@book{291,
	key={Software Engineering 2014},
	title="{Software Engineering 2014: Curriculum Guidelines for Undergraduate Degree Programs in Software Engineering}",
	organization= "{Joint Task Force on Computing Curricula} and {IEEE Computer Society} and {Association for Computing Machinery}",
	year= 2015,
	series="A Volume of the Computing Curricula Series",
	url="https://www.acm.org/binaries/content/assets/education/se2014.pdf"
}

@inbook{333,
	author = {Ipek Ozkaya  and Ömer Akin  and James E. Tomayko },
	title = {Teaching to Think in Software Terms: An Interdisciplinary Graduate Software Requirement Engineering Course for {AEC} Students},
	booktitle = {Computing in Civil Engineering (2005)},
	chapter = {},
	pages = {1-10},
	doi = {10.1061/40794(179)8},
	year=2005,
	URL = {https://ascelibrary.org/doi/abs/10.1061/40794\%28179\%298},
	abstract = { Software is no longer developed and discussed only by computer science majors. Software development and engineering is a professional concentration area in architecture, engineering and construction (AEC) fields, among many others. Graduates of AEC related fields, who are motivated by problems which can be addressed better with computation or with better computation, often return to school to pursue graduate studies devoted to understanding computation of the professional problems they encounter. These students understand discipline specific issues in their fields well. However, in contrast to computer science majors, they lack techniques that can help them formulate solutions in software engineering terms. Asking such students to take classes from computer science curricula fosters interdisciplinary thinking; however, this practice fails to address the specialized computational needs of the AEC fields. An in depth understanding of how to use software development as a problem analysis approach can provide AEC students, both in the graduate and undergraduate levels, with problem classification techniques that they need. Here, we will describe our experience in introducing graduate AEC students to software requirement elicitation and development process techniques. }
}




@ARTICLE{334,
	author={Goswami, A. and Walia, G.S.},
	title={Teaching software requirements inspections to software engineering students through practical training and reflection},
	journal={Computers in Education Journal},
	year={2016},
	volume={16},
	number={4},
	pages={2-10},
	document_type={Article},
	source={Scopus},
}

@ARTICLE{335,
	author={Mich, L.},
	title={Teaching requirements analysis: A student project framework to bridge the gap between business analysis and software engineering},
	journal={CEUR Workshop Proceedings},
	year={2014},
	volume={1217},
	pages={20-25},
	document_type={Conference Paper},
	source={Scopus},
}


@ARTICLE{336,
	author={Sedelmaier, Y. and Landes, D.},
	title={A multi-level didactical approach to build up competencies in requirements engineering},
	journal={CEUR Workshop Proceedings},
	year={2014},
	volume={1217},
	pages={26-34},
	document_type={Conference Paper},
	source={Scopus},
}


@ARTICLE{337,
	author={Ouhbi, S. and Idri, A. and Fernández-Alemán, J.L. and Toval, A.},
	title={Requirements engineering education: a systematic mapping study},
	journal={Requirements Engineering},
	year={2015},
	volume={20},
	number={2},
	pages={119-138},
	doi={10.1007/s00766-013-0192-5},
	document_type={Article},
	source={Scopus},
}


@book{338,
	title={{Computing Curricula 2020: Paradigms for Global Computing Education}},
	author={{CC2020 Task Force}},
	organization={{IEEE Computer Society} and {Association for Computing Machinery}},
	series={{A Computing Curricula Series Report}},
	url={https://www.acm.org/binaries/content/assets/education/curricula-recommendations/cc2020.pdf},
	year=2020,
}

@article{339,
	title = {How do personality, team processes and task characteristics relate to job satisfaction and software quality?},
	journal = {Information and Software Technology},
	volume = {51},
	number = {3},
	pages = {627-639},
	year = {2009},
	issn = {0950-5849},
	doi = {10.1016/j.infsof.2008.08.006},
	author = {Silvia T. Acuña and Marta Gómez and Natalia Juristo},
	keywords = {Personality factors, Team processes, Task characteristics, Software quality, Job satisfaction},
	abstract = {This article analyses the relationships between personality, team processes, task characteristics, product quality and satisfaction in software development teams. The data analysed here were gathered from a sample of 35 teams of students (105 participants). These teams applied an adaptation of an agile methodology, eXtreme Programming (XP), to develop a software product. We found that the teams with the highest job satisfaction are precisely the ones whose members score highest for the personality factors agreeableness and conscientiousness. The satisfaction levels are also higher when the members can decide how to develop and organize their work. On the other hand, the level of satisfaction and cohesion drops the more conflict there is between the team members. Finally, the teams exhibit a significant positive correlation between the personality factor extraversion and software product quality.}
}

@inbook{340,
	author = {Damian, Daniela and Hadwin, Allyson and Al-Ani, Ban},
	title = {Instructional Design and Assessment Strategies for Teaching Global Software Development: A Framework},
	year = {2006},
	isbn = {1595933751},
	publisher = {Association for Computing Machinery},
	address = {New York, NY, USA},
	url = {https://doi.org/10.1145/1134285.1134391},
	abstract = {In the context of increasing pressure to adopt global approaches to software development,
	the importance of teaching skills for geographically distributed software development
	(GSD) becomes essential. This paper reports the experience of teaching a course to
	prepare graduates for software engineering (SE) in global customer-developer teams,
	and which was taught in three-University collaboration (Canada, Australia and Italy).
	The course emphasized the learning of requirements management activities in frequent
	synchronous computer-mediated client-developer relationships and created a GSD environment
	with significant time zone and language differences. We describe our instructional
	approach and assessment strategies within a GSD instructional design framework which
	integrates (a) required GSD skills and strategies for aligning classroom projects
	with contemporary and authentic GSD conditions, (b) strategies for assessment of learning
	of GSD skills and (c) examples from our GSD course.},
	booktitle = {Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Software Engineering},
	pages = {685–690},
	numpages = {6}
}


@article{ Sustainability,
	author = {Semerikov, Serhiy and Striuk, Andrii and Striuk, Larysa and Striuk, Mykola and Shalatska, Hanna},
	title = {{Sustainability in Software Engineering Education: a case of general professional competencies}},
	DOI= "10.1051/e3sconf/202016610036",
	journal = {E3S Web of Conferences},
	year = 2020,
	volume = 166,
	pages = "10036",
}


@article{Striuk201935,
	author={Striuk, A.M. and Semerikov, S.O.},
	title={The dawn of software engineering education},
	journal={CEUR Workshop Proceedings},
	year={2019},
	volume={2546},
	pages={35-57},
	document_type={Conference Paper},
	source={Scopus},
}


@article{Striuk_2019, title={``{A}dvanced course on software engineering'' as the first model for training of software engineers }, url={http://ite.kspu.edu/index.php/ite/article/view/732}, DOI={10.14308/ite000702}, abstractNote={&lt;p&gt;Designing a mobile-oriented environment for professional and practical training requires determining the stable (fundamental) and mobile (technological) components of its content and determining the appropriate model for specialist training. In order to determine the ratio of fundamental and technological in the content of software engineers’ training, a retrospective analysis of the first model of training software engineers developed in the early 1970s was carried out and its compliance with the current state of software engineering development as a field of knowledge and a new the standard of higher education in Ukraine, specialty 121 “Software Engineering”. It is determined that the consistency and scalability inherent in the historically first training program are largely consistent with the ideas of evolutionary software design. An analysis of its content also provided an opportunity to identify the links between the training for software engineers and training for computer science, computer engineering, cybersecurity, information systems and technologies. It has been established that the fundamental core of software engineers’ training should ensure that students achieve such leading learning outcomes: to know and put into practice the fundamental concepts, paradigms and basic principles of the functioning of language, instrumental and computational tools for software engineering; know and apply the appropriate mathematical concepts, methods of domain, system and object-oriented analysis and mathematical modeling for software development; put into practice the software tools for domain analysis, design, testing, visualization, measurement and documentation of software. It is shown that the formation of the relevant competencies of future software engineers must be carried out in the training of all disciplines of professional and practical training.&lt;/p&#38;gt;}, number={40}, journal={Journal of Information Technologies in Education (ITE)}, author={Striuk, Andrii}, year={2019}, month={Sep.}, pages={48-67} }
