Abstract not found

In this paper we present the experiences and architecture from a research project conducted in cooperation with two industry partners. The goal of the project was to reengineer an existing system for haemo dialysis machines into a domain specific software architecture [22]. Our main experiences are (1) architecture design is an iterative and incremental process, (2) software qualities require a context, (3) quality attribute assessment methods are too detailed for use during architectural design, (4) application domain concepts are not the best abstractions, (5) aesthetics guides the architect in finding potential weaknesses in the architecture, (6) it is extremely hard to decide when an architecture design is ready, and (7) documenting software architectures is a important problem. We also present the architecture and the design rational to give a basis for our experiences. We evaluated the resulting architecture by implementing a prototype application. Keywords Software Architectur...

Design is a term that brings many people together. Collectively, we distinguish ourselves from others by the fact that we are designers and members of a design community. But, design is also a term that pushes people apart. The design that some value in the new fashions in the boutiques in Milan is not seen by everyone as design. While some are impressed with the design of a new telephone, not everyone sees this as design. As a community, we believe design is important. But, as a community, we do not have a common definition of what it is. Many views of design have been proposed. Several classifications of design have been proposed. In this paper, we also seek to classify views on design. Unlike earlier efforts, however, we want to find the classification that the global community of designers uses. To this end, we examine the patterns of citations to key authors ’ works (Author Cocitation Analysis) to uncover this classification and identify seven key author clusters representing identifiable theory groups or schools of thought/practice in design.

Learning from experience, the cyclical interplay of thinking and doing, is increasingly important as organizations struggle to cope with rapidly changing environments and more complex and interdependent sets of knowledge. This paper confronts two central issues for organizational learning: (1) how is local learning (by individuals or small groups) integrated into collective learning by organizations? and (2) what are the differences between learning practices that focus on control, elimination of surprises, and single-loop incremental “fixing ” of problems with those that focus on deep or radical learning, double-loop challenging of assumptions, and discovery of new opportunities? We articulate these relationships through an analysis of learning practices in high-hazard organizations, specifically, problem investigation teams that examine the most serious and troubling events and trends in nuclear power plants and chemical plants. Our analysis suggests a four-stage model of organizational learning reflecting different approaches to control and learning. LEARNING FROM EXPERIENCE IN HIGH-HAZARD ORGANIZATIONS 1

Studies of software engineering projects show that a significant large part of the maintenance costs of software systems is spent on dealing with usability issues. Fixing usability problems during the later stages of development has proven to be costly since many changes cannot be easily accommodated by the software architecture. These high costs prevent developers from meeting all the usability requirements, resulting in systems with less than optimal usability. Explicit evaluation of a software architecture for its support of usability is a tool to cost effectively develop usable systems. It allows for more “usability tuning ” on the detailed design level, hence, preventing part of the high costs incurred by adaptive maintenance activities once the system has been implemented. Based on our investigations into the relationship between usability and software architecture, we developed a Scenario based Architecture Level UsabiliTy Analysis technique (SALUTA). The contribution of this paper is that it provides experiences and problems we encountered when conducting architecture analysis of usability at three industrial case studies performed in the domain of web based enterprise systems (e.g. e-commerce-, content management- and enterprise resource planning systems). We make some general observations and some architecture assessment related observations. For each experience, a problem description, examples, causes, solutions and research issues are identified.

Public administration scholars often associate increased public participation in policy implementation with the advancement of democratic values. Likewise, scholars engaged in the various forms of action research (AR) promote their efforts as a means to democratizing the research process or contributing to improved social outcomes. Despite these common interests in participation and democracy, there have been few attempts to apply AR methods to policy implementation problems. Drawing on Matland’s conflict-ambiguity matrix, we develop a framework for matching particular AR methods to specific policy implementation contexts.

• action science • at-risk youth • inclusive education • program theory evaluation • school improvement • social exclusion

mathematical concepts, just as abstract concepts in general, are metaphorical and are built from people's sensory experiences (Lakoff & Nuez, 1997; Lakoff & Johnson, 1999). Therefore, teaching mathematics necessarily requires teaching the metaphorical structure of mathematics. This should have the beneficial effect of dispelling the myth that mathematics is literal, is inherent in the structure of the universe, and exists independent of human minds. (Lakoff & Nuez, 1997, p. 85) 8 Abstract mathematical ideas are almost always defined by metaphorical mappings from concrete, familiar domains. Understanding takes place when these concrete domains fit the students' own, individual experience, and frustration and confusion ensues when they are incongruent. English (1997) provides a very good example of what happens if the metaphorical mapping is rooted in an a-priori construction that doesn't fit the students' own individual experience. The example concerns the use of a line metaphor to r...

Abstract: This paper identifies issues in developing a three-year duration, work-focussed undergraduate degree programme with a model of inquiry-based learning supported through online communities of inquiry. On the course, students examine their current work-practice to identify issues and then plan, implement and evaluate an improvement strategy. Negotiated learning activities and facilitated networking environments are key to providing students with a highly personalised and relevant learning experience. Students were surveyed and interviewed through questionnaire, telephone and face-to-face meeting. Staff were asked to produce accounts identifying major issues within their particular role, describing and evaluating steps taken to mitigate them. In both cases, transcripts were examined using interpretive phenomenological analysis and this grounded approach was used to identify key issues. The findings show that challenges for the improvement of the learning experience included a range of issues unified by concerns regarding diversity of approach and complexity. It is proposed that this was partly due to knowledge held tacitly but unarticulated. To improve practice, a Pattern Language approach is proposed. In order to articulate values

Abstract not found