Transitioning international software engineering standards to academia: Analyzing the results of the adoption of ISO/IEC 29110 in four Mexican universities

被引:11
作者
Munoz, Mirna [1 ]
Mejia, Jezreel [1 ]
Pena, Adriana [2 ]
Lara, Graciela [2 ]
Laporte, Claude Y. [3 ]
机构
[1] Ctr Invest Matemat, Parque Quauntum,Ave Lassec,3 Lote 7, Zacatecas 98160, Mexico
[2] Univ Guadalajara, CUCEI, Dept Ciencias Comp, Av Revoluc 1500, Guadalajara 44430, Jalisco, Mexico
[3] Ecole Technol Super, Dept Software & IT Engn, 1100 Notre Dame St West, Montreal, PQ H3C 1K3, Canada
关键词
Process models and standards; MoProSoft; ISO/IEC; 29110; Basic profile; Computer science and informatics; Software engineering; Industry; Academia; Very small entities (VSEs); Management and engineering guide; PROCESS IMPROVEMENT; SMALL ORGANIZATIONS; SMALL ENTITIES; MANAGEMENT; COVERAGE; SYSTEMS;
D O I
10.1016/j.csi.2019.03.008
中图分类号
TP3 [计算技术、计算机技术];
学科分类号
0812 ;
摘要
Software standards, targeted for the software industry, were developed to contribute to the development of quality products within budget and schedule, by optimizing efforts and resources. For small companies, the largest percentage of software companies in Mexico, they are fundamental for their growth and survival. However, academic programs do not always match industry requirements. In previous studies, the curricula in Computer Science and Informatics, and Software Engineering, of 4 Mexican universities, were compared with two software industry standards: the MoProSoft standard, a Mexican standard designed for organizations having up to 50 people and the Basic profile of the ISO/IEC 29110 developed specifically for organizations having up to 25 people. The analysis of the academic programs showed a better coverage of ISO/IEC 29110 than MoProSoft. In this paper, these two standards are mapped to understand the results of the analysis in detail and provide recommendations regarding academic programs. The analysis provides an evidence that the processes of the Basic profile of ISO/IEC 29110 are better covered by the universities curricula because the processes provides the minimal set of practices to be performed while a project is executed from the beginning until the delivery of a software. In addition, this mapping presents a clear differentiation between these two standards that might help Software Development Centers to understand where to start in the implementation of one of them.
引用
收藏
页数:12
相关论文
共 35 条
  • [1] [Anonymous], 2017, 291105132017 ISOIEC
  • [2] [Anonymous], 2017, 12207 ISOIECIEEE
  • [3] [Anonymous], 2016, 2911012016 ISOIEC TR
  • [4] [Anonymous], 2011, 291105122011 ISOIEC
  • [5] [Anonymous], 2018, 291105142018 ISOIEC
  • [6] [Anonymous], 1993, CAPABILITY MATURITY
  • [7] Calvo Manzano J. A., 2008, EUROSPI2008 IND P
  • [8] Galinier S., 2018, 2018 IEEE INT SYST E, P1
  • [9] Garcia L., 2015, SOFTWARE QUALITY PRO, V17, P2015
  • [10] Instituto Nacional de Estadistica y Geografia -INEGI, 2015, ENC NAC PROD COMP MI