Vahid Garousi
Michael Felderer
ABSTRACT
The level of industry-academia collaboration (IAC) in software engineering in general and in software testing in particular is quite low. Many researchers and practitioners are not collaborating with the "other side" to solve industrial problems. To shed light on the above issue and to characterize precisely what industry wants from academia in software testing, we solicited practitioners' opinions on their challenges in different testing activities and also the particularly relevant topics that they want the research community to work on. This short paper aims to draw the community's attention to the important issue of strengthening IAC with the hope of more IAC in software testing in the areas of most importance to the industry.
- P. Ammann and J. Offutt. 2016. Introduction to Software Testing (2 ed.). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- S. Beecham, P. O'Leary, S. Baker, I. Richardson, and J. Noll. 2014. Making Software Engineering Research Relevant. Computer 47, 4 (Apr 2014), 80--83. Google ScholarDigital Library
- L. Briand. 2012. Embracing the Engineering Side of Software Engineering. IEEE Software 29, 4 (July 2012), 96--96. Google ScholarDigital Library
- V. Garousi, A. Coşkunçay, A. Betin-Can, and O. Demirörs. 2015. A survey of software engineering practices in Turkey. Journal of Systems and Software 108 (2015), 148--177.Google ScholarCross Ref
- V. Garousi, M. M. Eskandar, and K. Herkiloğlu. 2016. Industry-academia collaborations in software testing: experience and success stories from Canada and Turkey. Software Quality Journal (2016), 1--53.Google Scholar
- V. Garousi and M. Felderer. 2017. Living in two different worlds: A comparison of industry and academic focus areas in software testing. IEEE Software (in press) (2017).Google Scholar
- V. Garousi, A. Mesbah, A. Betin-Can, and S. Mirshokraie. 2013. A systematic mapping study of web application testing. Information and Software Technology 55, 8 (2013), 1374--1396. Google ScholarDigital Library
- V. Garousi, K. Petersen, and B. Özkan. 2016. Challenges and Best Practices in Industry-academia Collaborations in Software Engineering. Information and Software Technology 79, C (Nov. 2016), 106--127. Google ScholarDigital Library
- V. Garousi and J. Zhi. 2013. A Survey of Software Testing Practices in Canada. Journal of Systems and Software 86, 5 (May 2013), 1354--1376. Google ScholarDigital Library
- R. L. Glass. 2006. Software Creativity 2.0. developer.* Books. Google ScholarDigital Library
- D. Graham, E. V. Veenendaal, and I. Evans. 2008. Cengage Learning. Cengage.Google Scholar
- D. Lo, N. Nagappan, and T. Zimmermann. 2015. How Practitioners Perceive the Relevance of Software Engineering Research. In 10th Joint Meeting on Foundations of Software Engineering (ESEC/FSE 2015). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 415--425. Google ScholarDigital Library
- J. S. Molléri, K. Petersen, and E. Mendes. 2016. Survey Guidelines in Software Engineering: An Annotated Review. In 10th International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement (ESEM). ACM, New York, NY, USA, Article 58, 6 pages. Google ScholarDigital Library
- D. M. Shaw and B. S. Elger. 2013. The relevance of relevance in research. Swiss Medical Weekly 143:w13792 (May 2013), 1--4.Google Scholar
- D. I. K. Sjoeberg, J. E. Hannay, O. Hansen, V. B. Kampenes, A. Karahasanovic, N. K. Liborg, and A. C. Rekdal. 2005. A survey of controlled experiments in software engineering. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 31, 9 (Sept 2005), 733--753. Google ScholarDigital Library
- G. J. Smith, M. M. Schmidt, P. J. Edelen-Smith, and B. G. Cook. 2013. Pasteur's Quadrant as the Bridge Linking Rigor with Relevance. Exceptional Children 79, 2 (2013), 147--161.Google ScholarCross Ref
- A. Tang and R. Kazman. 2017. On the Worthiness of Software Engineering Research. Online: http://shidler.hawaii.edu/sites/shidler.hawaii.edu/files/users/kazman/se_research_worthiness.pdf. (March 2017).Google Scholar
- M. W. Toffel. 2016. Enhancing the Practical Relevance of Research. Production and Operations Management 25, 9 (2016), 1493--1505.Google ScholarCross Ref
- R. v. Solingen and E. Berghout. 1999. The Goal/Question/Metric Method: A Practical Guide for Quality Improvement of Software Development. Mcgraw-Hill Professional.Google Scholar
- C. Wohlin. 2013. Software Engineering Research under the Lamppost. In ICSOFT. SciTePress, IS--11.Google Scholar
- C. Wohlin, P. Runeson, M. Höst, M. C. Ohlsson, B. Regnell, and A. Wesslén. 2012. Experimentation in Software Engineering. Springer. Google ScholarDigital Library
Index Terms
- What industry wants from academia in software testing?: Hearing practitioners' opinions
Recommendations
Industry-academia collaborations in software engineering: An empirical analysis of challenges, patterns and anti-patterns in research projects
EASE '17: Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software EngineeringResearch collaboration between industry and academia supports improvement and innovation in industry and helps to ensure industrial relevance in academic research. However, many researchers and practitioners believe that the level of joint industry-...
Exploring the industry's challenges in software testing: An empirical study
Abstract ContextSoftware testing is an important and costly software engineering activity in the industry. Despite the efforts of the software testing research community in the last several decades, various studies show that still many practitioners in the ...
Characterizing industry-academia collaborations in software engineering: evidence from 101 projects
Research collaboration between industry and academia supports improvement and innovation in industry and helps ensure the industrial relevance of academic research. However, many researchers and practitioners in the community believe that the level of ...
Comments