Conference Session

Software Engineering Teaching Techniques

Collection

2009 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

J. Scott Hawker, Rochester Institute of Technology

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

AC 2009-2001: A SOFTWARE PROCESS ENGINEERING COURSEJ. Scott Hawker, Rochester Institute of Technology Dr. Hawker graduated with a B.S. and M.S. in Electrical Engineering from Texas Tech University in Lubbock, Texas, in 1981 and 1982, respectively. He graduated with a Ph.D. in Electrical Engineering from Lehigh University in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, in 1990. He has over 15 years of industry experience developing large-scale, multi-agent information and control systems for diverse applications including manufacturing, combat pilot decision support and mission management, robotics, and surveillance. In these areas, he developed and applied technologies including distributed

Conference Session

Pedagogical Approaches for Software Engineering

Collection

2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Kevin A. Gary, Arizona State University, Polytechnic; Yegeneswari Nagappan, Unicon, Inc.; Supreet Verma, Delasoft, Inc.; Russell J. Branaghan, Arizona State University

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

each data set (4 maps for the juniors, 3 maps for the seniors). These alumni had 2-4 years of professional experience. iv. Identification information was anonymized. b. The evaluator was asked to ordinal rank each data set using an insertion sort-like process. The evaluator was shown maps in a random order, one per screen at a time, and provided a tool to place it in a ranked list.This protocol was designed to measure the knowledge organization trajectory. As a single dataset included both the pre and post map, with the hypothesis that a maturing trajectory ofknowledge organization would be shown by each student’s post map being ranked higher thanher/his pre map. Of course the protocol design is not

Conference Session

SE Curriculum and Course Management

Collection

2008 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Joseph Clifton, University of Wisconsin-Platteville

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

AC 2008-927: A SOFTWARE ENGINEERING TOOL FOR MANAGING COURSEPROJECTSJoseph Clifton, University of Wisconsin-Platteville Joseph M. Clifton is a Professor in the Department of Computer Science and Software Engineering at the University of Wisconsin – Platteville. He has a Ph.D. from Iowa State University. His interests include software engineering, real-time embedded systems, and software engineering education. Page 13.105.1© American Society for Engineering Education, 2008 A Software Engineering Tool for Managing Course ProjectsAbstractIn the fall of 2006 and spring of 2007, the students in our

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

Paper ID #16525A Merged Software Requirements and Architecture CourseDr. J. Scott Hawker, Rochester Institute of Technology (COE) Dr. Hawker graduated with a B.S. and M.S. in Electrical Engineering from Texas Tech University in Lub- bock, Texas, in 1981 and 1982, respectively. He graduated with a Ph.D. in Electrical Engineering from Lehigh University in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, in 1990. He has over 15 years of industry experience developing large-scale, multi-agent information and control systems for diverse applications including manufacturing, combat pilot decision support and mission management, robotics, and

Conference Session

Software Engineering Topics

Collection

2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Walter W. Schilling Jr., Milwaukee School of Engineering; Eric Durant, Milwaukee School of Engineering

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

AC 2012-4501: TEACHING SOFTWARE SECURITY: A MULTI-DISCIPLINARYAPPROACHDr. Walter W. Schilling Jr., Milwaukee School of Engineering Walter Schilling is an Assistant Professor in the Software Engineering program at the Milwaukee School of Engineering in Milwaukee, Wis. He received his B.S.E.E. from Ohio Northern University and M.S.E.S. and Ph.D. from the University of Toledo. He worked for Ford Motor Company and Visteon as an Embed- ded Software Engineer for several years prior to returning for doctoral work. He has spent time at NASA Glenn Research Center in Cleveland, Ohio, and consulted for multiple embedded systems companies in the Midwest. In addition to one U.S. patent, Schilling has numerous publications in

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

of developing the outcomes and course materials for this project, wehave encountered a number of challenges that pose potential risks for institutions that intendto adopt our work. In this section we identify those risks, while in the next section weprovide a number of strategies that serve to mitigate the risks. The challenges we haveencountered in implementing a more communication-intensive curriculum can be groupedinto four non-exclusive categories: a) Curricular issues, b) Instructional issues, c) Logistical issues, and d) Motivational issues.Curricular issues are primarily concerned with identifying how to best incorporatecommunication skills into a larger degree program. The biggest issue is the add/subtractproblem

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

Page 26.230.6give students feedback regarding the correct running of their program. In his study, 79 studentswere in courses using Athene, and 46 students were in non-Athene courses. In the Athene-courses, 71% of the students finished with a grade high enough to move on to the next course(grade of A, B, or C), whereas in the non-Athene course, only 46% of the students scored highenough to move on. One variable that was not held constant across the two different coursegroups was the number of assignments given. A major goal of Towell’s was making it possibleto increase the number of assignments by decreasing the need for manual grading. With the useof the AAT, students were given 75 assignments, while the non-AAT group were given only 15.In

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

2006-1788: THE COLLABORATIVE ENOTEBOOK: A COLLABORATIVELEARNING AND KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT TESTBEDJ. Scott Hawker, Rochester Institute of Technology Dr. Hawker is an Assistant Professor of Software Engineering at Rochester Institute of Technology. He graduated with a B.S. and M.S. in Electrical Engineering from Texas Tech University in Lubbock, Texas, in 1981 and 1982, respectively. He graduated with a Ph.D. in Electrical Engineering from Lehigh University in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, in 1990. He has over 15 years of industry experience developing large-scale, multi-agent information and control systems for diverse applications including manufacturing (at Motorola Semiconductor Products

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

AC 2008-1750: PRELIMINARY EXPERIENCE OF USING A LEARNING ANDKNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM FOR AN SE-1 COURSEJ. Scott Hawker, Rochester Institute of Technology Dr. Hawker is an Assistant Professor of Software Engineering at the Rochester Institute of Technology (RIT). He graduated with a B.S. and M.S. in Electrical Engineering from Texas Tech University. He graduated with a Ph.D. in Electrical Engineering from Lehigh University. He has over 15 years of industry experience developing large-scale, multi-agent information and control systems for diverse applications including manufacturing, combat pilot mission decision support, robotics, and surveillance. In these areas, he developed and

Conference Session

Software Engineering Constituent Committee Division Technical Session 3

Collection

2016 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Suhas Xavier, Arizona State University; Christian Murphy, Arizona State University; Kevin A Gary, Arizona State University

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

Paper ID #15728Work in Progress: A Student Activity Dashboard for Ensuring Project-basedLearning ComplianceSuhas Xavier, Arizona State UniversityChristian Murphy, Arizona State UniversityDr. Kevin A Gary, Arizona State University Dr. Gary is an Associate Professor in the School of Computing, Informatics, and Decision Systems Engineering of the Ira A. Fulton Schools of Engineering at Arizona State University. His interests are broad and deep in all areas of the professorate: research, teaching, and service. His research interests are in software engineering education, web & mobile applications (specifically mHealth

Conference Session

Tools and Support for Software Education

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Michael Lutz, Rochester Institute of Technology

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

elementsin the underlying set.The declaration of a relation within a signature means the relation consists of tuples whose firstelement is an atom from the signature’s underlying set. Thus known is a binary relation mappingeach book to those persons recorded in the book, and dates is a ternary relation, whose tuplesconsist of a book, a person known in that book, and that person’s birthday. Or at least that’s whatwe intend: without further constraints there is nothing to ensure the persons known in a book areexactly those whose dates are recorded.To create the needed constraints we add “facts” – predicates that must hold in any legal state ofthe system. In our case, we can state our constraint in one fact:fact { all b : BirthdayBook | b.known

Conference Session

SE Curriculum and Projects

Collection

2010 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

James Long, Oregon Institute of Technology

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

requirements fit nicely into theoutsourcing assignment, bringing global communications and offshore teamwork into thelearning environment.Course Description for Outsourcing Project ApplicationThe outsourcing assignment is given in the third term of the third year (junior year) of theprogram. The third year requires students to take a three term sequence of courses. In these Page 15.934.4courses, students develop and deploy a large scale software project for a real-world client whilelearning team based software skills in: a. Requirements Gathering b. Functional Architecture c. Use Case Analysis d. Functional to Object Mapping through Sequence

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

engineering was taught using both collaboration and competition. In this course,students collaborated in two ways. First, they worked with their teammates in the projects. Page 11.1223.2Second, each team had representatives to form three cross-team committees. (a) The stan-dard committee defined the common interface and wrote the library so that the programbuilt by each team could compete. (b) The quality committee wrote testing code that usedthe standard interface. Any team that failed the tests would be disqualified from the finalcompetition. (c) The contest committee decided the competition rules and wrote the codeto decide the winner in each game. The

Conference Session

Software Engineering Constituent Committee Division Technical Session 1

Collection

2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

J. Jenny Li, Kean University; Patricia Morreale, Kean University

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

able to compare their outcomes. Through the comparison study, they will beable to better understand and appreciate software engineering testing concepts. Hopefully whenthey see the benefit, they will be more likely to take high level software engineering courses atthe later stage of their study. Because the testing was only introduced to the two classes with IDE experience, we wereable to collect more data points to show students’ progress after the learning of the testingconcept. We first had students working on a project, A, without any discussion of testingconcepts and we then introduced the concept of basic testing, followed by their work on anotherproject, B. 3.1 Four Measurements From each project, we collected the following

Conference Session

Software Engineering Topics

Collection

2007 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Marcelo Jenkins, University of Costa Rica

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

(Comprehension) Yes 3. Organizational and process benchmarking (Analysis) Yes B. Standards, specifications, and models. Identify and use software process and assessment Yes models, including ISO 9001, ISO 15504, IEEE software standards, IEEE/EIA 12207, SEI Capability Maturity Model Integrated (CMMI), etc., in a variety of situations. (Application) C. Leadership tools and skills No D. Ethical conduct and professional development No II

Conference Session

Software Engineering Teaching Techniques

Collection

2009 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Janusz Zalewski, Florida Gulf Coast University; Andrew Kornecki, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University; Jerzy Nogiec, Fermi National Accelerator Lab

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

learning process, a basic series of laboratory experiments to be performed bythe students has been created. The sequence addresses the issues of timing, multi-tasking, sharedresources and locking, communication, signals and interrupts, and scheduling. As the operatingsystem plays an important role in developing real-time software, the experiments focus on usingthe kernel primitives by the application programs. The experiments were designed to becompleted by a student during a single semester, or during a course of independent study, whilelearning the appropriate theory component in the classroom. Each lab experiment contains the following sections: a) introduction, b) objectives, c)description, d) example program, e) procedures, f) follow-on

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

algorithm visualizations. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin 32 (2000), 109-113.[11] R. Baecker. Sorting Out SORTING: A Case Study for Teaching Software Visualization in Computer Science, in: J. T. Stasko, M. H. Brown, and B. A. Price, editors. Software Visualization, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1997[12] L. Stern, L. Naish, H. Sondergaard. Algorithms in Action. http://www.csse.monash.edu.au/˜dwa/Animations/index.html, 2000. Page 22.1621.14[13] B. Thompson, D. J. Pearce, C. Anslow, G. Haggard. Visualizing the computation tree of the Tutte polynomial. In SOFTVIS’08: Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Software Visualization. Herrsching

Conference Session

Software Engineering Course Content

Collection

2008 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Bruce Maxim, University of Michigan - Dearborn

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

: Final report Section HeadingsSection Heading 1 Cover Page 2 Acknowledgments 3 Table of Contents 4 Introduction/Overview 5 Requirements/Analysis Model 6 Hardware/Software Design 7 Implementation Details 8 Testing/SQA 9 Future Maintenance Suggestions 10 Client Acceptance Letter 11 References & Bibliography 12 Appendix A - User Manual 13 Appendix B - Program Listing, Sample Output, Diskette 14 Appendix C - Team Member Resumes 15 Appendix D - Project Plan & Log Book 16 Appendix E - Project Demo Notes

Conference Session

Software Engineering Constituent Committee Division Technical Session 3

Collection

2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Robert W. Hasker, Milwaukee School of Engineering; Yan Shi, University of Wisconsin - Platteville

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

environments. In 29th EUROMICRO Conference 2003, New Waves in System Architecture, pages 267–272, Belek-Antalya, Turkey, Sept. 2003. IEEE Computer Society. [3] G. Booch, J. Rumbaugh, and I. Jacobson. The Unified Modeling Language User Guide. Addison-Wesley, 1999. [4] W. Coelho and G. Murphy. ClassCompass: A software design mentoring system. ACM Journal on Educational Resources in Computing, 7(1):Article 2, Mar. 2007. [5] C. R. B. de Souza, H. L. R. Oliveira, C. R. P. da Rocha, K. M. Gonc¸alves, and D. F. Redmiles. Using critiquing systems for inconsistency detection in software engineering models. In SEKE, pages 196–203, 2003. [6] A. Egyed. UML/Analyzer: A tool for the instant consistency checking of UML models. In Proceedings

Conference Session

Software Engineering Curriculum Components

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Donald Bagert, Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

• Jim McDonald, Monmouth University • Massood Towhid Nejad, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University (Florida) References1. ABET Engineering Accreditation Commission. Criteria for Accrediting Engineering Programs, ABET, Inc., Baltimore, Maryland, USA, 17 November 2004. Page 11.1325.72. Ardis, Mark A. and Ford, Gary A., 1989 SEI Report on Graduate Software Engineering Education, Carnegie Mellon TR CMU/SEI-89-TR-21, June 1989.3. Bagert, Donald J.; Hilburn, Thomas B.; Hislop, Greg; Lutz, Michael; McCracken, Michael and Mengel, Susan., Guidelines for Software Engineering

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

Reflective Learning1. Interviews 1. Split the team into 2 pairs of 2 people, • Interviews (Y)2. Group Meetings subgroups “A” and “B”… • Group Meetings (Y): XXX met3. Brainstorming 2. Subgroup A should read Domain with the customer and his4. Storyboarding Description 1 and formulate interview team...This method proved to5. Ethnography methods and questions. be more useful to the customers6. Questionnaires than the analyst, allowing them7. Domain research 3. Subgroup B assigns 1 person the role “User” to organize their

Conference Session

Software Engineering Curriculum Components

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Michael Lutz, Rochester Institute of Technology; Gregory Hislop, Drexel University; Mark Sebern, Milwaukee School of Engineering

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

the Software Engineering Body ofKnowledge project (SWEBOK) 1 was released, so SWEBOK provided the initial framework forthe project. The module categories in the prototype web site – design, process, quality, andrequirements – corresponded directly to major focus areas of SWEBOK. Page 11.1125.2More recently, the Computing Curriculum in Software Engineering (SE 2004) 2 became availableand influenced the development of the SWENET project. SE 2004 gave rise to a more detailedbody of knowledge for education. This software engineering education body of knowledge (orSEEK) had the advantages of (a) relating directly to the mission of SWENET, and (b

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

presentations. All necessary clarifications orreclassifications of data were resolved during these weekly status presentations.Each software project team was graded on the basis of the following criteria. - meeting the functional requirements - meeting the schedule (both intermediate and final) - monitoring the project effectivelyThe teams may earn similar letter grade such as B, but they were also given numericalgrades to retain a finer level of granularity. Project team success is defined in terms of theproject team grade, and the numerical grade served as the measuring scale for success.The following are the specific questions that we will address in this paper. 1. Does the amount of communications affect

Conference Session

Software Engineering Constituent Committee Division Technical Session 1

Collection

2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Tanmay Bhowmik, Mississippi State University; Nan Niu, Mississippi State University; Donna Reese, Mississippi State University

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

students and the professionals. The metric used here is the F2 measure commonlyadopted in traceability research.5, 8, 11 Formally, let A be the answer set of correct traceabilitylinks and B be the set of links submitted by the human. Then, recall is R = (|A ∩ B|)/(|A|),and precision is P = (|A ∩ B|)/(|B|). F2 represents a harmonic mean of R and P and is de-fined as F2 = (5 · R · P )/(4 · P + R). Note that the F2 measure weights recall (R) twice asmuch as precision (P ). This is because in automated tracing, it is easier to remove incorrectlinks than to find missing links.11To answer RQ2, we perform qualitative analysis by collecting a hybrid of data. Our main datasources are observations and notes taken during all the tracing sessions, coding and

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

Software Engineering Teaching Techniques

Collection

2009 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Salamah Salamah, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, Daytona Beach; Steve Roach, University of Texas, El Paso; Omar Ochoa, University of Texas, El Paso; Veronica Medina, University of Texas, El Paso; Ann Gates, University of Texas, El Paso

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

propositions 4 Figure 2. Scopes in SPS [19]for L, R, P, and Q. For example, the property “Request (E) always triggers Acknowledgment(A), between Beginning of execution (B) and System shutdown (N)”, can be described by theS Responds to P pattern within the Between Q and R scope. The LTL formula for the patternand scope combination as provided by the SPS website is:✷((Q ∧ (¬R) ∧ R) → (P → ((¬R)U (S ∧ ¬R)))U R).Using the user’s propositions E, N, A, and B, the resulting LTL specification is:✷((B ∧ (¬N ) ∧ N ) → (E → ((¬N )U (A ∧ ¬N )))U N ). Tools such as the Property Elicitation (Propel) [17] and the Property Specification (Prospec)[12, 13] build on SPS by completely

Conference Session

Software Engineering Constituent Committee Technical Session 2

Collection

2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Temesghen Kahsai , Carnegie Mellon University; Liam O'Reilly, Swansea University; Markus Roggenbach, Swansea University

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

students’ limited programming experience, students are critical ofSECs and require convincing arguments that the taught SECs are relevant.Our pedagogical approach to address these challenges is (a) to run a lab-centered course and(b) to let students see the “real thing” as often as possible.To (a): Lectures introduce concepts and ideas that can later be experienced in carefullydesigned lab sessions. In the labs, we focus on SECs rather than programming by providingstudents with Java programs to be manipulated with tools. Topics covered include: codecommenting with Javadoc, coding standards with Checkstyle, debugging in Eclipse,automated testing with JUnit, test coverage with Emma, automated GUI testing usingsoftware robots, and extreme programming

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

developed forthe final report [Appendix B]. It was developed from first principles for a requirements finalreport. As with the previous rubric, it was provided to students well in advance of the Page 11.332.7assignment due date so that they could focus their work on what the instructors consideredimportant. And, again, faculty using the rubric have the option of establishing a direct mappingof rubric scores to assignment scores, potentially easing their grading process. The facultymember who used this new rubric during the 2005–2006 offering of the course found that itsignificantly reduced his grading effort, while not seeming to reduce the

Conference Session

Software Engineering Technical Session 2

Collection

2016 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Massood Towhidnejad, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, Daytona Beach; Alexandria Spradlin, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University; Thomas Rogers Bassa, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

deliverable schedule, therefore we did not want to interrupt their activities on other projects with continuous interruption of the interns for every little obstacle. In addition to project personnel discussed above, there were number of products and other resources that was available to the students to complete their project. The following are some of resources that was used for the project. • LulzBot TAZ 5 3D printer, and SOLIDWORKS D CAD software • Two RC vehicle chassis, including wheels and Lithium polymer (LiPo) batteries and charger • Three Raspberry Pi B+'s • A Ubiquiti Rocket M2 • LS20031 GPS Receiver • Electronics (PCB boards, wire of various gauges, a soldering iron, and miscellaneous electrical

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

. Coelho and G. Murphy. ClassCompass: A software design mentoring system. ACM Journal on Educational Resources in Computing, 7(1):Article 2, Mar. 2007. [3] M. Dahm. Grammar and API for Rational Rose petal files. http://crazybeans.sourceforge.net/CrazyBeans/doc/grammar.pdf, 2001. Retrieved January, 2011. [4] C. R. B. de Souza, H. L. R. Oliveira, C. R. P. da Rocha, K. M. Gonc¸alves, and D. F. Redmiles. Using critiquing systems for inconsistency detection in software engineering models. In SEKE, pages 196–203, 2003. [5] A. Egyed. UML/Analyzer: A tool for the instant consistency checking of UML models. In Proceedings of the 29th International Conference on Software Engineering, pages 793–796. IEEE Computer Society, 2007. [6] M