search

isaqb-org / curriculum-foundation

iSAQB Curriculum for the CPSA - Foundation Level. This repository contains copyrighted work.
https://public.isaqb.org/
Other
64 stars 14 forks source link

New LG: Socio-technical systems #657

Closed mistertakai closed 4 weeks ago

mistertakai commented 1 month ago

I'd like to add a new LG to the curriculum:

Understand and explain the feedback loop of a socio-technical system.

Literature:

sippsack commented 1 month ago

I'm a bit sceptical. Why should we speak about this in Foundation which is already fully packed. I suppose you want to raise awareness. But in my opinion it would be only R3 and there for optional

alxlo commented 1 month ago

We've removed the old LG 1-3: Understand Software Architecture as Part of the Software Lifecycle (R2) from the curriculum

Software architects understand their tasks and can integrate their results into the overall lifecycle of IT systems. They can: • identify the consequences of changes in requirements, technologies, or the system environment in relation to software architecture • elaborate on relationships between IT-systems and the supported business and operational processes

This is where this could have fitted in and I honestly do not remember why we eliminated that LG because "coping with change" is a very central thing and I can't find anything in the curriculum related to that topic anymore.

Very(!) reluctantly (@sippsack 's observation about the overwhelming size of the curriculum is well noted and something I very much relate to) I would like to ask if we should reconsider this point. Understanding the ongoing evolution of an IT system over time is IMHO quite important for architects.

@gernotstarke What do you think?

alxlo commented 1 month ago

On the content itself: That's 50y old research (which s neither a good or a bad sign) and I never ever in my career stumbled upon this, I'd rather talk about Rajlich and Bennet's Staged Model for the Software Life Cycle (http://www.dsc.ufcg.edu.br/~garcia/cursos/dglobal_software/artigos/staged_modelsw.pdf) but Lehmanns' Law might provide some background on the principles.

If (and that's a very big IF) we reintroduce this learning goal the general understanding of this should be R2 with all the additional details being R3.

gernotstarke commented 1 month ago

added a few more people to the assignee-list to get more feedback.

mahboubagharbi commented 1 month ago

It would make sense to specifically integrate the topic of socio-technical systems into the soft skills curriculum for software architects, rather than placing it in the foundation curriculum. Here are some aspects that could be considered:

  1. Interdisciplinary Communication: Software architects should be able to communicate effectively with various stakeholders, including developers, product managers, and end users.
  2. Understanding Team Dynamics: Understanding group behavior and team dynamics can help architects work better in agile environments.
  3. Stakeholder Management: Addressing the identification and management of stakeholder interests and influences could be valuable. This includes techniques for stakeholder analysis and strategic decision-making.
  4. Influence of Social Aspects on Design Decisions: Raising awareness of how social factors impact technological decisions, such as how cultural differences can affect implementation.
  5. Conflict Resolution and Negotiation: Skills for resolving conflicts that may arise within teams or with stakeholders are crucial. Role-plays or simulations could help develop these skills.
rhoadesre commented 1 month ago

It would make sense to specifically integrate the topic of socio-technical systems into the soft skills curriculum for software architects, rather than placing it in the foundation curriculum. Here are some aspects that could be considered:

I second this suggestion - even though it means that I have work to do to update the Soft-Skills curriculum and my corresponding handouts. :-) The Soft-Skills curriculum is already really (!) full, but the topics belong more in this area.

programming-wolf commented 1 month ago

SOFT is also still an RC, so we could add it for the new release.

ulibecker commented 1 month ago

It sure is a relevant topic. However, as @sippsack wrote, the foundation curriculum is already pretty packed, so one could only handle the topic very superficially, and I see no value in that. Adding it to SOFT sounds good to me.

michaelpog commented 1 month ago

I think this is important. But the foundation level curriculum is not an exhaustive list of topics software architects need to know and be aware of. So I think it should be as part of a CPSA-A modules instead of being part of the foundation level curriculum.

alxlo commented 1 month ago

There are several advanced modules where the details of this topic might fit in. There is some overlap with SOFT, but there might be other advanced curricula as well - but that's no the point I wanted to make here.

My point is: currently we no longer talk at all about the long term impact of software architecture on the evolution of a system. And that's something I'm seriously worried about for quite a number of reasons.

Sorry for sounding a bit dramatic here, but making FL students think about what consequences their architectural decision have in the long run is one of the things that I deem to be fundamental. It's one of the big WHY's of why we should spend effort on any kind of systems architecture in the first place.

gbeine commented 1 month ago

Please be aware that socio-technical systems is a well defined term in social sciences and none of the mentioned sources uses it correctly ;-)

Especially Scharmer is a no-go for serious discussions about that topic.

I'd also suggest to not overload the SOFT module with this topic as it is very loosely coupled to the existing curriculum.

gernotstarke commented 1 month ago

@alxlo and myself summarized this discussion with the following decisions:

Put all related changes into branch Issue-#657-socio-technical-systems-etc

PR is #665