This paper suggests an evolution to the graduate level systems engineering curriculum framework documented in an International Council on Systems Engineering (INCOSE) report in October of 2007 [Jain and Verma, INCOSE-PP-2007-001-01, Seattle, WA, 2007]. This evolution leverages the International Organization for Standardization (ISO)/International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) 15288 Systems and Software Engineering-System Life Cycle Processes standard [ISO/IEC 15288, International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, 2008] as a guide. The evolved framework is presented and consists of six levels of course categories: prerequisite, introductory, technical system life cycle processes, project planning system life cycle processes, infrastructure processes and other broad areas, and capstone courses. Next, 18 systems engineering centric online masters degrees offered by 17 distinct universities are identified as part of a growing base of graduate level systems engineering degrees offered globally through distance education. Specific examples for applying the framework using three of the universities that provide online systems engineering masters programs globally are included.
In this paper we address the challenges and importance of developing the students' affective engagement with the cognitive content offered in systems engineering education. Systems engineering is concerned with developing the most appropriate total system solution to address a need. Systems engineering methods used to find this solution require applying a systems perspective while making tradeoffs of the relative benefits of each set of possible approaches to a problem. However, the practical application of systems engineering is to seek a comprehensive design solution that satisfies a range of constraints and provides an adequate solution that "satisfices" the stakeholders. Applying the systems engineering method in order to gain the advantage of an optimal rather than adequate solution, demands that the systems engineer believes in the value of the methods, techniques, and perspectives of the systems engineering method, even at times where the method may seem indirect or counterintuitive to performing engineering work. Therefore, systems engineering education must engage the students in both the cognitive domain -developing ability to perform the techniques, and in the affective domain -transforming the student's belief to recognize the positive value of the systems engineering method. This paper discusses: 1) the current gap in addressing the affective domain in systems engineering education, 2) the importance of closing that gap to enable the effective implementation of systems engineering on the job, and 3) related issues and challenges. Following this discussion, the paper proposes a framework for assessing the development of the student's affective engagement in systems engineering methods.
This paper demonstrates a method that can be used to analyze the degree to which an organization's systems engineering capabilities meet government‐industry defined systems engineering needs. To demonstrate this process, using universities as the case study, we summarize secondary research completed for nine institutions from various countries that offer systems engineering graduate level programs in the space domain. Next, we select a Masters degree program from three universities, one from each country, and map their space‐based systems engineering courses to the 37 systems engineering capabilities within the 10 systems engineering competencies. These capabilities represent the knowledge, skills, and behaviors that systems engineers are expected to possess and perform as a part of their job. We then review a process for a more detailed mapping of the curriculum to one of four levels of proficiency within each capability, using the Stevens Institute of Technology as the example. The result is a systems engineering competency‐based approach that can be used by universities or companies to compare the “as is” state of their systems engineering capabilities development against a government‐industry defined set of needs to identify and address gaps or opportunities in the curriculum, training, or experience of their students and/or employees. © 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Syst Eng
Abstract. Systems thinking is commonly accepted as the backbone of a successful systems engineering approach. As such, the Body of Knowledge and Curriculum to Advance Systems Engineering (BKCASE) team chose to leverage a systems thinking based tool, called Systemitool, to describe our project to the vast audience that would potentially become involved directly or indirectly in the success of the project. This paper describes the process and steps used by the authors and the BKCASE team to develop the project's systemic diagram, or Systemigram TM , and the story behind the project, the products, and the vision of the BKCASE project. The goal of the paper is to provide guidance so that readers can leverage the lessons learned from this effort to successfully develop their own project definitions and stories.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.