L e t t e r s

rcsponses rcccived by the Softwarc Engineering Professional Ethics Projcct The article is availahle online at httpll co~nputer arglco~i~p~t~r~Co~le-of-~t l~ics pdf and correspondcnce via e-mail at SEPEPetsucdu is welcome

Scveral major companics have already adopted the Codc as a best-practices stan- dard and others have inadc it part of their cmploynient contracts In support of professional practice in softwarc cngi- ncering the IEEE Cumputcr Society and the ACM have organized mirrored Web sites to publicize the Code and its cndorsements 11ttpllcsciwwwetsuedu seerilscrode_adipter As joint copyrights holders hoth organizations have agrced that distribution of the Code will be imrc- stricted and permission is grantcd to rcproduce it without permission as long as it is not changed in any way and it cites lEEe and A C M copyright uwncrship

In his Iettcr Mr Manthey refers to clauscs 106 and 607 in the Codc and niakcs tlie intercsting observation that if wc avoided deception (spin) in advertis- ing wc would havc vcry diffcrcnt ads We think he is riglit Wc also think this would hc a positivc change

Mr Manthcy interprcts clause 303 as requiring practitioners to document all issues and claims that this would be a hurdcn on sinal1 firms Thir clause pro- poses two critical steps for practitioners to take to fulfi l l their rcsponsihility to dcvelop liigh-quality products It asks us to pay nttention to social issues sur- rounding our products and it cmpha- sizcs the importance of addressing these issucs Howcver the Code docs not require documcntation of every action taken hy a software cngineer and it does not equate clocunicnting a problem with rcsolving a problem

Mr Manthey infers that because clause 31 3 has an obvious exception it should not be included in the Code of Ethics However this cxceptinn does nut invali- date the general rule The complexity of life and software engineering means that at times principles will he in conflict and we havc to make professional judgments to resolve that conflict The Codc does not assert that such tensions ncver exist instead it provides a framework for working through them The casc Mr

Compute1

Manthcy mentions is clearly an illustra tion of this appmach rather than a refu ration of it

In nur view it could br ethical to us[ illcgally ohtaincd data to save someonersquos life in certain cases The Codc says that we should use only legally obtained data but if informatior is necessary to prc- serve the public health welfare or safety using it is colisistent with the Codc The Codc does not assert that such tensions never exist instead it acknowledges thc brute forcc of such tensions and providca some direction for working througli those tensions

Regarding Mr Brownrsquos question about who can be callcd a ldquosoftware enginecrrdquo tlie use of this term lias caused difficulty siiicc the early discussions about the con- tent of this cincrgiiig profession and whether it is n discipline at all

Whether you can Icgally call yourself a ldquosoftware enginccrrdquo depcnds on whcrc you arc and how loudly ynu claim to hc one In the US and Canada enginccr is a protccted titlc What that means varies from statc to state and provincc to province In biirope therc is similar con- fusion The legal squabbles and ongoing hattlcs about who can lcgitimately be called a softwarc cngineer arc a positive indication of how far tlic discipline Inas advanced We want to dintinguish thasc who follow the principles of tlic disci- pline from those who do not or at least distinguish those who now how to pro- cluce quality software from those whr do not

The Code was designed by practicing profcssionals who hold connnon beliefs ahout tlie significance nf software dcvcl- opnient and the prnfcssional and c th - zal responsihilitics of those who use and arc affected by their work Software engineer shonld be an achievemcnt term McrcIy having a set of skills or [native intellect (the 16-year-old genius) is not sufficient for using the software ngineer titlc Rather a professional software enginccr has a particular set of kills that are guided h y the valucs of the profcssion lsquoThc Novemhcr-December 1999 issuc of JELlsquoE Software provides some cxcellcnt discussions on issucs elated to the plofessionaliiatioii of ioftware engineering

MEGATIVE IMPACT OF CLASSROOM COMPUTERS To the Editor

ldquoThc Myth of the Educatinnal Computerrdquo by Neville Holmes (Sept 1999 pp 36-42) is a very well written ancl timely article Computers in class- ~oonis do havc advantagcs but they also an h a w a negative impact Something should be done to prevent poor educa- tion becausc of the cxcessivc dcpcndence 3f our educational methods on machines

In my expcrience with teaching coin- mtcr science I find that it is difficult to zonvincc o w studcots instructors and administrators that providing networked omputers will not adcquately educate hc future workforcc Obicct-orieutcd software development mcthods do havc idvantages and thcy are convenient hut hey do not train students and users to lie cxtent ncccssary This is hound to esult in frustration in tlic near future I cccp telling my stuilents that thcy should lot use computcrs just as a black box

I suggcsr that you should consider iutting together a special issuc of Tknputer on quality education using omputcrs You could present articles hat review the statc of tlic art in coin- mtcr science and computer infnrmation zystems education and suggest ways to xovidc an education that would do jus- ice to the students and their prospective mployers Such an issuc would surely he in eye-opener for many of n s in the coni- mter education husincss

h o k e K Uhattacharyya Computer Science Department Lincoln Uniuersity Jefferson City MO UhattachBLincoln~iedu