Annual Assessment Report to the College 2010-11
Sept 28, 2011
College: Engineering and Computer Science
Department: Computer Science
Program: BS in Computer Science
Note: Please submit your report to (1) the director of academic assessment, (2) your department chair or program coordinator and (3) the
Associate Dean of your College by September 30, 2011. You may submit a separate report for each program which conducted assessment
activities.
Liaison: Gloria Melara ( 2010-2011); Diane Schwartz ( 2011- 2012)
1. Overview of Annual Assessment Project(s)
1a. Assessment Process Overview: Provide a brief overview of the intended plan to assess the program this year. Is assessment under the
oversight of one person or a committee?
The computer science program has seven subcommittees to assess eleven student learning outcomes. Each subcommittee is
responsible for the assessment of one or two student learning outcomes. During the year 2010 – 2011 each subcommittee made
plans to assess one or more of their assigned student learning outcomes. Three of the groups completed their assessments in 20102011. The others will complete their assessments in 2011-2012.
1b. Implementation and Modifications: Did the actual assessment process deviate from what was intended? If so, please describe any
modification to your assessment process and why it occurred.
The assessment process did not achieve all that was planned for 2010 – 2011 due to faculty commitments to their teaching, research
and service.
July 18, 2011, Bonnie Paller
2. Student Learning Outcome Assessment Project: Answer questions according to the individual SLOs assessed this year. If you assessed more
than one SLO, please duplicate this chart for each one as needed.
Part 1: SLO d
2a. Which Student Learning Outcome was assessed this year?
SLO d : Students should be able to demonstrate that they can function effectively on teams to accomplish a common goal.
2b. What assessment instrument(s) were used to gather evidence about this SLO?
Peer evaluation surveys were used. Student team members evaluated using a rubric related to our key performance indicators for
that SLO.
2c. Describe the participants sampled to assess this SLO: discuss sample/participant and population size for this SLO. For example, what type of
students, which courses, how decisions were made to include certain participants.
We assessed all students in our Comp 380/L and Comp 490 courses. Both Comp 380/L and Comp 490 require one or two semester
team projects. There were 41 students assessed. They are all junior and senior students in the computer science major.
2e. Assessment Results & Analysis of this SLO: Provide a summary of how the evidence was analyzed and highlight important findings from the
collected evidence.
The survey results were analyzed by the faculty. The mean student performance on the Key Performance Indicators was
satisfactory. About 10 – 30 percent of the students performed less than satisfactory on any given individual survey item.
2f. Use of Assessment Results of this SLO: Think about all the different ways the resulting evidence was or will be used to improve academic
quality. For example, to recommend changes to course content/topics covered, course sequence, addition/deletion of courses in program,
student support services, revisions to program SLO’s, assessment instruments, academic programmatic changes, assessment plan changes, etc.
Please provide a clear and detailed description of how the assessment results were or will be used.
July 18, 2011, Bonnie Paller
We suggested that we add a component to the beginning of Comp 380 and Comp 490 which explores how to be an effective team
member and specifically reviews the key performance indicators that we use to measure the effectiveness.
Part 2: SLO f
2a. Which Student Learning Outcome was assessed this year?
SLO f: Students should demonstrate that they have an ability to communicate effectively with a range of audiences: Oral
Communication.
2b. What assessment instrument(s) were used to gather evidence about this SLO?
Two faculty members attended 16 oral presentation made by students in Comp 450 and Comp 491 in Spring 2011. They assessed
each presentation using a rubric developed from our Key Performance Indicators for this SLO.
We also assessed the oral presentations made by computer science majors in the CECS Senior Design Showcase Competition in
April 2011. In this case we used the presentation ratings from a panel of judges from industry.
2c. Describe the participants sampled to assess this SLO: discuss sample/participant and population size for this SLO. For example, what type of
students, which courses, how decisions were made to include certain participants.
We assessed all students in in Comp 491L and about half of the students in Comp 450. Each of these classes requires students to
make oral presentations in class. The sample size was 16 students.
We assessed all three computer science teams in the Senior Design Showcase Competition. The sample size was approximately 12
students.
July 18, 2011, Bonnie Paller
2e. Assessment Results & Analysis of this SLO: Provide a summary of how the evidence was analyzed and highlight important findings from the
collected evidence.
The evidence was analyzed by the faculty who tallied up the scores from the faculty evaluators and the industry judges. The results
from the assessment of the classroom presentations showed that 80% of the assessed students have excellent oral presentation
skills. However three of the 16 students were rated WEAK on at least one of the rubrics. The industry judges rated the senior
design competition teams as “good”.
2f. Use of Assessment Results of this SLO: Think about all the different ways the resulting evidence was or will be used to improve academic
quality. For example, to recommend changes to course content/topics covered, course sequence, addition/deletion of courses in program,
student support services, revisions to program SLO’s, assessment instruments, academic programmatic changes, assessment plan changes, etc.
Please provide a clear and detailed description of how the assessment results were or will be used.
We recommended that all computer science majors should make three or four 15-minute presentations before they take their senior
design classes ( Comp 490/l and 491. This recommendation has not been discussed at the department level yet as the final report
form the assessment of SLO f was completed in the summer.
Part 3: SLO a
2a. Which Student Learning Outcome was assessed this year?
SLO a : Students should be able to demonstrate that they can apply the knowledge of computing and mathematics appropriate to the
discipline.
2b. What assessment instrument(s) were used to gather evidence about this SLO?
A multiple choice, true/false, fill-in exam consisting of material covered in relevant programming courses, including COMP 110/L,
COMP 182/L, and 282 was used to gather evidence.
2c. Describe the participants sampled to assess this SLO: discuss sample/participant and population size for this SLO. For example, what type of
students, which courses, how decisions were made to include certain participants.
July 18, 2011, Bonnie Paller
Senior-level students in COMP 424 were sampled to assess the SLO. The population size was 19 students. The decision to sample
these students was based on the fact they had already taken the courses being assessed, and they had a variety of educational
backgrounds (transfer students, non-transfer students), and took the courses a variety of semesters ago.
2e. Assessment Results & Analysis of this SLO: Provide a summary of how the evidence was analyzed and highlight important findings from the
collected evidence.
The exam was graded and the scores were categorized according to stated rubrics as Excellent (15-20 correct), Adequate (12-14
correct), Marginal (9-11 correct), and Unacceptable (0-8 correct). The results were then categorized in terms of the demographic
questions and grouped according to the stated rubrics to see if certain patterns emerged. Questions on which a significant number of
students answered wrong were isolated and measured as well. The conclusion was that students in general performed adequately.
2f. Use of Assessment Results of this SLO: Think about all the different ways the resulting evidence was or will be used to improve academic
quality. For example, to recommend changes to course content/topics covered, course sequence, addition/deletion of courses in program,
student support services, revisions to program SLO’s, assessment instruments, academic programmatic changes, assessment plan changes, etc.
Please provide a clear and detailed description of how the assessment results were or will be used.
Based on the current results, the questions seem sufficient, and the same exam will be administered once more during the current
assessment cycle. The current method of administering the exam during a session of a senior level class (such as COMP 424) in
which all three courses assessed (COMP 122, COMP 222, COMP 322) are prerequisites seems appropriate, and no changes seem
necessary. No suggested changes to the curriculum were made. COMP 122, COMP 222, and COMP 322 are all required courses,
and they themselves should sufficiently meet the learning outcome.
July 18, 2011, Bonnie Paller
3. How do this year’s assessment activities connect with your program’s strategic plan and/or 5-yr assessment plan?
All of the assessment activities undertaken this year are part of our long range ( ABET required) assessment plan and
part of the 5-year assessment plan we submitted to the University.
4. Overall, if this year’s program assessment evidence indicates that new resources are needed in order to improve and support student
learning, please discuss here.
No new resources have been requested based on assessment results other than more reassign time for faculty carrying out theses
assessment activities. They are very time-consuming for the faculty.
5. Other information, assessment or reflective activities not captured above.
None noted.
July 18, 2011, Bonnie Paller
6. Has someone in your program completed, submitted or published a manuscript which uses or describes assessment activities in your
program? Please provide citation or discuss.
”Barkataki, Shan & Lingard, Robert, “Web Based Collaboration in Teaching Teamwork”, Proc. The 3rd International
Symposium on Engineering Education and Education Technologies: EEET 2011, Orlando, FL, July 2011. The paper
discusses ways to teach and assess teamwork on student papers.
July 18, 2011, Bonnie Paller