 absolutionem, subject headings, (taxonomies, controlled paucitatem s f provenance, rights, quality

Conference Session

Software Engineering Constituent Committee Division Technical Session 2

Collection

2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Janusz Zalewski, Florida Gulf Coast University; Fernando Garcia Gonzalez, Florida Gulf Coast University

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

): for example temperature human and robotics s(t) = s0 + v*t + a*t2/2 regulation in mammals. movements. How to use the software Using feedback theory Use of simulators to(Eductional) solution and for what in Instructional Design. teach about kinematicsTechnology reasons? of robotic movement. Programming solution: Thermostat as a Software development(Software) r1 = (–b+sqrt(Δ)) / (2*a) temperature controller for robot movementEngineering r1 = (–b–sqrt(Δ)) / (2*a) based on feedback

Conference Session

SE Tools and Techniques

Collection

2011 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Shane Markstrum, Bucknell University; Gary M. Haggard, Bucknell University

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

. Haggard, J. Schlipf, S. Whitesides. Discrete Mathematics for Computer Science. Brooks Cole Publ.,2007.[6] S. Hakimi. On the realizability of a set of integers as degrees of the vertices of a graph. J. SIAM Appl. Math. 10 (1962), 496-506.[7] F. Harary. Graph Theory. Addison Wesley Publ., 1969.[8] C. Mawata. Math Cove. http://www.mathcove.net/petersen/lessons/index, 1998.[9] D. Medani, G. Haggard, C. Bassett, P. Koch, N. Lampert, T. Medlock, S. Pierce, R. Smith, A. Yehl. Graph works - pilot graph theory visualization tool. In SOFTVIS’10: Proceedings of the 5th International Symposium on Software Visualization. Salt Lake City, UT, October 2010.[10] T. Naps, J. Eagan, L. Norton. JHAVE—An environment to actively engage students in web-based

Conference Session

Tools and Support for Software Education

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Yung-Hsiang Lu, Purdue University; Evan Zelkowitz, Purdue University; Mark C Johnson, Purdue University

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

study discovers that up to 72% errors can be attributedto design errors of single components. There is not clear correlation between the sizes ofmodules and the error density. Shen et al.14 analyze software to determine how to allocateresources for testing. Their study compares five products written in Pascal, PL/S, and as-sembly. They find that smaller modules do not necessarily have lower error density. Errordensity can be a size-normalized indication of program quality for only the modules withmore than 500 lines of codes. Thus, they conclude that error density is not an effective way Page 11.1057.4to measure quality. Withrow16 analyzes

Conference Session

Accreditation and Assessment in SE Programs

Collection

2011 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Janet E. Burge, Miami University; Paul V. Anderson, Miami University, Ohio; Michael Carter, North Carolina State University; Gerald C. Gannod, Miami University; Mladen A. Vouk, North Carolina State University

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

Conference Session

Software Engineering Course Content

Collection

2008 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Bruce Maxim, University of Michigan - Dearborn

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education (Capprica, Portugal, June, 2005), ACM Press, New York, NY, 2005, 123-127.13. Rabin, S. Introduction to Game Development, Charles Rivers Media, Hingham, MA, 2005.14. Rollings, A. and Morris, D. Game Architecture and Design, New Riders, Indianapolis, IN, 2004.15. Rouse, R. Game Design: Theory and Practice, Wordware, Plano, TX, 2001.16. International Game Developers Association Curriculum Framework, (6 September 2005)17. Maxim, B. R., Software Requirements Analysis and Design, NIIT, Atlanta, GA 2004.18. Michael, D. and Chen, S. Serious Games: Games that Educate, Train, and Inform, Thomson Course Technology, Indianapolis, IN, 2006.19. Maxim, B. R. and Akingbehin, K. Experiences in

Conference Session

Software Engineering Curriculum Support

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Sheryl Duggins, Southern Polytechnic State University

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

particularly useful, was described. Finally both the status ofour accreditation efforts and the benefits we have received were discussed.References[1] Duggins, Sheryl (2002) “Process Teaching and Learning in Engineering Education”, in Proceedings of the 2002 American Society for Engineering Education, Montreal, Canada, June 2002.[2] Wheeler, S. & Duggins, S. (1998) “Improving Software Quality”, in Proceedings of the Southeastern ACM Conference, Marietta, GA, April 1998, pp. 300-309, ACM, New York, NY.[3] Deming, W. E. (1986) Out of the Crisis, M.I.T., Center for Advanced Engineering Studies, Cambridge, MA.[4] Paulk, Mark C. et.al. (1993) “Capability Maturity Model for Software, Version 1.1”, Software Engineering Institute Technical Report

Conference Session

Software Engineering Topics

Collection

2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

W. Eric Wong, University of Texas, Dallas

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

have the flexibility toeither follow the suggested teaching outline or use their own discretion to determine which of thetopics are suitable, fine-tuning the course materials to make them more accessible andunderstandable to their students. This also increases the effectiveness of the modules andachieving the desired learning outcomes.Seven Course ModulesThe following is a description of seven course modules that are to serve as the instructionalmaterials for teaching software testing in multiple CS and SE undergraduate courses. Alsoexplained is the rationale behind the choice and design of each module, and the course(s) itmight apply to.Module 1 – Software Testing Fundamentals: The must-knows of software testingThis module covers concepts

Conference Session

Software Engineering Constituent Committee Division Technical Session 2

Collection

2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Vignesh Subbian, University of Cincinnati; Carla C. Purdy, University of Cincinnati

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

? In what language(s) did you program?1.2. What OOP concepts did you use while programming at work? Give specific examples. What software-related concept(s) did you realize during the course of a specific project? (In other words, you knew the concept theoretically, but actually applied it while working on the project). What “best” programming practices did you follow/learn?1.3. Explain your thought process during a typical programming session (This is an open-ended question)Examination:2.2. Explain, with examples, OOP concepts and design patterns that you have used in this class.Reflection: Similar to the reflection section in Table I UnLecture IV: Software Testing and Code Maintenance In this session, students with software

Conference Session

Software Engineering Pedagogical Approaches

Collection

2013 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Jon A Preston, Southern Polytechnic State University; Sushil Acharya, Robert Morris University

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

engineering students. Additionally, he has spoken at two recent NSF-sponsored workshops on gaming in engineering and computer science education and how to vertically integrate student teams in games for learning projects.Dr. Sushil Acharya, Robert Morris University Sushil Acharya, D.Eng., Associate Professor of Software Engineering joined Robert Morris University in spring of 2005 after serving 15 years in the Software Industry. With US Airways Acharya was re- sponsible for creating a Data Warehouse conceptual design and using advance Data Mining Tools for performance improvement. With i2 Technologies he worked on i2’s Data Mining product ”Knowledge Discover Framework” and at CEERD (Thailand) he was the product manager of