ABET Computing Accreditation Commission. SELF-STUDY QUESTIONAIR FOR REVIEW of the COMPUTER SCIENCE PROGRAM. submitted by

(1)

1 ABET

Computing Accreditation Commission

SELF-STUDY

QUESTIONAIR FOR REVIEW of the

COMPUTER SCIENCE PROGRAM submitted by

McNeese State University Institution

to the

Computing Accreditation Commission

Primary contact: William Albrecht

Telephone number: (337) 475-5788 Fax number: (337) 475-5799 Email: [email protected]

COMPUTING ACCREDITATION COMMISSION ABET, Inc.

111 Market Place, Suite 1050 Baltimore, MD 21202-4012

Phone: 410-347-7700 Fax: 410-625-2238 Email: [email protected] Website: http://www.abet.org

(2)

2 Table of Contents Background Information ...4 Contact Information ...4 Program History ...4 Options ...6 Organizational Structure ...7

Program Delivery Modes ...8

Program Locations ...8

Previous Evaluation ...8

Joint Accreditation ...9

Criterion 1- Students ...10

Student Admissions ...10

Evaluating Student Performance ...10

Transfer Students and Transfer Courses ...10

Advising and Career Guidance ...11

Work in Lieu of Courses ...11

Graduation Requirements ...11

Transcripts of Recent Graduates ...11

Criterion 2 – Program Educational Objectives ...12

Mission Statement ...12

Program Educational Objectives...12

Program Educational Objectives and Mission of Institution ...12

Program Constituencies ...13

Process for Revision of Program Educational Objectives ...13

Criterion 3 – Student Outcomes ...14

List of Student Outcomes...14

Relationship to Program Educational Objectives ...14

Process for Establishment and Revision of Student Outcomes ...14

Enabled Student Characteristics ...15

Criterion 4 – Continuous Improvement ...16

Program Educational Objectives (Table of Objectives) ...16

Student Outcomes ...22

Continuous Improvement...31

Additional Information (statement of availability) ...33

Criterion 5 - Curriculum ...34

Program Curriculum ...34

Plan of Study for students (Table 5.1) ...35

Alignment with Educational Objectives ...41

Prerequisite Charts ...42

Curriculum and Computer Science Standards (chart) ...44

Curriculum and Mathematics Standards (chart) ...45

Curriculum and Science Standards (chart) ...46

Capstone Course ...46

Coop ...47

(3)

3

Criterion 6 –Faculty ...48

Faculty Qualifications ...48

Summary Chart of Faculty Qualifications (Table 6-1) ...49

Faculty Workload...50

Faculty Workload Summary (Table 6-2) ...51

Faculty Size ...54

Professional Development ...55

Authority and Responsibility of Faculty ...55

Criterion 7 –Facilities ...56

Offices, Classrooms and Laboratories ...56

Computing Resources ...56

Guidance ...57

Maintenance and Upgrading of Facilities ...57

Library Services ...58

Overall Comments on Facilities...60

Criterion 8 – Institutional Support ...61

Leadership ...61

Program Budget and Financial Support ...61

Staffing ...62

Faculty Hiring and Retention ...63

Support of Faculty Professional Development ...63

Program Criteria...64

Appendix A – Course Syllabi ...65

Computer Science Syllabi ...66

Mathematics Syllabi...124

Science Syllabi ...151

Misc. Supporting Syllabi ...174

Appendix B – Faculty Vitae ...181

Appendix C – Major Equipment ...192

Appendix D – Institutional Summary ...193

Institution ...193

Type of Control ...193

Educational Unit ...193

Academic Support Units ...194

Non-academic Support Units ...194

Credit Unit ...194

Table D-1 – Program Enrollment and Degree Data ...196

Table D-2 – Personal ...199

Appendix E – University Admission ...200

Appendix F – University Organizational Chart ...207

Appendix G – Degree Plans ...208

(4)

4 Self-Study Report

for the Computer Science program, McNeese State University June 20, 2012

BACKGROUND INFORMATION A. Contact Information

William Albrecht

McNeese State University MSU BOX 92340

Lake Charles, Louisiana 70609 Voice: (337) 475-5788

Fax: (337) 475-5799

Email: [email protected] B. Program History

Prior to 1981 The Department of Mathematics offered a Baccalaureate of Science degree in Mathematics with a concentration in Computing Science. For the first time, in 1982, the department offered a Baccalaureate of Science degree in Computer Science which was heavily based in mathematics with requirement of four computing science classes and a computing science senior-seminar. The Baccalaureate of Science degree was renamed Computer and Information Sciences in 1986 and started to replace some of the upper level mathematics requirements with courses which were quickly defining the field of computing science. By the 1988-1989 academic year, the degree had grown from its original 121 credit hours to 136 credit hours and was clearly identifiable as a stand-alone Computer Science degree program and renamed B.S. in Computer Science. During the 1994-1995 academic year the department began offering a year-long sequence in Software Engineering. In 1999 the degree program was met with a state initiative requiring all universities to reduce degree programs to a standard 121 credit hour curriculum.

The first academic cycle in which field specific accreditation was earned was just prior to the 2002-2003 academic year. The department earned its accreditation from the Computer Science Accreditation Commission (CSAC) of the Computing Sciences Accreditation Board (CSAB). As a result of the Integration of CSAB into ABET as the fourth commission of ABET the 2003-2004 catalog listed the ABET affiliation for the first time noting the program being accredited by the Computing Accreditation Commission (CAC) of ABET.

(5)

5 The Computer Science Program at McNeese had its last regular ABET on-site visit during the 2006-2007 accreditation cycle. The Final statement dated August 13, 2007 from ABET identified a weakness and five concerns in the Computer Science Program at McNeese State University. The weaknesses and concerns are listed below along with a brief description of the actions taken.

The 2007 Final Statement has identified a weakness with respect to: A. Objectives and Assessments

(I-3) Data relative to the objectives must be routinely collected and documented, and used in program assessment.

(I-4) The extent to which each program objective is being met must be periodically assessed.

The 2007 Final Statement also identified the following concerns in the Computer Science Program at McNeese:

B. Objectives and Assessments

(I-1) The program must have documented, measurable objectives. C. Faculty

(III-1) There must be enough full-time faculty members with primary commitment to the program to provide continuity and stability. (III-5) All faculty members must remain current in the discipline. D. Curriculum

(IV-8) Students must be exposed to a variety of programming languages and systems and must become proficient in at least one higher-level language. (IV-15) The oral communications skills of the student must be developed and applied in the program.

(IV-16) The written communication skills of the student must be developed and applied in the program.

F. Institutional Support and Financial Resources

(VI-1) Support for faculty must be sufficient to enable the program to attract and retain high-quality faculty capable of supporting the program’s

objectives.

The identified weakness and the five concerns were addressed and reported to ABET (CAC) in an interim report dated June 2008. A second Interim report was submitted June 2010 resulted in one remaining concern, which will be discussed in section G of Program Background Information.

Major Program changes since the 2006-2007 ABET visit include:

a) Clearly defined Program Outcome and Objectives and identifying how and when they will be measured have been put in place.

b) The department hired 3 Ph.D. faculty

Note: One Ph.D. Faculty member retired at the end of the 2010-2011 academic year.

(6)

6 c) An emphasis has been placed on faculty scholarly activities such as attending

meetings, giving presentations, writing papers and grant writing.

d) The Computer Science degree has added an Applied Concentration to the already existing General Concentration.

e) The program requires a Full Year of exposure to either the C programming language (General Concentration) or Visual Basic (Applied Concentration). Both

Concentrations require a full year of exposure to JAVA and a semester exposure to SQL and PHP.

f) Additional emphasis has been put on written and oral assignments throughout the computer science curriculum in addition to the general distribution curriculum. g) Microcontroller interaction, programming, and application are currently being phased

into the curriculum using equipment obtained through a grant written by the CS faculty.

h) A required course in programming languages has been replaced by a required course in Web Programming.

i) Elimination of the requirement for the General Concentration to take Differential equations in order to meet a mandated 120 credit hour degree requirement imposed by the state Board of Regents.

C. Options

The department has two concentrations leading to the Baccalaureate of Science in Computer Science. The two concentrations are the Applied Concentration (new as of 2011-2012) and the General Concentration (the renaming of the original curriculum for the CS degree).

A Minor in Computer Science is also offered by the department as well as a Computer Information Technology Associate of Science degree which will be transferred to Sowela Technical and Community College within the next year.

(7)

7 D. Organizational Structure (as it applies to the program)

NOTE: A Comprehensive Organizational chart for the University can be found in appendix F.

Organizational Chart as it Applies to Computer Science PRESIDENT

Philip Williams

PROVOST / ACADEMIC VP Jeanne Daboval

DEAN COLLEGE OF SCIENCE George Mead

COMPUTER SCIENCE FACULTY

William Albrecht –Coordinator Paul Bender – Assistant Professor Kay Kussmann - Assistant Professor Vipin Menon – Assistant Professor DEPARTMENT HEAD

Mathematics, Computer Science and Statistics

(8)

8 E. Program Delivery Modes

All classes taught within the Computer Science requirements, Mathematics requirements, with the exception of CSCI 399 – Coop/Internship in Professional Practice, are taught using traditional Lecture/Lab delivery mode. Classes are offered during the day and evening.

Supporting courses in the Sciences and General Education are taught either as traditional Lecture/Lab courses or as web based courses.

F. Program Locations

All portions of the program are taught on the main campus of McNeese State University in Lake Charles, Louisiana, with the exception of the Coop/Internship in Professional Practice course with location determined by the hosting institution.

G. Deficiencies, Weakness or Concerns from Previous Evaluation(s) and the Actions Taken to Address Them

In this section this report will address any Deficiencies, Weaknesses or Concern Items from the most recent ABET Final Statement dated August 1, 2011. The Final Statement addressed the 2010-2011 Interim ABET Self-Study report.

The single item identified in the ABET Final Statement was a Program Concern. The Program Concern resulted from a previous Weakness Identified in an earlier Final Statement dated June 2008.

The concern was with regard to :

Criterion I, Objectives and Assessments: The following factors contribute to this weakness.

a). Standard I-3. The effectiveness of the additional data from exam questions in assessing the extent to which outcomes a and c have been achieved has not been demonstrated. The data on the achievement of outcome f based on actual student performance remains to be collected and evaluated.

( Standard I-3: Data relevant to the objectives must be routinely collected and documented, and used in program assessment.

(9)

9 a. Ability to apply knowledge of computing and mathematics appropriate to the

discipline.

c. An ability to design, implement, and evaluate a computer based system, process, component, or program to meet desired needs.

f. An ability to communicate effectively. )

b). Standard I-4. The assessment of program educational objectives is still incomplete. (Standard I-4: The extent to which each program objective is being met must be

periodically assessed. )

The Concern as it relates to Standard I-3 has been addressed through the following actions:

1. Regular meetings of the computer science faculty to review sample course work from each of the computer science courses and sample writing assignments from the Technical Writing Course (ENG 253). Material from computer science courses includes results of targeted questions embedded in each of the departmental course exams.

2. The department is implementing a schedule to establish routine evaluation of course data.

3. Students continue to be required to take the PHIL 252 (Ethics in the Sciences) course, however, the computer science faculty have introduced ethics studies based on the IEEE/ACM based codes in the Software Engineering Sequence CSCI 410 and CSCI 413.

4. The department continues to implement the University wide Quality Enhancement Plan (QEP) "Writing across the curriculum" and has Identified the following courses as having a significant writing component: CSCI 308, CSCI 410, CSCI 413, CSCI 491.

The Concern as it relates to Standard I-4 has been addressed through the following actions:

1. The department has reviewed results from the required Major Fields Test and has implemented review sessions each semester starting the month before the exam. We continue to evaluate the effectiveness of these sessions on student performance. 2. The department has conducted and reviewed surveys of Alumni and Employers. We

have also met with our industry Advisory Board for input. The Alumni and Employer Surveys are conducted in alternating years. The Advisory board is scheduled to meet again in the Fall of 2012.

H. Joint Accreditation

(10)

10 CRITERION 1. Students

A. Student Admissions

Admission to the University is required. See appendix E for general admission

requirements. Upon acceptance to the university, First Time Freshmen are placed into Basic Studies for the first semester. One advisor in Basic Studies handles STEM majors. A major is declared at this point. After the first semester the advising duty is transferred to a DMCS advisor.

If computer science is not declared as a major when the student first enrolls, then to enter the Computer Science Program, a Change of Curriculum request is required. This is accomplished by:

1. A curriculum change form must be obtained from the Office of the Registrar. The academic department head(s) involved must approve the change. All copies of the completed form must be returned to the Office of the Registrar. A student who is unable to come to campus to complete this process should contact his/her academic advisor for assistance.

2. A curriculum may be changed through the last date for late registration for a particular term. Any curriculum change form received after the last date for late registration will be processed for the next semester in which the student enrolls. B. Evaluating Student Performance

Students are required to meet with their departmental faculty advisor prior to registration for the next semester. Students are issued a PIN number by their advisor which allows them to register for courses. The academic advisor keeps a degree plan outlining all courses the student has taken and all courses the student is required to take to complete the degree. Pre-requisites for each course are clearly stated in the catalog, and the registration software will not allow students to register for courses for which they do not have the pre-requisites. In the event the student does not meet the pre-requisite

requirement as recorded in the registration system, the student is directed to consult with the instructor of the course and the coordinator of the computer science program to determine if the student's background is sufficient for waiving of the pre-requisite. C. Transfer Students and Transfer Courses

Transfer students must be admitted to the university and may declare computer science as their major. See appendix E for transfer admission requirements.

Awarding of transfer credit usually is determined from the Louisiana Board Of Regents Master Course Articulation Agreement, which can be found at

http://regents.louisiana.gov/index.cfm?md=pagebuilder&tmp=home&pid=334. If the course is not in the matrix, the course is evaluated by the computer science coordinator or department head to determine if course content and learning objectives are comparable to course work at McNeese.

(11)

11 D. Advising and Career Guidance

Students have open access to their advisor through the year. Students are required to meet with their faculty advisor prior to registering each semester. After the first semester freshman year all advising of computer science majors is performed by departmental faculty. Selection of electives is performed in consultation with the student's advisor and in accordance with the student’s career goals. As part of the CSCI491 (Senior Seminar), a representative of the university Career Services Center is scheduled as an invited speaker.

E. Work in Lieu of Courses

We offer credit examinations in lieu of course work for incoming transfer or returning students.

F. Graduation Requirements

To complete the Bachelor of Science in Computer Science degree students may choose either the General Concentration or the Applied Concentration. The Computer Science Degree consists of 120 credit hours. For both concentration, the following are required: 1 hour of orientation, 9 hours of English, 6 hours of humanities, 3 hours of speech, 12 hours of science, 6 hours of social science, 3 hours of art, and 5 general elective hours. The General Concentration further includes 27 hours of mathematics and 48 hours of computer science. The Applied Concentration further includes 18 hours of mathematics, 51 hours of computer science, and 2 business courses.

Detailed degree plans for each concentration are included in appendix G. G. Transcripts of Recent Graduates

(12)

12 CRITERION 2. Program Educational Objectives

A. Mission Statement of University

McNeese State University, a selective admissions institution, provides education, research, and service that support core values of academic excellence, student success, fiscal responsibility, and university-community alliances. The University’s fundamental educational mission is to offer associate, baccalaureate, and specific graduate curricula distinguished by academic excellence. The University engages in collaborative ventures to benefit industry and to enhance economic development and cultural growth in this region and beyond.

The foundation for student success begins with faculty commitment to excellence in teaching, research, and creative and scholarly activity. At McNeese State University, a member of the University of Louisiana System, students cultivate skills for critical thinking and effective expression and gain an understanding of the global community. The learning and social

environment integrates discipline-specific knowledge with the values of lifelong learning, ethical responsibility, and civic engagement.

Mission Statement of the College of Science

The primary purpose of the College of Science is to offer quality undergraduate and graduate science curricula. Course offerings in the sciences are designed to satisfy the requirements of offered science curricula; of science and mathematics requirements of the core curriculum, and of specific requirements of other curricula and programs.

B. Program Educational Objectives

The educational objectives for the Computer Science undergraduate program are to produce alumni(ae) who can:

1. Become productive, responsible computing science professionals capable of conducting research and/or designing, developing, or maintaining projects in the various areas of computer science.

2. Understand and apply ethical issues and social aspects of computing science in performing their duties as computer science professionals.

3. Continue the learning of new technologies in the computer science area through self-directed professional development or post graduate education.

These objectives can be found on the departmental website at http://dmcs.mcneese.edu/node/1 C. Consistency of the Program Educational Objectives with the Mission of the Institution The University is committed to providing learning opportunities; enhancing intellectual, civic, and cultural well-being; influencing economic and technological development; and improving quality of life.

(13)

13 Our efforts to keep the Computer Science program current and produce graduates who will be productive, responsible computer science professionals is tantamount to the University's mission. D. Program Constituencies

The Computer Science program constituents are students;

parents;

regional Employers/Industry; and

post baccalaureate educational programs to which our students apply. By producing graduates who are able to be productive, responsible computer science

professionals, we provide students with the ability to meet the needs of parents and regional employers.

An understanding of ethical and social issues benefits employers and industry by providing graduates with the tools necessary to maintain the trust of the employer and the employer's customers.

Graduates of the program are expected to know how to learn new technologies as they become available, that ability enhances their long term employment prospects. Our Computer Science program provides students with the needed balance between applied and theoretical training to allow the graduate to pursue employment in the computer science profession and to pursue a graduate degree. Students who can learn on their own are capable of pursuing graduate degrees, should they desire to do so.

E. Process for Revision of the Program Educational Objectives

The three vehicles through which we assess the Program Education Objectives are alumni surveys, employer surveys and meeting with the Program's Advisory Board. The alumni surveys are conducted in even numbered years. The employer surveys are conducted in odd number years. The advisory board meets in even numbered years.

The written program educational objectives outlined in part B of this section were revised by the faculty in response to an observation identified during the 2006-2007 ABET review cycle. The faculty revised the Program Educational Objectives to more clearly match the needs of our constituents. The current Program Educational Objectives appear in the 2008 ABET Interim Report.

(14)

14 CRITERION 3. STUDENT OUTCOMES

A. Student Outcomes

The following are the program outcomes for the undergraduate computer science degree: (a) an ability to apply knowledge of computing and mathematics appropriate to the discipline; (b) an ability to analyze a problem, and identify and define the computing requirements appropriate to its solution;

(c) an ability to design, implement, and evaluate a computer-based system, process, component, or program to meet desired needs;

(d) an ability to function effectively on teams to accomplish a common goal;

(e) an understanding of professional, ethical, legal, security and social issues and responsibilities; (f) an ability to communicate effectively with a range of audiences;

(g) an ability to analyze the local and global impact of computing on individuals, organizations, and society;

(h) recognition of the need for and an ability to engage in continuing professional development; (i) an ability to use current techniques, skills, and tools necessary for computing practice; (j) an ability to apply mathematical foundations, algorithmic principles, and computer science theory in the modeling and design of computer-based systems in a way that demonstrates comprehension of the tradeoffs involved in design choices;

(k) an ability to apply design and development principles in the construction of software systems of varying complexity;

These outcomes can be found on the departmental website at: http://dmcs.mcneese.edu/node/15 B. Relationship of Student Outcomes to Program Educational Objectives

Mapping of outcomes to the objectives:

Objective Outcome

1. a, b, c ,d, f, i, j, k

2. e, f, g

3. c, h,

C. Process for the Establishment and Revision of the Student Outcomes.

We are using the ABET established Student Outcomes from the 2012-2013 CRITERIA FOR ACCREDITING COMPUTING PROGRAMS published on the ABET Computing Accreditation Commission website. Student outcomes are revised as standards change. The mapping between Outcomes and Objectives is reviewed yearly.

(15)

15 D. Enabled Student Characteristics

Since the program's Student Outcomes match the outcomes from the 2012-2013 CRITERIA FOR ACCREDITING COMPUTING PROGRAMS for Computer Science programs, there are no characteristics of students which are not addressed by the student outcomes.

(16)

16 CHRITERION 4. Continuous Improvement

A. Program Educational Objectives

The Program Educational Objectives will be assessed using the following schedule and tools: Instrument for

Collecting Data

All Data Collected Continually via Web and by mailers in

Evaluation Takes Place (month) Odd/Even Numbered Year Alumni Survey

July even numbered years December even Employer

Survey

July odd numbered years December odd Advisory

Board Meeting

even numbered years June or October even

Results of Alumni Surveys

The results of the alumni survey were evaluated and actions were implemented/proposed by the Computer Science Committee.

Question: Are you a member of a professional organization such as ACM or IEEE? Response (2010): 1 yes response and 7 no responses

Response (2012): 5 yes response and 3 no responses Computer Science Committee Recommendation/Action:

 We increased emphasis in appropriate classes for students to join ACM and we continue to encourage our students to attend our department ACM/MAA meetings.

 The department has joined as an inaugural node of the Pledge of The Computing Professional in 2011. An annual public induction ceremony is performed for new members.

 April 2010, three students presented posters at the South Central Regional conference of the Consortium for Computing Sciences in Colleges (CCSC-SC) meeting in Austin Texas.

April 2011, three undergraduate attended and presented posters at CCSC South Central meeting in Huntsville Texas.

April 2012, three undergraduate and two graduate students attended and presented posters at CCSC South Central meeting in Canyon Texas. One additional student attended the meeting.

 We continue to participate (two teams) in the yearly ACM International Collegiate Programming Contest.

 We will continue to hold a minimum of six meetings of the ACM/MAA chapter each year.

(17)

17 Question: Rate the training you received from McNeese in each of the following areas:

a.) Working in groups

b.) Designing appropriate problem solutions c.) Implementing problem solutions

d.) Awareness of professional ethics e.) Effective oral communications f.) Effective written communication Choices for the above were

4 – Excellent 3 – Above Average 2 – Average

1 – Below Average 0 – Poor

The Computer Science faculty established an average number of 2.5 and above as acceptable and below this number requiring a serious analysis and modification of our program.

The resulting averages of our surveys from 2010 are as follows:

Question Topic Average Program Outcome

a.) Working in groups 2.63 1

b.) Designing appropriate problem solutions 2.75 1 c.) Implementing problem solutions 3.13 1 d.) Awareness of professional ethics 3.00 2

e.) Effective oral communications 3.13 1

f.) Effective written communication 3.13 1 The resulting averages of our surveys from 2012 are as follows:

f.) Effective written communication 2.88 1

The overall averages for the four year period occurring in the 2010 and 2012 survey cycle are as follows:

(18)

18 Computer Science Committee Recommendation/Action:

 The combined 2010 and 2012 survey results indicate that we are meeting our benchmarks.

 The faculty is concerned about the downward trend shown in response to the question on designing appropriate problem solutions and in the two questions on communication skills.

 To comply with the university's QEP, Writing Across the Curriculum, CSCI 308, 410, and 413 were identified as writing enriched courses in the Fall semester of 2011. As such, they will have a significant writing component which should increase the overall written communication skills of students.

 The faculty are currently looking to identify if the weakness in designing appropriate problem solutions is as a result of a single course or multiple courses within the curriculum.

Question: Have you received additional training since graduating from McNeese?

Response (2010): Six out of the eight indicated they had received additional training since leaving McNeese.

Response (2012): Two out of the eight indicated they had received additional training since leaving McNeese

--- Directly related to Program Outcome 3.

Computer Science Committee Recommendation/Action:

Half of the 16 respondents to the survey indicated that they had received some additional training since leaving McNeese. This points to the conclusion that our students will continue the learning of new technologies in the computer science area through self-directed professional development or post graduate education.

Question: Are there any areas of computer science that DMCS could have included that would have better prepared you for the workforce? Please explain:

2010 Survey Responses include: networking,

web development SQL

current languages, and

more small real-world projects 2012 Survey Responses include:

developing trends, and resources for new technologies, networking, and

(19)

19 Computer Science Committee Recommendation/Action:

 The Database Management Systems course (CSCI 309) was switched to SQL starting in 2009

 C# was offered as an elective for computer science majors in Spring, 2009 and Spring, 2012

 Web development was offered as an elective in Fall, 2009, and was made a requirement in the 2011 catalog. This course will be taught every 3rd semester in the future.

 Networking was offered as an elective in Spring,2009, Fall, 2010, and Spring, 2012. Networking is a requirement for the applied concentration, and will be taught every 3rd semester in the future.

Results of Employer Surveys

In December of 2009 Employer Surveys were sent to institutions that had hired McNeese State University computer science graduates. A total of 67 surveys were sent out and 12 surveys were returned. Many of these responses were collected during our May 14, 2010 advisory board meeting. Since the responses were collected late in the survey period the faculty decided it would forgo the 2011 survey cycle for employer surveys.

The respondent’s to the survey were: A. W.R. Grace

B. Recon Management Services/Engineering C. PCI Gamming Authority

D. America's Pizza Company (Franchise of 127 locations) E. Christus St. Patrick (Hospital)

F. Citgo Petroleum G. CPSB (School Board) H. McNeese State University I. PPG

J. Isle of Capri Casino

K. Safety Council of South West Louisiana L. Global Industries Offshore LLC

The Employers were asked to evaluate the McNeese CS graduates on the questions below. Question: Rate the training of the MSU Computer Science Alumni who are employed by you in the following areas:

a) Employees are productive group members.

b) Employees are capable of designing appropriate problem solutions. c) Employees are capable of implementing problem solutions.

d) Employees demonstrate professional ethics. e) Employees are willing to learn new skills.

f) Employees are capable of effective oral communications. g) Employees are capable of effective written communications.

(20)

20 Choices for the above were

4 – Excellent 3 – Above Average 2 – Average

1 – Below Average 0 – Poor

The Computer Science faculty established an average number of 2.5 and above as acceptable and below this number requiring a serious analysis and modification of our program.

The resulting averages of our surveys are as follows: AVERAGES a). Employees are productive group members. 3.03 b). Employees are capable of designing appropriate problem solutions. 2.78 c). Employees are capable of implementing problem solutions. 3.03 d). Employees demonstrate professional ethics. 2.97 e). Employees are willing to learn new skills. 3.06 f). Employees are capable of effective oral communications. 2.5 g). Employees are capable of effective written communications. 2.28 Computer Science Committee Recommendation/Action:

Items a-c are most directly related to outcome 1. Become productive, responsible computing science professionals capable of conducting research and/or designing, developing, or maintaining projects in the various areas of computer science.

Our students were above average on most areas, an indication that our graduates are performing as expected.

Item d speaks to outcome 2.Understand and apply ethical issues and social aspects of computing science in performing their duties as computer science professionals.

Again we see the employers of our graduates rating the graduates above average.

Item e relates to outcome 3. Continue the learning of new technologies in the computer science area through self-directed professional development or post-graduate education.

While most areas are above average, area ‘g’, effective written communication skills, shows (what the Computer Science Faculty agree) a number indicating the area requires analysis and program modification. Area ‘f’, effective oral communication skills, is borderline and indicates more emphasis should be given to oral communication, e.g. more class presentations by students. In 2007 CSCI 491- Seminar, increased from a 1 hour course to a 3 hour course. More time and emphasis has been placed on writing of the student’s senior paper and on preparing their oral presentation. In addition, the University has a campus wide writing-across-the –curriculum initiative. Students are now required to have 24 hours (8 courses) considered to be writing

(21)

21 enriched in their general education courses. Additionally they will be required to have 12 hours (4 courses) of writing enriched courses in their major at the junior / senior level. The 12 hours at junior senior level went into effect Fall, 2010. We expect to see the numbers in both the oral communication and written communication areas start to increase in the next two surveys. As a faculty, we are pleased to see the variety of organizations hiring our majors.

Advisory Board Meeting

In addition to both the alumni and the employer surveys and data, the computer science faculty met with the Computer Science Advisory board on Friday May 14, 2010 to review our program outcomes, required course list, various course objectives and the direction of our program. The advisory board consists of representatives from CITGO, WR GRACE, McNEESE STATE UNIVERSITY, INFOTECH SOLUTIONS, ST. PATRICK’S HOSPITAL, and CALCASIEU PARISH SCHOOL SYSTEM.

Several comments/suggestions came out of the afternoons meeting. a). Communication and written skills are very important.

b). Working on multidiscipline teams (even if just pairing a hardware specialist with a software specialist) is important.

c). Students should be strong in fundamentals and should be trainable.

d). Senior projects and software engineering projects should be presented to audiences.

e). Senior projects and software engineering projects could have industry connections/mentors. The computer science faculty noted that at the Advisory Board meeting written and oral communication skills were again mentioned. The faculty committee recommended that in Fall 2010 not only will students have a written paper and oral presentation in CSCI 491, but also they will also be required to display a poster at a poster session on their project. In addition, Dr. Albrecht will be teaching the year-long course sequence on software engineering and has been making contact with the Advisory Board participants to explore possible team projects.

(22)

22 B. Student Outcomes

The following tools will be utilized to measure the student's ability to master the Program Student Outcomes.

Instrument for Collecting Data

Data Collected Evaluation Takes Place (month)

Odd/Even Numbered

Year

ENGL 253 every semester December odd

CSCI 308 every spring September even

CSCI 410 every fall September even

CSCI 413 every spring September even

CSCI 491 every semester December odd

ACM Report June September even

Senior Exit Survey every semester September even Major Fields Test every semester December odd

Student performance on each outcome will be measured using the following benchmarks on the assessment tools listed above.

Outcome Rubric - Schedule

a. An ability to apply knowledge of computing and mathematics appropriate to the discipline.

• Major Fields Test - conducted every semester and evaluated every odd year in December.

• Select final exam questions in CSCI308, CSCI413, and CSCI426.

• Course projects in CSCI308, CSCI413, and CSCI426.

b. An ability to analyze a problem and identify and define the computing requirements appropriate to its solution.

• Project reviews in CSCI 308 - conducted every spring semester and evaluated every even numbered year in September.

• Alumni Survey - evaluated every even numbered year in December.

• Employer Survey - evaluated every odd numbered year in December.

c. An ability to design, implement, and evaluate a computer based system,

process, component or program to meet desired needs.

• Review from CSCI 491 - conducted every regular semester and evaluated every odd numbered year in December.

d. An ability to function effectively on teams to accomplish a common goal

• Peer review in CSCI 413 (Software Engineering) Course conducted every Spring semester and evaluated every even number year In September. • Alumni Survey - evaluated every even number year

(23)

23 in December.

• Senior Exit Survey - conducted each regular

semester and evaluated every even numbered year in September.

e. An understanding of professional, ethical, legal, security and social issues and responsibilities.

• Senior Exit Survey - conducted each regular

semester and evaluated every even numbered year in September.

• Paper reviews in CSCI 410/413 - conducted every fall/spring semester and evaluated every even numbered year in September.

f. An ability to communicate effectively with a wide range of audiences.

• Conference with English Professor(s) who are responsible for teaching ENGL 253 (Professional Writing) - done at convenience of English

department each semester.

g. An ability to analyze the local and global impact of

computing on individuals, organizations, and society

h. Students will recognize the need for and an ability to engage in continuing professional development.

• Review from CSCI 491 - conducted every regular semester and evaluated every odd numbered year In December.

• Report from faculty advisor of student’s

involvement in ACM/MAA chapter-done annually in June.

• Senior Exit Survey - evaluated every even numbered year in September.

i. An ability to use current techniques, skill and tools necessary for computing practice.

• Review from CSI 491 - conducted every regular semester, and evaluated every odd numbered year in December.

(24)

24 j. An ability to apply

mathematical foundations, algorithmic principles, and computer science theory in the modeling and design of

computer-based systems in a way that demonstrates

comprehension of the tradeoffs involved in design choices.

• Review of CSCI 308 - conducted every spring semester and evaluated every even numbered year in September.

• Major Fields Test - conducted every regular semester and evaluated every odd year In December.

k. An ability to apply design and development principles in the construction of software systems of varying complexity

• Review of CSCI 308 - conducted every spring semester and evaluated every even numbered year in September.

• Review of CSCI 410/413 - conducted every fall/spring semester and evaluated every even numbered year in September.

Expected Levels of Attainment for Each Student Outcome

a. An ability to apply knowledge of computing and mathematics appropriate to the discipline. The Final Exam and/ or project results from CSCI 308, CSCI 413 and CSCI 426 will be one instrument used to determine if students are achieving proficiency in this area. Minimum scores of 70 percent are expected of all students on both projects and final exams.

The Major Fields Test will be used to assess proficiency in applying knowledge of computing and mathematics appropriate to the discipline. The Computer Science Committee considers at or above the 25th percentile, in all subject areas and an overall average at or above the 25th

percentile in total score (according to the ETS Major Field Test Assessment Indicators table and Total Score table) to be an acceptable performance indicator for McNeese computer science students. The Committee has set a goal to move the acceptable performance indicator gradually up to the 40th percentile.

b. An ability to analyze a problem and identify and define the computing requirements appropriate to its solution.

Project results from CSCI 308 and CSCI 413 will be used to determine if students are achieving proficiency in an ability to analyze a problem and identify and define the computing

requirements appropriate to its solution. Minimum scores of 70 percent are expected of all students on major projects assigned in CSCI 308 & 413.

c. An ability to design, implement, and evaluate a computer based system, process, component or program to meet desired needs.

Project results from CSCI 413 and CSCI 491 will be used to determine if students are achieving proficiency in an ability to design, implement, and evaluate a computer based system, process,

(25)

25 component or program to meet desired needs. Minimum scores of 70 percent are expected of all students on final project assigned in CSCI 413 & 491.

d. An ability to function effectively on teams to accomplish a common goal.

Evaluation of our student's ability to function effectively on teams to accomplish a common goal will be evaluated in CSCI 413 using a peer review document. Students are expected to earn a minimum of a 70 percent average on their peer review evaluation.

The Exit Survey document is also used to determine a student's perception of his/her own ability and comfort level working in a group environment. We look for a 70% average from the Exit Survey document.

e. An understanding of professional, ethical, legal, security and social issues and responsibilities. We expect 100 percent of our graduating seniors to be aware of the codes of ethics in computer science field. The exit surveys will be one indicator for this awareness.

We expect our students in the CSCI 410/413 sequence will be able to apply the code of ethics by achieving a minimum average of 70% on written assignments.

f. An ability to communicate effectively with a wide range of audiences.

The final written report and oral presentation from CSCI 491 will be used as a tool for evaluating the student's ability to communicate effectively with a wide range of audiences. A grade of 70 % or better on the written and oral presentation of the student's project is deemed acceptable. The final written report submitted by each student for ENGL253 will be submitted for evaluation by the computer science faculty. The computer science faculty will utilize the Rubric for

Technical Writing to evaluate each paper. Students are expected to score in the acceptable or exceptional range on each category of the rubric.

g. An ability to analyze the local and global impact of computing on individuals, organizations, and society.

Students in the CSCI491 course are expected to complete a written and oral report on international diversity. This assignment is graded pass/fail.

h. Students will recognize the need for and an ability to engage in continuing professional development.

We expect 70% of our graduating seniors to be members of MAA/ACM or IEEE-CS, or to at least have attended some meetings of the student chapter.

(26)

26 Both of the above will be measured using the senior exit survey.

We require 100% of our students in CSCI 491 to have successfully completed a self-directed project with a mark of C or better. This project must include research required to master techniques utilized to complete the project.

i. An ability to use current techniques, skill and tools necessary for computing practice.

The final written report and oral presentation from CSCI 491 will be used as a tool for evaluating the student's ability to use current techniques, skill and tools necessary for computing practice. A grade of 70 % or better on the written and oral presentation of the student's project is deemed acceptable.

j. An ability to apply mathematical foundations, algorithmic principles, and computer science theory in the modeling and design of computer-based systems in a way that demonstrates comprehension of the tradeoffs involved in design choices.

The final exam and/ or project results from CSCI 308 will be one instrument used to determine if students are achieving proficiency applying mathematical foundations, algorithmic principles, and computer science theory in the modeling and design of computer-based systems in a way that demonstrates comprehension of the tradeoffs involved in design choices. Minimum scores of 70 percent are expected of all students on both projects and final exams.

The Major Fields Test will be used to assess proficiency in applying mathematical foundations, algorithmic principles, and computer science theory in the modeling and design of computer-based systems in a way that demonstrates comprehension of the tradeoffs involved in design choices. The Computer Science Committee considers that at or above the 25th percentile, in all subject areas and an overall average at or above the 25th percentile in Total Score each semester (according to the ETS Major Field Test Assessment Indicators table and Total Score table) to be an acceptable performance indicator for McNeese computer science students. The Committee has set a goal to move the acceptable performance indicator gradually up to 40th percentile.

k. An ability to apply design and development principles in the construction of software systems of varying complexity.

Project results from CSCI 308 and CSCI 413 will be used to determine if students are achieving proficiency in an ability to apply design and development principles in the construction of software systems of varying complexity. Minimum scores of 70 percent are expected of all students on major projects assigned in CSCI 308 & 413.

(27)

27 Summaries of the results of the evaluation process and an analysis illustrating the extent to which each of the student outcomes is being attained

Senior Exit Surveys: Addresses Student Outcomes d, e and h

Results from Spring 2008- Spring 2012 Positive

Student response Exit Survey question :

Member of professional Organization 61.%

Did you attend ACM/MAA meetings 62%

Attended any CS or Math prof. meetings 59%

Familiar with ACM IEEE-CS codes of Ethics 100% Able to Communicate Effectively orally 97% Able to write in a professional setting 97%

Solve a problem in discipline 81%

Design a problem solution in discipline 80%

Work in groups 88%

As these results relate to student outcome d, an ability to function effectively on teams to accomplish a common goal, the 88% indicating they were prepared to work in groups meets the 70% benchmark established by the faculty.

As these results relate to outcome e, an understanding of professional, ethical, legal, security and social issues and responsibilities, 100% of our graduating seniors indicate they are aware of the existing codes of ethics relating to the computing science profession. This result meets the benchmark established by the faculty.

As these results relate to student outcome h, students will recognize the need for and an ability to engage in continuing professional development, the indicators used, i.e. membership in

professional organizations, attending ACM/MAA student chapter meetings and being able to work in groups, fell below the benchmarks in the first two markers and met the benchmarks in the third indicator.

The faculty would like to see a stronger showing in student participation in professional

organizations. Since the last program review, the MSU ACM chapter became an official student chapter of the ACM. We are moving for a more student centric organization and expect to make our meetings more relevant to students needs and desires i.e. bringing in an ACM distinguished lecturer.

Major Fields test results: Addresses Student Outcomes a and j

Total scores are reported for each student who takes the Major Field Test whereas subject area scores are only reported for cohorts of 5 or more students and are thus not provided for several semesters leading up to the report discussed in the August, 2009 Final Statement.

(28)

28 Total Test Score Analysis by academic year

Semester Number Students Average Test Score Approximate Percentile Spring 2012 7 153.7 70 Fall 2011 3 143 30 Spring 2011 5 143.2 35 Fall 2010 4 144.25 35 Spring 2010 6 138.5 25 Fall 2009 4 155 60 Spring 2009 3 136 20 Fall 2008 4 137.8 20 Spring 2008 1 151 55 Fall 2007 0 NA NA Spring 2007 3 147 45 Fall 2006 0 NA NA Spring 2006 5 141 30

As it relates to both student outcomes a and j, the results of the Major Fields test indicate that our students meet the benchmark of being in the 25th percentile for all semesters after the Spring, 2009. In the Fall,2009, the department instituted review sessions as a means of improving scores on the exam.

CSCI 491 Seminar: Addresses Student Outcomes c, f, g, h, i

The following table summarizes data from CSCI 491 for the last two academic years. The program outcome measured by each column is noted in the shaded area of the table.

Number Students

Presentation Paper Design, Implement, and Evaluate Analyze Impact Recognize Professional Development Need Current Practices OUTCOME F. F. C G. H. I. S12 8 89% 89% 97% 96% 100% 100% F11 2 88% 77% 95% 85% 95% 95% S11 7 91% 85% 95% 90% 99% 99% F10 7 88% 88% 93% 85% 95% 95%

The bench mark is 70% for each area, as established by the program faculty. It can be seen that the results indicate the students are meeting the benchmark goals. There are no changes needed to the areas being measured by these benchmarks.

(29)

29 CSCI 413 Software Engineering: Addresses Student Outcomes a,b,c,d,e, k

The following table summarizes preliminary data from CSCI413 collected in the Spring,2012 semester: Ethics Peer Evals Final Exam Final Project OUTCOMES e. d. a. a., b., c., k. Grafton 100 85 74 75 Hebert 0 85 70 85 Lafleur 100 90 80 70 Lilly 95 75 84 85 Oulapour 95 96 70 70 Pham 95 85 88 75 Shrestha 0 91 60 70 Sims 95 85 60 70 Van Tassel 95 90 71 75 Waite 95 87 84 85

Preliminary data indicates that the benchmarks measured, a,b,c and k, are met by all students for this semester. Two students did not complete the ethics assignment used for measurement in CSCI413 and thus did not achieve the required benchmark score. The remainder of the students did score above the benchmark. This course is scheduled to be analyzed in detail by the program faculty in September,2012.

(30)

30 CSCI 308 Data Structures and Algorithms: Addresses Student Outcomes a, b,j, k

The following table summarizes preliminary data from CSCI308 collected in the Spring,2012 semester:

Last name Lab % Project % Exam % Final Exam % OUTCOME a, b,k,j a,j, Higgins 95.83 100 98.15 84 Hileman 76.67 85 58.71 75 Honore 72.00 90 87.75 74 Hyun 98.33 90 103.04 96 Jhong 85.00 90 77.55 73 LaRocca 90.33 90 82.90 83 Miller 33.33 0 67.04 98 Nguyen 57.50 80 70.32 65 Patin 38.33 70 79.50 90 Pitts 79.17 95 92.27 102 Quebodeaux 59.17 90 53.51 64 Seiford 62.50 90 64.43 82 Shrestha 81.67 70 53.54 74 Trahan 100.00 100 100.87 97

Preliminary data indicates that the benchmarks measured, a, b, j, and k, are met by most students who actually complete the required coursework. 2 of 14 students failed to meet the 70%

benchmark on the final exam. One of 14 students failed to meet the 70% benchmark on

programming projects. This course is scheduled to be analyzed in detail by the program faculty in September, 2012.

How the results are documented and maintained

For the courses used for evaluating student outcomes, results are kept in notebooks for each time the course is evaluated. Summary data from the Major Fields Test, exit surveys, employer surveys, and alumni surveys are also maintained in notebooks for future reference.

(31)

31 C. Continuous Improvement

The following pages provide a list of issues which have been addressed by the computer science faculty through review of the program, and our solutions to these issues.

Issue: Weak textbooks were selected for some courses:

In the course of reviewing CSCI419 from the Spring, 2009, the computer science faculty decided the book chosen for the course was weak.

Solution/Recommendation:

All computer science faculty would be involved in selection of textbooks used for all CSCI undergraduate courses.

Issue: Students have lower than expected scores on the Major Fields Test:

In the course of reviewing Major Fields Test results, which are used both for ABET purposes and for the computer science master plan, many students’ scores were found to be

consistently below the 40th percentile target. Solution/Recommendation:

Because of the time which elapses between taking course material and taking the Major Fields Test, the computer science faculty began holding review sessions each semester for some topics in the Fall, 2010. The format of the review sessions was initially given as a series of quick review lectures. These sessions proved to be difficult to plan and prepare , since so much material needed to be covered. The material covered now includes working through a printed copy of Major Fields Test in computer science and GRE computer science subject exam sample questions.

Issue: Students are unable to complete major projects in a single semester:

Students in the program are required to complete a major project as part of the Software Engineering sequence (CSCI410/413) and as part of the Capstone Project course (CSCI491). Students were having trouble finishing the projects during the allotted 1 semester timeframe. Solution/Recommendation:

The CSCI410/413 project is now started in CSCI410 instead of waiting until CSCI413. Students enrolling in CSCI491 are required to select a mentor before the end of the previous semester, and are expected to start working on the CSCI491 capstone project during the break between semesters.

(32)

32 Issue: Students exiting the program lacked experience with SQL

Upon review of the Database course, CSCI309, the faculty decided the student's exposure to SQL was weak.

A decision was made to switch from using Microsoft Access to MySQL; also the textbook was changed to put further emphasis on SQL and program interaction with databases.

Issue: Students finishing the Associates Degree in Computer Information Technology and at feeder community colleges have no path to a 4 year degree:

Students finishing the Associates Degree in Computer Information Technology, both at McNeese, SOWELA, and other nearby community colleges have no clear path to obtain a B.S. degree without starting over.

The Applied Concentration was added to the program in order to provide these students with a clear path to a B.S. degree.

Issue: Loss of students to General Studies

Many students were unable to complete the 4 year degree due to weaknesses, especially in Mathematics, and choose to complete a degree by changing majors to the General Studies degree program. Some students following this path have a difficult time finding employment. Solution/Recommendation:

Advisors will direct students who are weak in math and considering a change of major to change to the Applied Concentration.

Issue: Students in upper level courses were weak in programming:

Upon review of several upper division courses, it was determined that students lacked sufficient hands on programming skills which should have been developed in lower division courses.

Solution/Recommendation: Add a lab component to introductory computer programming courses:

A lab component was added to the computer programming course, CSCI180 and CSCI281, as of the 2009-2010 catalog.

(33)

33 Issue: Insufficient time in CSCI281 to teach Java

Upon review of CSCI281 from the Fall, 2008, it was determined there was insufficient time to cover both the required topics in C and introduce the Java programming language in order to sufficiently prepare students for CSCI308.

A new course, CSCI282, Object Oriented Design, was added in the 2009-2010 catalog as a requirement for the Computer Science degree and as a pre-requisite for CSCI308.

Issue: Increase hands on activities in courses:

Computer Science is a field of study that deals with many complicated abstract concepts that are difficult for students to grasp without hands on activity. Due to the complexity of the hardware design, some activities we would like students to perform are difficult to accomplish on currently available PC and MAC hardware, which is available in the computer learning studios

Solution/Recommenddation:

The computer science faculty applied for, and received, a Louisiana Board of Regents Enhancement grant to obtain Arduino based embedded systems for laboratory exercises. These embedded systems will be utilized to provide a simplified hardware environment on which to teach courses. Funding for this project starts in the Fall, 2012.

In the Summer, 2012 we purchased a classroom set of robots, used in teaching a new course in robotics. These robots were purchased using funds from the Drew equipment monies allocated to the College of Science.

D. Additional Information

Materials referenced in 4(A), 4(B) and 4(C) along with minutes from computer science faculty meetings will be readily available at the time of the accreditation visit.

(34)

34 CRITERION 5. CURRICULUM

A. Program Curriculum

1. Table 5-1 describes the plan of study for students in the program including information on course offerings in the form of a recommended schedule by year and term along with average section enrollments for all courses in the program over the two years

immediately preceding this report. McNeese State University operates under a traditional Fall/Spring semester schedule and provides for a compressed six week summer semester

(35)

35 Table 5-1 Curriculum

Computer Science – Applied Concentration-current

Course

(Department, Number, Title)

List all courses in the program by term starting with first term of first year and ending with the last term of the final year.

Indicate Whether Course is Required, Elective or a Selective Elective by an R, an E or an SE2

Curricular Area (Credit Hours)

Last Two Terms the Course was Offered:

Year and, Semester, or Quarter Average Section Enrollment for the Last Two Terms the Course was Offered1 Math & Basic Sciences Computing Topics Mark with an F or A for Fundament al or Advanced General Educatio n Other General Elective E 3 General Elective E 2

COMM 201 Fundamentals of Public Speaking R 3

BADM 120 Topics in Contemporary Business R 3

FFND 101 Freshmen Foundations R 1

ORIN 101 Orientation R 0

ENGL 101 English Composition I R 3

CSCI 180 Introduction to Computer Science I SE 3F Sp 2012, Fall 2011 18

CSCI 102 Introduction to Programming with BASIC SE 3F Sp 2012, Fall 2011 21

ACCT 208 Accounting Principles R 3

CSCI 241 Introduction to Software Packages I R 3F Sp 2012, Fall 2011 23

HIST 201 America History to 1877 SE 3

HIST 202 American History since 1877 SE 3

ENGL 102 English Composition II R 3

CSCI 242 Introduction to Software Packages II R 3F Fall 2011, Fall 2010 9

CSCI 278 Introduction to Personal Computer Hardware R 3F Fall 2011, Fall 2010 13

(36)

36

MATH 130 Finite Mathematics SE 3 Su 2012, Sp 2012 32

MATH 185 Discrete Mathematics SE 3 Fall 2011, Fall 2010 15

MATH 307 Foundations of Mathematics SE 3 Sp 2012, Sp 2011 19

ENGL 253 Introduction to Professional Writing Workshop R 3

CSCI 281 Introduction to Computer Science II SE 3F Su 2012, Sp 2012 13

CSCI 284 Selected Topics in Programming (Visual Basic II) SE 3F Sp 2012, Sp 2011 11

CSCI 286 Computer Operation and Operating Systems R 3F Sp 2012, Sp 2011 10

STAT 231 Elementary Probability and Statistical Inference SE 3 Su 2012, Sp 2012 37

STAT 430 Probability SE 3 Sp 2012, Su 2011 12

STAT 431 Mathematical Statistics and Probability SE 3 Fall 2011, Fall 2010 37

Approved Science Lecture SE 3

Approved Science Lab SE 1

Social Science Elective SE 3

CSCI 282 Introduction to Object-Oriented Programming R 3F Fall 2011, Fall 2010 21

CSCI 309 Data Base Management Systems R 3F Fall 2011, Fall 2010 17

CSCI 321 Information Systems Analysis R 3F Sp 2012, Fall 2011 25

MATH 170 Pre-Calculus College Algebra R 3 Su 2012, Sp 2012 34

MAAP 200 Midpoint Assessment of Academic Progress Examination

R 0

CSCI 308 Advanced Data Structures and Algorithms R 3A Sp 2012, Sp 2011 17

CSCI 274 Introduction to Computer Organization R 3F Sp 2012, Sp 2011 24

MATH 175 Pre-Calculus II R 3 Su 2012, Sp 2012 31

PHIL 252 Ethics in the Sciences R 3

CSCI 410 Software Engineering I R 3A Fall 2011, Fall 2010 11

CSCI 419 Computer Organization and Architecture R 3A Sp 2012, Fall 2010 36

CSCI 426 Introduction to Web Programming R 3A Fall 2011, Fall 2009 12

(37)

37

MATH 190 Calculus I SE 4 Su 2012, Sp 2012 36

CSCI 491 Seminar R 3A Sp 2012, Fall 2011 9

CSCI 424 Introduction to Networking R 3A Sp 2012, Fall 2010 15

CSCI 413 Software Engineering II R 3A Sp 2011, Sp 2012 12

CSCI 409 Special Topics in Computing Science R 3A Su 2012, Sp 2012 14

MATH 314 Calculus for Technology II SE 3 Sp 2012, Sp 2011 9

MATH 291 Calculus II SE 4 Su 2012, Sp 2012 27

OVERALL TOTAL CREDIT HOURS FOR THE DEGREE

120

PERCENT OF TOTAL 25 42.5 22.5 10

1. For courses that include multiple elements (lecture, laboratory, recitation, etc.), indicate the average enrollment in each element.

2. Required courses are required of all students in the program, elective courses are optional for students, and selected electives are courses where students must take one or more courses from a specified group.

(38)

38 Table 5-1 Curriculum

Computer Science – General Track 2011-current

Course

(Department, Number, Title)

List all courses in the program by term starting with first term of first year and ending with the last term of the final year.

Indicate Whether Course is Required, Elective or a Selective Elective by an R, an E or an SE2

Curricular Area (Credit Hours)

Last Two Terms the Course was Offered: Year and, Semester, or Quarter Average Section Enrollmen t for the Last

Two Terms the Course was Offered1 Math & Basic Scien ces Computing Topics Mark with an F or A for Funda mental or Advanc ed General Educ ation Other

CSCI 180 Introduction to Computer Science I R 3F Sp 2012, Fall 2011 18

MATH 170 Pre-Calculus College Algebra R 3 Su 2012, Sp 2012 34

COMM 201 Fundamentals of Public Speaking R 3

FFND 101 Freshmen Foundations R 1

ORIN 101 Orientation R 0

ENGL 101 English Composition I R 3

CSCI 281 Introduction to Computer Science II R 3F Su 2012, Sp 2012 13

CSCI 274 Introduction to Computer Organization R 3F Sp 2012, Sp 2011 24

(39)

39

HIST 201 America History to 1877 SE 3

HIST 202 American History since 1877 SE 3

ENGL 102 English Composition II R 3

CSCI 282 Introduction to Object-Oriented Programming R 3F Fall 2011,Fall 2010 21

CSCI 309 Data Base Management Systems R 3F Fall 2011, Fall 2010 17

MATH 190 Calculus I R 4 Su 2012, Sp 2012 36

MATH 185 Discrete Mathematics SE 3 Fall 2011, Fall 2010 15

MATH 307 Foundations of Mathematics SE 3 Sp 2012,Sp 2011 19

ENGL 253 Introduction to Professional Writing Workshop R 3

CSCI 308 Advanced Data Structures and Algorithms R 3A Sp 2012, Sp 2011 17

CSCI 419 Computer Organization and Architecture R 3A Sp 2012, Fall 2010 36

MATH 291 Calculus II R 4 Su 2012, Sp 2012 27

MATH 322 Linear Algebra and Matrix Theory R 3 Su 2012, Sp 2012 22

PHIL 252 Ethics in the Sciences R 3

CSCI 410 Software Engineering I R 3A Fall 2011, Fall 2010 11

CSCI 415 Introduction to Operating Systems R 3A Sp 2011, Fall 2009 27

MATH 292 Multivariable Calculus R 4 Su 2012,Sp 2012 21

CSCI 304 Numerical Methods I R 3A Fall 2011, Fall 2010 23

General Elective E 2

MAAP 200 Midpoint Assessment of Academic Progress Examination

R 0

CSCI 413 Software Engineering II R 3A Sp 2011, Sp 2012 12

CSCI 426 Introduction to Web Programming R 3A Fall 2011, Fall 2009 12

CSCI 408 Introduction to Formal Language Theory R 3A Fall 2011, Sp 2010 19

ART 351 Visual Arts Survey R 3

CSCI 416 Structure of Programming Languages E 3A Fall 2011, Sp 2010 17

CSCI 425 Artificial Intelligence E 3A Sp 2012, Sp 2010 21