Teaching technical reviews in a one-semester software engineering course

ABSTRACT

Software technical reviews are essential to the development and maintenance of high quality software. These review processes are complex group activities for which there exist an abundance of basic concepts evolved over years of practical experience. In a typical one-semester software engineering course very little of this information is adequately conveyed to students. Texts supporting this course are also very weak in this area. This paper provides a practical approach for teaching about software technical reviews in a one-semester software engineering course. The contents for two to three lectures on this topic are described as well as suggested exercises and an approach for integrating technical reviews with the usual team project. An extensive annotated bibliography is also provided to assist instructors and students.

REFERENCES

• Ackerman 83: A. Frank Ackerman , Priscilla J. Fowler , Robert G. Ebenau, Software inspections and the industrial production of software, Proc. of a symposium on Software validation: inspection-testing-verification-alternatives, p.13-40, October 1984, Darmstadt, Germany
• Boehm 76: Boehm. B. W. Software Engineering. IEEE Transactions on Computers:1226-1241, December 1976. Provides data on increasing error costs the later errors are detected and repaired in the software life cycle.
• Buck 83: Robert D. Buck , James H. Dobbins, Application of software inspection methodology in design and code, Proc. of a symposium on Software validation: inspection-testing-verification-alternatives, p.41-56, October 1984, Darmstadt, Germany
• Fagan 76: Fagan, M. E. Design and Code inspections to Reduce Errors in Program Development.IBM System Journal, vol. 15(3), 1976. A must read classic paper which introduces the whole concept of software inspections. Sample forms, checklists and experimental data from IBM are also presented.
• Fish 70: Fisher, A. Decision Emergency: Phases in Group Decision Making. Se_p~ M_onographs37, 1970. This article describes a theory of group development in which a group passes through four phases before becoming effective. This understanding of small group interaction is valuable in better dealing with the problems associated with review groups.
• Forsyth 83: Forsyth9 Donelson R. An Introduction to Group Dynamics. Brooks/Col-e Publishing Company, 1983. This text presents many of the important behavioral factors that must be dealt with during review processes. In particular group conflict, the effective environment on review processes and organizational group behavior are described.
• Freedman 82: Daniel P. Freedman , Gerald M. Weinberg, Handbook of Walkthroughs, Inspections, and Technical Reviews: Evaluating Programs, Projects, and Products, Dorset House Publishing Co., Inc., New York, NY, 2000
• Hart 82: Hart, Jolene J. Code Inspections at First Union Corporation. In Proceedings of COMPSAC '82. IEEE Computer Society's Sixth International Computer Software and Applications Conference, Pages 515-522. Chicago9 IL, USA~ November, 1982. Many benefits of performing design and code walkthroughs are cited. Variation of reviews~ including "round robin reviews", and their relative effectiveness are also noted. Actual sociological problems encountered at Sperry are also briefly mentioned.
• IEEE 84: IEEE Standard 730-1984 for Software Assurance Plans 1984. The IEEE standard for Software Quality Assurance puts review processes into perspective with the entire software quality assurance process. Specific reviews are mandated by this standard.
• Janis 72: Fisher, I. Victims of Groupthink. Houghton Mifflin, 1972. This book describes the phenomenon of groupthink, its impact on groups and ways of dealing with the problem
• McConnell 84: McConnell, Peter R. H.; Strigel, Wolfgang B. Results of modern software engineering principles applied to small and large projects. In AFIPS Conference Proceedings of the 1984 National Computer Conference, Pages 273-281. Las Vegas, NV, USA, July, 1984. The Impact of review processes and their cost to implement on two medium to large real-time software projects are documented. The utilization of review processes to track a project is also described.
• McKissick 84: McKissick, John Jr.: Somers, Mark J.; Marsh, Wilhelmina. Software Design Inspection for Preliminary Design. In Proceedings COMPSAC '84. The IEEE Computer Society's Eighth International Computer Software and Applications Conference, Pages 518-519. November, 1984. An inspection process at General Electric company for preliminary designs is outlined including the roles of the review participants. The benefits of this process, including improved education, are also cited.
• MILS 85: Military Standard for Technical Reviews and Audits for Systems, Equipments, and Computer Software MIL-STD-1521B Edition, 1985. This standard defines the required reviews for military contracts. The appendices contain details about exactly what is to be covered for each of the mandated reviews as well as the role of the contractor and the contracting agency.
• Peele 82: Peele, Ronald. Code Inspections at First Union Corporation. In Proceedings of COMPSAC '82. IEEE Computer Society's Sixth International Computer Software and Applications Conference, Pages 445-446. Chicago,IL, USA, November, 1982. This paper presents a variation of the Fagan inspection methodology defining the process in depth along with the roles of the review participants. The benefits of utilizing their process are also documented.
• Quirk 85: W. J. Quirk, Verification and validation of real-time software, Springer-Verlag New York, Inc., New York, NY, 1985
• Remus 83: Horst Remus, Integrated software validation in the view of inspections/reviews, Proc. of a symposium on Software validation: inspection-testing-verification-alternatives, p.57-64, October 1984, Darmstadt, Germany
• Walker 79: Walker, Michael G. Auditing Software Development Projects: A Control Mechanism for the Digital Systems Development Methodology. In Proceedings, COMPCON Spring, Pages 310-314. IEEE, 1979. Software audits and their functions in a development organization are defined. Auditing techniques are presented as well as experiences from the Computer Science Corporation.
• Weinberg 84: Weinberg, Gerald M.~ Freedman, Daniel P. Reviews, Walkthroughs, and Inspections. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, vol. SE-10(1): 68-72, January, 1984. An overview paper describing the distinction between walkthroughs and inspections. The difference between formal and informal reviews is also clarified. The paper also contains sample review reports and how these reports can be utilized.
• Yourdon 78: Edward Yourdon, Structured walkthroughs: 4th edition, Yourdon Press, Upper Saddle River, NJ, 1989

INDEX TERMS

Primary Classification:
  D. Software
  D.2 SOFTWARE ENGINEERING

Additional Classification:
  K. Computing Milieux
  K.3 COMPUTERS AND EDUCATION
      K.3.2 Computer and Information Science Education
          Subjects: Curriculum

General Terms:
Human Factors, Management