Agile Modeling (AM) is a practice-based methodology for effective modeling and documentation of software-based systems. Simply put, Agile Modeling (AM) is a collection of values, principles, and practices for modeling software that can be applied on a software development project in an effective and light-weight manner. As you see in Figure 1 AM is meant to be tailored into other, full-fledged development methodologies such as XP or RUP, enabling you to develop a software process which truly meets your needs. The techniques of AM, in particular Agile Model Driven Development (AMDD), the lifecycle for which is depicted in Figure 2, enable you to scale agile software development to very complex situations.
Something new is clicking on campus at UCI, flipping traditional teaching on its ... Multiple campus units have contributed to the Anteater Learning Pavilion (ALP) and this website.
L. Botturi, M. Derntl, E. Boot, and K. Figl. Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT2006). Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE, (2006)
S. Liscouët-Hanke, S. Pufe, and J. Maré. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part G: Journal of Aerospace Engineering, 222 (6):
749-756(2008)
E. Dashofy, A. van der Hoek, and R. Taylor. Proceedings of the 24rd International Conference on Software Engineering, 2002. ICSE 2002, page 266--276. IEEE, (May 2002)
B. Latour, and A. Yaneva. Explorations in architecture: Teaching, design, research, (2008)"It is well known that we live in a very different world than that of Euclidian space: phenomenologists (and psychologists of the Gibsonian school) have never tired of showing that there is an immense distance in the way an embodied mind experiences its surroundings from the “objective” shape that “material” objects are said to possess. They have tried to add to the “Galilean” bodies rolling through Euclidian space, “human” bodies ambling through a “lived” environment. I All this is very well, except it does nothing more than to reproduce, at the level of architecture, the usual split between subjective and objective dimensions that has always paralyzed architectural theory—not to mention the well known split it has introduced between the architectural and engineering professions (and not to mention the catastrophic consequences it has had on philosophy proper). What is so strange in this argument is that it takes for granted that engineering drawings on a piece of paper and, later, projective geometry offer a good description of the so-called “material” world. This is the hidden presupposition in the whole of phenomenology: we have to add human subjective intentional dimensions to a “material” world that is well described by geometric shapes and mathematical calculations. The paradoxical aspect of this division of labor envisioned by those who want to add the “lived” dimensions of human perspective to the “objective” necessities of material existence is that, in order to avoid reducing humans to things, they first had to reduce things to drawings." p 82.