Last update: Sun Aug 5 02:03:07 MDT 2018
@Article{Raccoon:2000:WNK,
author = "L. B. S. Raccoon",
title = "A whole new kind of engineering",
journal = j-SIGSOFT,
volume = "25",
number = "1",
pages = "109--113",
month = jan,
year = "2000",
CODEN = "SFENDP",
DOI = "https://doi.org/10.1145/340855.341144",
ISSN = "0163-5948 (print), 1943-5843 (electronic)",
ISSN-L = "0163-5948",
bibdate = "Wed Aug 1 17:13:50 MDT 2018",
bibsource = "http://www.math.utah.edu/pub/tex/bib/sigsoft2000.bib",
abstract = "There is a lot of momentum for software engineering to
become a title act branch of engineering. A brochure
from McMaster University
(www.cas.mcmaster.ca/cas/undergraduate/SEbrochure.pdf,
Fall 1999), reads, ``At McMaster we have taken the
position that software engineering is a branch of
engineering and have applied well established
principles of engineering education in this new
specialty.'' And, the Texas Board of Professional
Engineers is certifying software engineers as title act
engineers, today. If other states follow then software
engineering will become a title act branch of
engineering by fiat. While I agree that software
engineering resembles traditional engineering in many
ways, I also believe that software engineering is a
whole new kind of engineering that is equal to,
parallel to, and independent of traditional
engineering. I believe that if software engineers want
to be licensed, they should recognize their unique
reality and become licensed in a way that reflects this
reality. Software engineers should be professionalized
on their own terms, with their own regulatory
structure. Software engineers should create a whole new
kind of engineering, and not just follow the path
trodden by traditional engineers. In the first section,
I argue that software engineering is a real profession
that stands on its own and that its culture differs
substantially from that of traditional engineering.
Software engineering is big: it counts nearly as many
practitioners as traditional engineering; diverse: it
has many areas of specialized practice; and enduring:
it has grown steadily for more than fifty years. Every
facet of software engineering, from technology to
attitude to origins, differs from traditional
engineering, which profoundly affects the culture of
software engineering. Software engineering is not a
branch of traditional engineering. In the second
section, I argue that
all-of-software-engineering-combined should resemble
all-of-traditional-engineering-combined. Four kinds of
traditional engineering regulation are practiced today
that software engineering can emulate: unregulated,
title-act, practice-act, and
all-of-engineering-combined. Of these four kinds,
title-act and all-of-engineering-combined are the most
likely outcomes. There is a lot of momentum to regulate
software engineering as a title-act branch of
engineering. However, regulating software engineering
like all-of-engineering-combined will give software
engineers more control over their destiny, let them
define their own identity and culture, wield their own
power, and set their own curriculum and immigration
policy.",
acknowledgement = ack-nhfb,
fjournal = "ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes",
journal-URL = "https://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=J728",
}