Academic Degree Program Assessment

School of Computing and Software Engineering

Use of Results Report

CS - MS Computer Science

1. Please list the Program Outcomes which were met and briefly discuss these.

1. Demonstrate the understanding of the capabilities and limits of computation, hardware and software systems, and software development.
2. Analyze problems in the computing discipline and design solutions that integrate hardware and software, and that are technologically appropriate and theoretically sound.
3. Manage systems complexity by applying best practices of the discipline.
4. Demonstrate the ability to effectively communicate technical information, as expected within the discipline.
5. Research and critique computing literature, and utilize it for proposing solutions.

All of the program outcomes for the MSCS program are listed above, and have been met.  They are measured through the overall EPAN results on the different courses contributing to those outcomes.  When the EPAN summaries are averaged for all the courses, it is clear that the desired threshold (of 2 out of 3) was exceeded for all the above outcomes.
2. If any program outcomes were not met, please list these and discuss these in more detail.
While the following outcomes were met, a minor concern was indicated by the results on the following outcomes:

• Demonstrate the understanding of the capabilities and limits of computation, hardware and software systems, and software development.

On program outcome #1, CS 6413 (Theory of Computation) had an EPAN summary of just under 2 (1.94 to be precise).  The instructor felt that a better motivation for introducing the subject and its relevance to the field will satisfy the threshold.

With respect to program outcome #5, we need to review the program to make sure that several courses have a research component, and that it is being evaluated.  As it turned out, neither CS 6153 (Advanced Database Systems) nor CS 6223 (Advanced Computer Architecture) actually evaluated this component.  However, CS 6023 (Research Methods and Presentations) is devoted to this outcome.  Also, CS 6423 (Algorithmic Processes) also measured this outcome.  It was suggested that this outcome be not evaluated in CS 6153, but that its assessment be reinforced in CS 6223.
3.
A. Please discuss how you think that or anticipate that these results might be used.

The following suggestions for improvement have been made and will be considered for implementation:

1. Make the suggested improvement to CS 6413.
2. There was a feeling that the outcomes were accomplished at a relatively high level on the EPAN scale, mostly above 2.5 (and on outcome #4, at 2.99) on a scale of 0-3.  While this is a pleasant outcome, the question of whether the assessment is indeed accurate or any change is needed in the assessment needs further evaluation in the next round.

B. Please note below when you are tentatively planning to discuss these results and the use of these results with your faculty and with others.

These results have been discussed at the August 22 meeting and a prioritization is in progress by the respective subcommittees for implementation purposes.  At the next department meeting, scheduled for September 12, this process will be completed and steps for implementation will be taken.

It was also agreed that the program objectives and outcomes should be better aligned with ABET definitions.

4. Dates of Meetings: Please list below the dates of meetings at which the use of assessment results was discussed and also briefly summarize the discussions and decisions.
In the meeting of August 12, it was decided to call an Assessment Retreat on August 22 to complete the work.  Several subcommittees were formed to cover different programs.  It was also agreed that the Assessment Retreat should be an annual event, generally scheduled on the fourth Friday of each Fall semester, and that FCARs will be due by the second Friday of each semester for the courses taught the previous semester.  (The best time to complete them is perhaps when the grades are submitted to the Registrar.)

In the meeting of August 22, four subcommittees met and discussed the various programs as follows:

• Undergraduate CS programs subcommittee
• MSCS subcommittee
• Graduate Certificates in CS subcommittee
• Software Engineering programs subcommittee

Each subcommittee studied the FCARs related to the programs it covered, summarized whether each outcome is met or not, and identified a prioritized list of improvements for further discussion and implementation.

 

 

 

Academic Degree Program Assessment (CSE)

Planning and Assessment Homepage