ITM 530 Case 1

 The first article relates to the classic SDLC methodology. The second one gives you a description of the applications of systems development models from a practitioner’s perspective. You will see various different paradigms used in practice:
Hoffer, J. F., George,J. A., & Valacich, J, S. (2010). Systems development environment. Modern Systems Analysis and Design. [PPT presentation – Chapter 1] http://wps.prenhall.com/bp_hoffer_msad_4/22/5876/1504457.cw/index.html
Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (2008). Selecting a development approach. https://www.cms.gov/Research-Statistics-Data-and-Systems/CMS-Information-Technology/XLC/Downloads/SelectingDevelopmentApproach.pdf
BigLever Software Inc. (2010) The systems and software product line lifecycle framework. Retrieved from http://www.biglever.com/extras/PLE_LifecycleFramework.pdf
The last source is a website that quite thoroughly describes the software development life cycle. You are not responsible for reading all this in its entirety. Rather, look it over, become familiar with the concepts it outlines, and use it for reference in preparing your paper:
Stewart, B. (2011) Systems engineering and software development life cycle framework. OpenSDLC.org. Retrieved from http://opensdlc.org/mediawiki/index.php?title=Systems_Engineering_and_Software_Development_Life_Cycle_Framework
The Portland Pattern Repository (hosted by Cunningham and Cunningham, Inc.) is a Wiki forum specializing in software development. It is a most interesting resource for creative thoughts about computing, systems development, and organizational implications of the information environment. We will be drawing on it at several points in this course. Their introduction and links to key descriptions of what’s going on can be found here.
The Wiki is useful, but it is not a repository of “truth” except perhaps in the large aggregate. Its value lies in the diversity of opinions expresses and the prodigious amounts of experience and talent on view there. Those opinions can help you evaluate other sources of information.
You might want to get a feel for the Wiki first before you begin to use it for detail work. You could start with their section on SoftwareDevelopment (http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?SoftwareDevelopment) and/or on AgileProcesses (http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?AgileProcesses). Within the first one, links will take you to places like ProblemDomain (http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?ProblemDomain), AnalysingTheProblemDomain (http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?AnalysingTheProblemDomain), and ElicitingRequirements (http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?ElicitingRequirements). Essentially, there is no end to how far and where you can go with this. When you get started in earnest, you’ll need a good Search Strategy and careful documentation of where you’ve been; this isn’t random surfing.
Case Assignment
Read the assigned readings, supplemented if you wish with material from the optional readings and perhaps the supplementary background as well, and even other outside reading you might find by yourself to be useful. Then write a short paper stating your position on the question:
“The Systems Development Life Cycle methodology is [OR is not] excessively formal and rigid and should be [OR should not be] more flexible and unstructured?”
Your paper should be short (5-6 pages, not including cover sheet and references) and to the point. It is to be structured as a point/counterpoint argument, in the following manner.
You are expected to:
· Begin this paper by stating your position on this question clearly and concisely — take one or the other position (either for or against formality), but not both!
· Citing appropriate sources, present the reasons why you take this position. Be sure to make the most effective case you can.
· Then present the best evidence you can, again citing appropriate sources, against your position — that is, establish what counterarguments can be made in response to your original position.
· Finally, review your original position in light of the counterarguments, showing how they are inadequate to rebut your original statement.
By the end of your paper, you should be able to unequivocally re-affirm your original position.