ACM
SGB Meeting
March 19, 2005
Chicago
Outline
• General state
− Membership
− Finances
• Educational initiatives
− CSTA
− NCAA
− ED Council
• Brand awareness
• Council Offsite
Membership
• Membership is growing
− Professional
− Student
− CSTA
59,900
20,700
1,400
60,000+
20,000+
2,000+
Membership
• Membership is growing
− Professional
− Student
− CSTA
59,900
20,700
1,400
60,000+
20,000+
2,000+
70,000
60,000
50,000
40,000
30,000
Professional
Members
20,000
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
2000
1999
1998
1997
1996
1995
1994
1993
1992
1991
1990
1989
1988
1987
1986
1985
1984
1983
0
1982
10,000
Financial Highlights
• FY ’05 SIG Projection
Conference Net
Operations Net
SIG Net
Projection
3,250
(2,750)
Budget
2,368
(2,754)
500
• Digital Library SIG distribution
− Projection: $1,230,000
(386)
Var
882
4
886
SIGs - In Perspective
FY99
Actual
FY00
Actual
FY01
Actual
FY02
Actual
ACM SIGs
Conference Revenue
Conference Expense
Conference Net
$22,233
$18,894
$3,339
$23,699
$19,867
$3,832
$24,755
$19,601
$5,154
$22,813
$21,370
$1,443
Operations Revenue
Operations Expense
Operatons Net
$3,591
$6,198
($2,607)
$3,878
$5,901
($2,023)
$3,651
$6,828
($3,177)
$1,809
$1,977
ACM SIG Net
• Notes:
$732
− DL distribution of $1.23M
− Reduced SIG Allocation for 2nd year
FY 03
Actual
FY 04
FY05
Actual Projection
18,292
18,906
($614)
19,179
17,004
$2,175
20,643
17,393
$3,250
$3,439
$6,919
($3,480)
$3,572
$6,434
($2,862)
$3,614
$5,871
($2,257)
$3,837
$6,587
($2,750)
($2,037)
($3,476)
($82)
$500
SIG Fund Balance
30,000
25,000
20,000
15,000
ACM SIG
10,000
5,000
0
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
Financial Highlights
• DL Distribution in perspective
1600
1400
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
$1,230K
Financial Highlights
• DL Distribution in perspective
1600
1400
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
$1,430K
Educational Activities
− CSTA
− NCAA
− ED Council
CSTA
• Computer Science Teachers Association
− National organization for high school and middle school
teachers of computer science
− Goal: address a real crisis facing computer science in high
schools
− Immediate priorities
•
•
•
•
National standards for curriculum
Resources and professional development for teachers
Building a real community of CS educators
Engage the NCAA
CSTA
• Launch
− January 1, 2005
− Membership: ~ 2,000 by June 30
• Activities
−
−
−
−
Reconnecting across ACM educational activities
Refinement of strategic plan
NSF proposal
Advisory Council
CSTA Advisory Council
•
Frances E Allen
IBM Fellow Retired
•
Debra J. Richardson:
Dean, UC Irvine
•
Phillip B. Gibbon:
Principle Scientist, Intel
Research
•
Eric Roberts:
Stanford University
•
Maria Klawe:
Dean, Princeton
•
•
Cathy Neuman:
Cisco Networking Academy
Kevin Schofield:
Strategy and Communications
Microsoft Research
•
•
Greg Papadopoulos:
Executive VP & CTO, Sun
Walt Jimenez:
The College Board
CSTA
• Launch
− January 1, 2005
− Membership: ~ 2,000 by June 30
• Activities
−
−
−
−
Refinement of strategic plan
NSF proposal
Advisory Council
NCAA
NCAA
• The issue
− Computer science has been eliminated as a core course for meeting
initial eligibility
− Seriously negative message is going out to parents and students that
“computer science doesn’t count”
− Yet another example of the challenge to, and marginalization of,
computer science at the high school level
• Why would the NCAA do this?
− Too many courses being put forward by high schools that were
nothing more than computer skills
• The problem
− NCAA says they wanted to keep “real” computer science
− Their implementation seems to eliminate all computer science
NCAA
• ACM and CSTA are challenging the NCAA
− ED Board
− SIGCSE
• Letter to NCAA
−
−
−
−
Acknowledges the problem
Asks for an immediate reversal of the decision
Asks for an end to negative communication
Suggest standards:
• AP computer science
• ACM K-12 Guidelines
− Offers to help
NCAA
•
Endorsements
•
Considering
•
Supporting in principle
•
In front of
−
−
−
−
−
Computer Science Teachers Association
The College Board
Computing Research Association
National Center for Women and Technology
Bill Wulf, President, National Academy of Engineering
−
−
−
−
AAAI
SIAM
Anita Borg Institute
IEEE-CS
− John Hennessy, President, Stanford University
− Graham Spanier, President, Penn State University
− Mark Emmert, President, University of Washington
− President, Princeton
− President, Georgia Tech
− President, University of Colorado
Education Council
• ACM educational activities are increasing dramatically
− ED Board, SIGs, CSTA, …
• Need to ensure better coordination
• Reorganizing the ED Board
− Smaller Board
− Education Council
• Education Council
−
−
−
−
New volunteer structure
Engage all ACM education activities at an annual meeting
Facilitate communication and collaboration across ACM
Foster educational initiatives that might be missed with the current
organization
Brand Awareness
Brand Awareness
• Multi-year project to raise awareness of ACM
− Brand platform
− Communications program
• The Brand Platform
− Developed and vetted over the past year and a half
− Endorsed by the ACM Executive Committee
• Key elements
− ACM and its members advance computing as a science and a
profession
•
•
•
•
•
Enhancing our skills
Advancing our field
Growing our community
Defining our profession
Promoting our perspectives
IV. DETAILED FINDINGS
A. Aided Awareness
ACM, the Association for Computing
Machinery, dates back to this decade
when ENIAC came on line
% Aided Awareness of Membership Groups in the Computing Field
- % Member, Very Familiar, Somewhat Familiar Total
(n=1525)
Academic/Educator
(n=283)
44%
IEEE
22%
27%
AIS
21%
25%
AITP
21%
24%
ACM
20%
23%
AMS
20%
USENIX
19%
ICCA
18%
AAAI
18%
AWC
15%
WWISA
14%
0%
10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 0%
26%
15%
18%
17%
19%
16%
21%
16%
22%
18%
21%
17%
10%
20%
30%
12%
12%
16%
13%
18%
18%
17%
18%
20%
20%
10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 0%
18%
20%
24%
21%
16%
27%
22%
16%
20%
27%
23%
23%
39%
28%
28%
31%
50%
38%
29%
ASIS
Researcher
(n=232)
44%
38%
23%
ISOC
Practitioner
(n=621)
40%
36%
IEEE - CS
Manager
(n=389)
40%
50% 0%
12%
10%
12%
10%
10% 20%
30% 40% 50%
0%
Significantly higher at 90% confidence level.
Significantly lower at 90% confidence level.
Source: Tables 3-15; Q3: Please indicate if you are a member of each organization. If you are not a member, please indicate your degree
of familiarity with the organizations: Very familiar, Somewhat familiar, Not a member but only know by name, Never heard of.
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
% Aided Awareness of Membership Groups in the Computing Field
- % Member, Very Familiar, Somewhat Familiar * US Only *
Total US
(n=1004)
Academic/Educator
(n=180)
42%
IEEE
ASIS
23%
AIS
22%
AITP
20%
ACM
21%
AMS
20%
USENIX
18%
ICCA
18%
AAAI
17%
AWC
14%
WWISA
13%
0%
10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 0%
20%
15%
23%
22%
21%
17%
18%
21%
31%
15%
19%
25%
23%
22%
17%
30%
21%
14%
18%
31%
23%
22%
38%
25%
26%
29%
49%
34%
23%
18%
16%
21%
18%
20%
18%
12%
11%
15%
23%
12%
20%
17%
15%
10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 0%
Researcher
(n=181)
43%
31%
20%
ISOC
Practitioner
(n=391)
35%
33%
IEEE - CS
Manager
(n=252)
10%
19%
11%
10%
18%
10%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
0%
10% 20%
30% 40% 50%
0%
10%
20%
Significantly higher at 90% confidence level.
Significantly lower at 90% confidence level.
Source: Tables 3-15; Q3: Please indicate if you are a member of each organization. If you are not a member, please indicate your degree of familiarity with the
organizations: Very familiar, Somewhat familiar, Not a member but only know by name, Never heard of.
30%
40%
50%
% Aided Awareness of Membership Groups in the Computing Field
- % Member, Very Familiar, Somewhat Familiar * Europe Only *
Total Europe
(n=302)
Academic/Educator
(n=65)
18%
25%
AITP
20%
26%
AMS
USENIX
ICCA
AAAI
15%
15%
15%
18%
AWC
12%
17%
WWISA
13%
17%
0%
20%
20%
17%
20%
17%
40%
60%
0%
20%
60% 0%
7%
19%
10%
19%
21%
11%
21%
10%
7%
17%
8%
40%
60%
0%
19%
10%
10%
16%
20%
14%
12%
22%
40%
14%
12%
31%
17%
14%
10%
13%
25%
18%
14%
ACM
14%
7%
17%
AIS
14%
19%
35%
18%
13%
ASIS
33%
32%
46%
32%
26%
ISOC
57%
45%
47%
51%
40%
IEEE - CS
Researcher
(n=21)
Practitioner
(n=135)
51%
48%
IEEE
Manager
(n=81)
20%
14%
40%
60%
0%
Source: Tables 3-15; Q3: Please indicate if you are a member of each organization. If you are not a member, please indicate your degree
of familiarity with the organizations: Very familiar, Somewhat familiar, Not a member but only know by name, Never heard of.
20%
40%
60%
% Aided Awareness of Membership Groups in the Computing Field
- % Member, Very Familiar, Somewhat Familiar * Asia Only *
Total Asia
(n=204)
IEEE
Academic/Educator
(n=32)
25%
AIS
22%
AITP
34%
26%
ACM
AMS
AWC
22%
WWISA
21%
0%
20%
17%
21%
40%
60%
0%
20%
40%
20%
21%
10%
21%
17%
22%
17%
28%
14%
23%
15%
60% 0%
21%
21%
15%
31%
17%
22%
26%
34%
21%
20%
21%
34%
24%
28%
29%
17%
34%
22%
AAAI
22%
34%
24%
ICCA
19%
34%
22%
USENIX
23%
23%
28%
21%
28%
24%
21%
31%
24%
50%
30%
41%
Researcher
(n=29)
59%
40%
50%
30%
ASIS
45%
41%
43%
ISOC
Practitioner
(n=90)
44%
48%
IEEE - CS
Manager
(n=53)
7%
26%
40%
60%
0%
20%
40%
60%
0%
20%
Significantly higher at 90% confidence level.
Source: Tables 3-15; Q3: Please indicate if you are a member of each organization. If you are not a member, please indicate your degree of familiarity with the
organizations: Very familiar, Somewhat familiar, Not a member but only know by name, Never heard of.
40%
60%
IV. DETAILED FINDINGS
A. Unaided Awareness
% Unaided Awareness of Membership Groups in the Computing Field
- Top Mentions Total
(n=1525)
IEEE,
Institute for
Electrical &
Electronics
Engineers
9%
BCS, British
Computer
Society
1%
ISOC, Internet
Society
1%
USENIX, the
Advanced
Computing
Systems
Association
0%
Practitioner
(n=621)
6%
5%
1%
1%
1%
1%
1%
1%
1%
1%
1%
*
1%
1%
15%
20%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
0%
2%
1%
*
10%
2%
6%
1%
5%
7%
5%
1%
2%
Researcher
(n=232)
13%
4%
7%
4%
IEEE-CS, IEEE
Computer
Society
Manager
(n=389)
6%
5%
ACM,
Association for
Computing
Machinery
AITP, Association of
Information
Technology
Professionals
Academic/Educator
(n=283)
5%
10%
15%
20% 0%
5%
*
1%
10%
15%
20% 0%
5%
10%
15%
*Denotes less than .5%
Significantly higher at 90% confidence level.
Source: Tables 65; Q2: Please type in the names of all the membership groups in the computing field (i.e., associations, societies, user groups) that you can think of.
20%
% Unaided Awareness of Membership Groups in the Computing Field
- Top Mentions * US Only *
Total US
(n=1004)
IEEE,
Institute for
Electrical &
Electronics
Engineers
Academic/Educator
(n=180)
10%
BCS, British
Computer
Society
5%
IEEE-CS, IEEE
Computer
Society
1%
1%
ISOC, Internet
Society
1%
1%
USENIX, the
Advanced
Computing
Systems
Association
1%
1%
1%
1%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20% 0%
0%
8%
*
15%
20%
0%
2%
1%
1%
1%
1%
1%
1%
0%
1%
1%
1%
*
10%
7%
*
1%
5%
Researcher
(n=181)
15%
2%
0%
4%
Practitioner
(n=391)
6%
7%
1%
ACM,
Association for
Computing
Machinery
AITP, Association of
Information
Technology
Professionals
Manager
(n=252)
5%
10%
15%
20%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
0%
5%
10%
15%
*Denotes less than .5%.
Significantly higher at 90% confidence level.
Source: Tables 65; Q2: Please type in the names of all the membership groups in the computing field (i.e., associations, societies, user groups) that you can think of.
20%
% Unaided Awareness of Membership Groups in the Computing Field
- Top Mentions * Europe Only *
Total Europe
(n=302)
IEEE,
Institute for
Electrical &
Electronics
Engineers
2%
IEEE-CS, IEEE
Computer
Society
2%
ISOC, Internet
Society
USENIX, the
Advanced
Computing
Systems
Association
0%
22%
1%
2%
0%
0%
1%
0%
*
0%
1%
0%
15% 20%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
0%
0%
0%
0%
10%
0%
1%
5%
0%
24%
2%
*
5%
10%
14%
6%
Researcher
(n=21)
8%
32%
5%
1%
Practitioner
(n=135)
5%
22%
ACM,
Association for
Computing
Machinery
Manager
(n=81)
6%
7%
BCS, British
Computer
Society
AITP, Association of
Information
Technology
Professionals
Academic/Educator
(n=65)
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
0%
5%
10%
15%
*Denotes less than .5%.
Source: Tables 65; Q2: Please type in the names of all the membership groups in the computing field (i.e., associations, societies, user groups) that you can think of.
20%
% Unaided Awareness of Membership Groups in the Computing Field
- Top Mentions * Asia Only *
Total
(n=204)
IEEE,
Institute for
Electrical &
Electronics
Engineers
1%
ACM,
Association for
Computing
Machinery
1%
IEEE-CS, IEEE
Computer
Society
1%
ISOC, Internet
Society
Practitioner
(n=90)
4%
0%
3%
6%
1%
Researcher
(n=29)
8%
7%
0%
1%
0%
0%
1%
0%
0%
0%
2%
USENIX, the
Advanced
Computing
Systems
Association
Manager
(n=53)
3%
6%
BCS, British
Computer
Society
AITP, Association of
Information
Technology
Professionals
Academic/Educator
(n=32)
0%
3%
0%
1%
3%
0%
1%
3%
0%
1%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20% 0%
0%
0%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
0%
3%
5%
10%
15%
20%
0%
5%
10%
15%
*Denotes less than .5%.
Source: Tables 65; Q2: Please type in the names of all the membership groups in the computing field (i.e., associations, societies, user groups) that you can think of.
20%
Raising Awareness
• Many components
– Communications program
– Focused PR on specific areas
•
•
•
•
Awards
SIGs
CSTA
Washington policy activities
– Studies with impact
• Job Migration – Globalization of IT
• Voter registration database study
Council Offsite
Council Offsite
• ACM Professional Members
Researcher
11%
Other
7%
Academic/
Educator
21%
Manager
17%
Practitioner
44%
Council Offsite
• ACM
− 61%
− 32%
practitioners and managers
researchers and academics/educators
• Overarching brand platform message
− ACM and its members advance computing as a science and a
profession
• Focus of the offsite:
− How can ACM better serve professionals
(practitioners/managers) and the profession
Council Offsite
• Approach
− Significant pre-work from a task force comprising
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Terry Coatta
Laura Hill
Russ Shackelford
Fran Allen
Steve Bourne
Dave Patterson
Scooter Morris
Telle Whitney
Lynn Stein
− Recommendation
• Launch a major initiative to services relevant to practitioners and
position ACM as really serving both the science and the profession
Initiative
1.
Real support for professional career development.
2.
Major enhancement of professional development resources.
3.
Introduction of an ACM certification program that is a valued
specification of individual capability.
4.
Introduction of a graded membership categories
5.
Increase professional recognition for practitioners and managers
6.
Increase local activities and integrate them better into ACM
7.
Actively promote and be an advocate for the IT profession