Skip to main content

Scaling Up A Research Agenda for Software Engineering (1989) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:

4. Research Modes
Pages 19-22

The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.


From page 19...
... Much of the expertise in complex software systems resides in corporations, government research centers, and other nonacademic institutions. It is largely inaccessible to the academic community because of considerations of product delivery, proprietary knowledge, and cultural differences between the corporate and academic communities involved in software research.
Read the entire page →
From page 20...
... There are a number of reasons that information generated in our universities flows only slowb into the commercial sector: Academics do not study large systems because they do not have them or have access to them, and commercial and academic software specialists tend to read and have their work published in different journals. On the other hand, many topflight corporate researchers and developers, to the extent that they publish at all, do not publish in archival computer science journals because their topics-problems of practice-are not deemed scholarly.
Read the entire page →
From page 21...
... Glean Insights from Behavioral and Managerial Sciences There is a need to better understand how groups of people collaborate in large projects involving a variety of participants sharing a rich but uneven distribution of knowledge and imagination among them. Software engineering research would be enhanced by greater interaction with behavioral, managerial, and other scientists that could lead to increasingly effective contributions to software engineering practice, in part by accelerating the transfer of technology into and through the software engineering community.
Read the entire page →
From page 22...
... Computer Science and Technology Board workshop participants recommended that the academic research community expand its notion of good research to accept review or synthesis studies, case studies, comparative analyses, and development of unifying models for individual or multiple domains. In particular, review or synthesis studies, which are common in a number of other fields, would support a greater and ongoing codification of software engineering knowledge and help to minimize the reinvention of techniques and processes.
Read the entire page →

Key Terms

  • cstb workshop
  • academic software
  • abstract formal
  • complex software
  • managerial sciences

  • formal models
  • software engineers
  • synthesis studies
  • nonacademic institutions
  • developing complex

  • ongoing codification
  • specialists tend
  • work published
  • technology board
  • identified key

  • university courses
  • effective contributions
  • software researchers
  • corporate world
  • prior work

  • research requires
  • malting incremental
  • largescale integrated
  • academic communities
  • proprietary information

  • academic culture
  • development processes
  • workshop identified
  • exposure existing
  • academic investigation


    • This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
    More information on Chapter Skim is available.