Bloom’s Taxonomy Levels for Three Software Engineer Profiles
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper is the product of a workshop held in Amsterdam during the Software Technology and Practice Conference (STEP 2003). The purpose of the paper is to propose Bloom's taxonomy levels for the Guide to the Software Engineering Body of Knowledge (SWEBOK) topics for three software engineer profiles: a new graduate, a graduate with four years of experience, and an experienced member of a software engineering process group. Bloom's taxonomy levels are proposed for topics of four knowledge areas of the SWEBOK Guide: software maintenance, software engineering management, software engineering process, and software quality. By proposing Bloom's taxonomy in this way, the paper aims to illustrate how such profiles could be used as a tool in defining job descriptions, software engineering role descriptions within a software engineering process definition, professional development paths, and training programs.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it