[Year 12 IPM] Re: top down, bottom up and middle out

[Mark Kelly]

In brief, no.

Scanning recent end-of-year exams, not even top-down and bottom-up have 
been referred to(at least since 2001) so I earnestly doubt the 
problematic "middle-out" will earn a mention.

kgration at myrtlefordsc.vic.edu.au wrote:
> Hello to all on the list,
> 
> After the discussion last year regarding top down, bottom up and middle out I'm still a little vague on exactly what middle out is . . . is anyone else?
> 
> Is there anyone out there on the list that can clarify this for me?
> 
> Are students actually supposed to know what middle out is for the exam?
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Kim
> 
> ---
> Kim Gration
> ICT Manager
> Myrtleford Secondary College
> http://www.myrtlefordsc.vic.edu.au
> 
> "Geoff Moss" <geoffmoss37 at optusnet.com.au> on Mon, 11 Oct 2004 15:32:38 +1000 wrote:
> 
>>Oliver
>>
>>I usually relate the issue first to something students can relate to, like 
>>building a house or doing house renovations.
>>
>>With a house we adopt a top-down approach because we can plan and organise 
>>resources to complete the task within a time and financial budget. 
>>Obviously, planning a whole house ensures all rooms and components are as 
>>compatible as possible and the resources used are common throughout.
>>
>>First the house has to be planned and the plans submitted for approval.
>>
>>The builder breaks the task into smaller tasks so he can plan the tasks for 
>>each tradesman and ensure the resources are on-site when required.
>>Surveying would need to precede the site works to ensure correct location of 
>>the dwelling.  Footings need to be prepared before the concrete arrives, 
>>etc., etc.
>>He will arrange for the sparky to come when the frame is up to do the 
>>initial wiring and then later at the finishing stages.  The plumber would be 
>>required early to undertake necessary underground/underhouse works.  The 
>>brickie would be called in when the bricks are on site and the frame in 
>>place.  All tradesmen would be organised, delivery of materials planned to 
>>be on site for the tradesmen.  These days, builders will not leave many 
>>materials on site for too long before they are used.  Appliances would need 
>>to be planned for delivery as near as possible to installation.
>>
>>Imagine building a house, room by room, when  time and money permits.  You 
>>would not be able to ensure that the bricks, and other building materials 
>>will be compatible.  Specifications and rules may change and you may need to 
>>modify as you go.  Imagine plumbing connections being done on an ad hoc 
>>basis.
>>
>>[This was the situation for many after WW2.  Soldiers on return had limited 
>>funds and resources were scarce.  Many constructed a fibro-cement dwelling 
>>themselves because builders were not available or were too costly at the 
>>time.]
>>
>>Also, using the kitchen renovation, imagine doing the benches say this year, 
>>plasnning the overhead cupboards nerxt year, installing a new sink later, 
>>and maybe a new cook top.  Later we may decide to have combustion microwave. 
>>We then decide to install an insinkerator - where will this go?  In the 
>>bench or the sink - does this mean replacing the sink again.  Then we decide 
>>to buy and install an oven - what about our combustion microwave?  It is now 
>>partly redundant.  Now we want a new refrigerator.  Because we want 
>>ice-making facilities (don't we all) we find it is too big for the cavity. 
>>Then we need to choose a smaller refrigerator or make the cavity space 
>>bigger - this encroaches on other areas - Oh! the bernches will need to be 
>>modified again.  Did we have a pantry, do we need one.  Where will it do? 
>>Don't forget our internet-connected refrigerator.
>>
>>This is an example of bottom up planning.  There is no clear overview of the 
>>development.  There is difficulty with ensuring everything is compatible, 
>>there is duplication, there are additional costs.  There are continual 
>>disruptions.  What about tuiling and painting?  The chances are there will 
>>be a real mess at the end.
>>The solution?  A top-down one.  A complete kitchen make-over.  Everything is 
>>done at once and evrything is compatible.  The cost is defined, and 
>>disruptions are limited to one period.
>>
>>A more relevant exampler for IT would be where a school decides to buy 
>>individual pieces of hardware and software, when it suits.  Each department 
>>goes off and buys it own equipment and hardware.  No-one follows an overall 
>>plan.  Soon we find we have a range of different hardware - some not 
>>compatible.  We may have duplication of software and hardware.  Each 
>>department has its own scanners, printers, colour printers and nothing has 
>>been rationalised.  Then someone decides it may be a good idea to network.
>>
>>This scenario was typical of some schools during the 80's.
>>
>>A far better idea would be to decide to have a networked solution with an 
>>overall plan to ensure economies of scale, compatibility and a reduction in 
>>duplication.
>>
>>Hope this helps as a starter.
>>
>>Geoff Moss
>>RMIT
>>----- Original Message ----- 
>>From: "Murray O." <murrao at westbourne.vic.edu.au>
>>To: "IPM List" <ipm at fhc.vic.edu.au>
>>Sent: Monday, October 11, 2004 1:47 PM
>>Subject: top down, bottom up and middle out
>>
>>
>>
>>>I'm struggling to explain with examples the difference between top down,
>>>bottom up and middle out problem solving approaches. Can any one share 
>>>some
>>>example that students grasp.
>>>
>>>Any comments on the answers
>>>To question 4 part 2
>>>
>>>ii A company embarks on an ad hoc system expansion. The final cost is
>>>not considered until the end of the project.
>>>Vitta: bottom up
>>>Me: middle out
>>>
>>>Thanks
>>>Oliver


-- 
Mark Kelly
Manager - Information Systems
McKinnon Secondary College
McKinnon Rd McKinnon 3204, Victoria Australia
Phone +613 95780844  Fax +613 95789253
http://www.mckinnonsc.vic.edu.au
IPM Lecture notes: http://vceit.com
Moderator: IPM Mailing List

Gosh you’re cute. Wanna buy a monkey?