2002-2003 Year End Report 1
Year End Report
Department of Computer Science
The report consists of four parts. The first part is a prologue, providing some general facts to
view the materials in the subsequent parts. The second part is an expansion on the milestones of
the department. The third part describes the continuing problems in its computing environment
faced by the department. The fourth part is a summary of the activities of the faculty. A few
personal comments are attached at the end.
Small bits of CS history are provided for purposes of illumination. Also, one should point out
that the few examples on IS and CS programs are but a small fragment of available
information. They are given to lend some basis to the remarks provided, and the choices are
not accidental: examples from CSU, UC and Pennsylvania.
The five milestones listed under Executive Summary can best be viewed as responses of the
department, some externally driven and some internally generated, to the continuing changing
landscape of the field of information technology, in which computer science is an essential
component. Comments are provided to explain the purpose and the relative values of some of
these efforts. While the outcomes are the result of department-wide efforts and consensus,
names of those most closely associated with each activity are provided as a matter of
Part I Prologue
First a brief history ending with the state of the department approximately eight years ago is
sketched next. The BS degree in Computer Science (CS) at Fresno was formulated in the late
seventies and early eighties (B. Kehoe, H. Haslam, W. Read, G. Wei, H. Yeung). At that time, it
was one of the broadest and deepest degree programs in the country. Some of our graduates
attending MS programs elsewhere were informed that they had basically finished the first
semester of their graduate work. We became the first campus of CSU (and one of the few on the
West Coast) to be on the Internet (CSNet at that time) and one of the few undergraduate
programs from a four year college in the country with a laboratory of Unix workstations on the
net (H. Haslam and Jim Morris). The MS degree was conceived and developed in the late
eighties (S. Seki). In the early and mid nineties, with the transputer project (L. Jin) and NSF
funded workshop to train college faculty on parallel processing (L. Jin, S. Seki), a NSF Program
Enhancement Grant (L. Jin, T. Alameldin, S. Seki), a NSF graphic equipment matching grant
and a multimillion dollar Alias Research software donation (T. Alameldin), a four year program
with both undergraduate and graduate sequences in Software Engineering and graduate topic
courses (B. Auernheimer), with Dr. W. Read conducting multi-year AI research at UCLA and a
member of the AI Research Lab, and with Dr. G. Wei on the Board of Governors of the IEEE
Computer Society, creator of an IEEE CS magazine for student members distributed
internationally, and a regular visiting scholar to UC Berkeley, the program was regarded as one
of the strongest four year programs, not just in the CSU, but in the country. An external
2002-2003 Year End Report 2
evaluator, Dr. Orlando Madrigal (C S Chair, Chico), considered it "the strongest CSU program in
preparing students for graduate study." Professor Ramarmoorthy (U.C. Berkeley), a leading
Software Engineering pioneer, stated that our program is a model computer science program for
others to emulate, including China (G. Wei and L. Jin separately were invited to speak to leading
Chinese universities on this program).
Next, a brief and obviously very incomplete characterization of the history of the field of CS is
provided to orientate some the comments on our curriculum relative to the major developments
The driving goal of computing is to automate. Automate everything so that our quality of life
is better, our world is more fair and more efficient, and also automate for control and for
discovery, including simulating of nuclear weapon tests. In order to do this, it obviously takes
the combining efforts of computer engineering, computer science and information systems to
integrate in a vertical direction. I'll speak only of the major developments in CS, mindful of
the fact that ideas such as the Internet have to wait for the corresponding technology and
society to catch up. Hence, the timeline is only approximate.
The sixties was the decade where languages matured. The confluence of both theoretical and
practical ideas in formal languages and programming language translation led to compiler-
compilers being built routinely at the end of the decade, thus solving the problem of
automation of language production. On the hardware side, efforts on vector machines resulted
in the fastest computer Illiac IV at the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, leading to the
field of parallel processing (PP). The affiliated industries were yet to come. Today, export of
supercomputers and supercomputing technology is still regulated by security concerns. Ideas
such as the Internet would have to wait for decades until the technology and society catch on.
It is also the case of computer graphics, which did not experience an explosion until sufficient
computing power can be found at desktops. The seventies saw the rise of database (DB) with
Codd's framework of relational database at IBM and artificial intelligence (AI) with neural
networks and production systems. The eighties resulted in major advances in network
technology and the emerging field of distributed computing (DC). As software became more
complex, object-oriented languages, first appearing in Simula (1968), became the
implementers' choice, especially with the invention of C++. By the end of the decade, it was
not uncommon to hear a project or an industrial product described as a distributed intelligent
database management system, thus marrying the best of the technologies through the several
decades and with the implementation using object technology. The nineties is well known as
the Web phenomenon swept across the world beginning in the mid-nineties. As businesses and
indeed humanity took to it, CS departments and industry are in need of more Human-Computer
Interaction (HCI) experts, and web designers and implementers.
This decade could well turn out to be the decade of Grid computing (http://www-
fp.mcs.anl.gov/~foster/). The analogy to electric power grid is often used, but in reality and
practice, this new computing infrastructure is all pervasive and more powerful. Wireless
networks are also a part of it. Perhaps a quote from the April, 2003 article: The Grid:
2002-2003 Year End Report 3
Computing without Bounds in Scientific America (http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?
colID=1&articleID=000B1833-21DF-1E64-A98A809EC5880105) would suffice.
By linking digital processors, storage systems and software on a global scale, grid technology is
poised to transform computing from an individual and corporate activity into a general utility.
I want to stress that these remarks are not for pedantic purposes. Is CSU-Fresno
adequately preparing our students in Information Systems, Computer Science and
Computer Engineering for this world of information technology? Indeed, is Fresno State
adequately preparing our students, irrespective of their majors, through General
Education, for this world of information technology? Under Milestone 3 in this report,
partial answers will be provided.
Our BS curriculum in the eighties reflected the state of the field at the beginning of the
eighties. However the fields of information systems and computer science have gone
through a tremendous expansion in the eighties and nineties that require far greater
vertical integration. A software system is now built not just by one group of people but
by many groups of people with different disciplinary backgrounds and skill sets located
in diverse geographical areas. There is perhaps none better example than CSU's CMS
Project (http://cms.calstate.edu/T1_MProjectOverview.asp). Similar remarks can be said
about the education of our next generation in these fields. It is especially true in
Computer Science. To establish a program of excellency, it requires much more than our
approach back in the eighties. It requires the recognition of one of the most fundamental
principles by our institution, by our colleges and by our faculty, the principle of diversity.
It also requires the acceptance, implementation and celebration of such a principle. We
now discuss briefly this principle known to all of us in the human domain, but it applies
to all systems, natural, artificial or formal, such as the system of information technology
or any subsystem of it.
As our society becomes increasingly diverse and globally connected, a principle of
diversity is widely adopted as essential in every endeavor. The Director of the National
Science Foundation (http://www.cherry.gatech.edu/refs/nsf/nsf-review-criteria99.htm)
explicitly states it as follows:
Broadening opportunities and enabling the participation of all citizens -- women and men,
underrepresented minorities, and persons with disabilities -- are essential to the health and vitality of
science and engineering. NSF is committed to this principle of diversity and deems it central to the
programs, projects, and activities it considers and supports.
An analogous principle exists in the world of computer science and information systems.
Instead of citizens, it is full of entities and artifacts of great diversity, and a successful
computer system must incorporate a principle of diversity just as the US government,
multinationals and academic institutions do. Some of these entities could be software
subsystems or just bit-size code, machines from supercomputers to hand-held devices, human-
computer interfaces of all types, system designers, programmers, administrators and users.
Seamless integration and respect of diversity are fundamental to the success of any system.
While this is widely accepted in human endeavors, practitioners and system builders in the CS/
2002-2003 Year End Report 4
IS areas have a long way to go. Respect for this generalized principle of diversity is critical to
building successful systems. It applies equally to building exemplary educational programs.
Indeed, in any system of diversity and complexity, respect of the functionality and
distinguishing characteristics of its entities, especially the so called "minority" entities is a
precondition to building a successful construct. One line of code or one bit (this is certainly a
minority minority of one) could ground a system if set wrong or "not respected". It happened.
One of the worse Internet system-wide crashes that occurred was due to wrong bit. On matters
of education such as program development, we see the same phenomena over and over again.
In the CSU, the programs of distinction in IS and CS are embedded in systems with a history
where the respect and manifestation of this generalized principle is apparent.
Part II Milestones
As each milestone is presented, some comments are provided on related matters.
Milestone 1 – Curricular Changes
As the department examined its degree requirements, especially in view of the mandate to
reduce the unit requirements down to 124, it was clear that our fixed set of requirements would
not only be weakened (as we have to drop courses), but in itself was too rigid to meet the
current situation in CS. Our "model" program that served our students well a decade ago
should in fact be expanded, an issue which will be addressed in Milestone 2.
Our degree required a choice of four advanced sequences or three sequences and a project by
the student. Students increasingly found it difficult to fulfill the four sequence requirement as
scheduling was often compromised by budgetary and staffing constraints. Some of the
sequences were either not offered due the deteriorated environment (the sequence in PP and
DC, CSci 176-177) or not supported (compiler sequence CSci 134-136) due to staffing, it made
sense to reduce the number of sequence requirement. Other sequences such as those on AI
(CSci 164-166) and theory (CSci 186-188) were offered less again due to staffing constraints.
As a practical matter, little or no choice was available to the students as they have to take
whatever the available sequences were in order not to delay their graduation. The faculty
reduced the requirement to 2 sequences or one sequence and a project.
Requiring two sequences instead of four sequences has clearly weakened the degree. This is
compensated by two changes. One is to redouble our efforts to improve individual advising.
The Department traditionally has a culture of close interactions with the students by first
encouraging them to seek advising from all faculty, and then actively promotes such behavior
both among the students themselves and with the faculty. In addition, Gloria Riojas provides
constant and exceptional advising to all the students. Student chapters in both the major
professional organizations: Association of Computing Machinery (Advisor: W. Read) and
IEEE Computer Society (Advisor: G. Wei) provide additional avenues for information
exchange. The student chapter of the honor computing sciences society, Upsilon Pi Epsilon
(Advisor: B. Auernheimer) is another source of support. By improving the advising, and with
2002-2003 Year End Report 5
a more flexible requirement, we can tailor each student's set of courses more closely to his/her
interests and talents and also to the job market. Hopefully, this would compensate to some
degree on an individual basis the weakening of the degree requirements. More importantly, we
took steps to strengthen the core courses, C Sci 60, 115, 119 and 144 by adding a laboratory
session as it is also the better practice nationally. All core courses now have an accompanied
laboratory component or activity section. This ensures that the students are even better
grounded in the fundamentals. As our field continues to expand and change rapidly, the
education they all receive in the core subjects at CSU-Fresno will provide a solid and sound
After successfully testing the course materials on advanced web implementations over the past
several years, Dr. T. Wilson introduced a graduate course C Sci 230 on Web Technology and
its Implementation into our M.S. degree. CSci 230 is the advanced graduate version to follow
the undergraduate version CSci 130 on Web Programming, introduced in the previous
academic year. The current job market is the worse we have seen ever since 1971. However,
the students well-trained on web programming and database continue to find employment.
This new course also led to a reexamination of the graduate degree requirements. This resulted
in changes in the MS degree leading to greater flexibility. The same approach on advising the
undergraduate students is adopted for the graduate students.
We hope that with these changes, we have a reasonably adequate BS and MS degree for our
students for the short-term (next couple of years). The faculty next turned to the long-term
needs of the students at Fresno State.
Milestone 2 – Computational Science
It is clear that one CS degree with the current set of course requirements are not competitive
with the offerings elsewhere. Computer Science has broadened to become a field of
Computational Sciences. In the past decade, technical and educational developments inside
CSU and outside CSU have rendered our program to be outdated and insufficient. In
combining with the situation described in Part III, we are arguably the weakest program
currently serving the students in CSU (Humbolt excluded since they just started with a few
students). That we were at one time arguably the best program only adds to the pain. The very
fact that we have not provided adequate education for years, is sufficient to depress us even
In what sense are we not providing an adequate education. Some examples would suffice. The
courses CSci 176 and 177 on distributed computing and parallel processing have not been
given for several years as the transputer system was not fixed. It requires both software and
hardware technical support, which have become nonexistent for years. Alternatives all require
more technical support currently not available. Graphics equipment from the NSF, were only
partly realized, and after several attempts by Dr. W. Read (then Chair) and Dr. T. Alameldin,
some of the equipments are still not functioning. Database software are not configured and
supported at a level adequate for instruction. This would be visited again in Milestone 3. We
have regressed from an excellent program for the eighties back to a poor program semi-suitable
for the seventies. The brief outline of the major developments in the Prologue can now be used
2002-2003 Year End Report 6
as backdrop. Courses on distributed computing and parallel processing are no longer run,
database courses are ill supported, graphics courses rely on students' own computers as a rule.
And we are in the twenty-first century.
Even assuming that all these problems were all resolved immediately or that they never existed,
the CS field has moved beyond the eighties and one degree fits all. Software Engineering
degrees have been established at CalPoly and San Jose with very significant enrollments. An
outstanding telecommunications, multimedia and applied computing program has been
established at Monterey Bay (http://csumb.edu/academic/descriptions/tmac.html). Network
programs and labs exist throughout other CSU campuses, including an industry funded state-of-
art interdisciplinary Computer and Engineering Science graduate program at Sonoma State
(http://www.sonoma.edu/scitech/msces/progDescrip.shtml) that rivals some of the best MS
programs in the country. A couple of examples should suffice. Where once we took the
initiative to obtain a system-wide UNIX license from AT&T for the CSU to get on the ARPANet
(M. Mchaney), resulting in a distinct advantage over almost all four year programs in the
country, we have difficulty in getting a connection to the campus network today (over eight
months). The network course is taught by a part-time faculty (R. Viegas), with no supporting
network lab. Many programs in CSU boost significant investment and faculty in this crucial
area. For example, in 2000, CSU-Hayward received a NSF grant of $175,000 to join CSU San
Bernadino and Cal Poly Pomona as the only three of the 23 CSU campuses with access to
Internet 2 (http://www.calstate.edu/newsline/Archive/99-00/000616-Hay4.shtml). Hayward just
hired its third faculty in its network area (personal communication, Chair, Hayward). It is
instructive to look at a typical successful grant application. It was spearheaded by Dr. Michael
Leung (Dean of Science, Hayward). We quote.
The successful grant application was submitted by Leung, John Charles from CSUH Information and
Computing Services, professor Chris Morgan from the Mathematics and Computer Science
Department, and professor Alex Bordetsky, who directs the university's TELCOT satellite
telecommunications research center. Collaborating institutions include the Lawrence Livermore, Sandia
and Oak Ridge national laboratories.
We used to have an advantage in this area. In fact, the establishment of our UNIX lab, one of
the few in the country in a four year college at that time was due to the working together of Jim
Morris, then director of ITS and H. Haslam, then CS Chair, with the strong support of the
Provost's office. They needed to move fast to obtain the purchase/donation of two dozens of
workstations (called miniframes at that time) against other competitors. The company which
"donated" the miniframes wanted to "get rid" of them. Today, a coordinated rapid response
approach is adopted by the Sonoma's program with ability to bid and purchase equipment off
eBay. A culture of innovation, integration, respect of diversity (ideas as the citizens) and rapid
response is often found in the leading CSU programs in Information Systems and Computer
Science. It is both a necessary and almost sufficient condition for these programs to retain
their edge. And the CSU programs in IS and CS are very competitive among themselves since
their campus funding levels are basically the same. We were born and supported equally by
Meanwhile, one of the major developments in CS not mentioned earlier was cryptography or
more broadly, network and system security. Coupled with the state of the world and the
2002-2003 Year End Report 7
vulnerability of the network system, the US Government has initiated major efforts and
resources to encourage the development of Information Assurance programs, to advance the
field against Cyber attacks. Major universities such as UI, Urbana-Champaign, CMU and
Stanford and others are among the 36 Centers for Academic Excellency in Information
Assurance Education recognized by the National Security Agency (NSA) (http://www.nsa.gov/
releases/20030530a.htm). It is worthy to note that a four year program can not only participate
but achieve a distinguished status. Among the recent 12 new programs is the Information
Assurance program at Indiana University of Pennsylvania (http://www.iup.edu/infosecurity/)
jointly offered by the Computer Science and the Criminology departments. We do not even
have one course on cryptography for our students. Such a program could be easily developed
here with the Criminology, Mathematics and Information Systems provided a culture of
Since this milestone will take years to achieve, the consensus was to develop needed areas such as
Software Engineering (http://sites.computer.org/ccse/), Multimedia and Telecommunications,
Information Assurance and perhaps others by first working on a BA degree in Computer Science
with options. It would be weak at first and not competitive, but at least a first step is taken.
Depending on factors such enrollment, funding, hiring and grants, one of these will evolve into a
degree in time. We are many years behind the other CSU campuses. Achieving this milestone will
not mean we are competitive with other established programs such as the Software Engineering
program at CalPoly, (http://www.csc.calpoly.edu/academics/proposed_se_program.html), and the
Software and Information Engineering program or the Software Systems program or the
Client/Server program at San Jose State (http://www.engr.sjsu.edu/cmpe/academic/index.php?
PHPSESSID=a1dd361eae3b7b789bd6fa40531dfec6). At least it can serve as a spiritual guide and
beacon over time and serves as a gauge of our progress from the bottom.
Milestone 3 – Information Technology
Although this is listed as milestone number 3, it is certainly the single most important matter in
this report for this university. Potentially, it has the greatest impact. It is the most serious of
all matters facing the students who are here to receive an education in IS.
It is unusual for a Chair in another department to comment extensively and sometimes
negatively on a program in another department in another school. But if I view both IS and CS
as part of this institution and if I view IS and CS as considered by external bodies, then politics
and artificiality aside, this matter is as important as any I can address in this report. History
has led to the separate historical development of these fields in separate schools. Most IS
programs are located in Schools of Business, and most CS programs are located in Schools of
Science and Mathematics or Schools of Engineering. The latter situation depends on which
body of faculty, Mathematics or EE, originated the CS program.
But as intellectual disciplines and as practiced in all leading companies involved with IS and CS,
the two are two ends of an inseparable continuum in today's world. But the situation in most
American institutions is a result of history. To draw a not inappropriate analogy, the fields of IS
and CS are not unlike the situation faced by the Kurds or the Basque people today. As we will
see, some institutions have taken steps to correct the situation.
2002-2003 Year End Report 8
We now turn to the genesis of Milestone 3. A description of the events leading to it is
illuminating. As most appropriate, it was started by students, several remarkable students.
Last Fall, graduate students Pritesh Parekh and Chaitanya Rao Geddam came to ask me
whether we would accept IS 156T Advanced Database as an elective (among the nine 100 level
units for the MS degree). The course prerequisites of the IS program were shallow and it was
judged (solely based on the prerequisites) not to have meet the level of IS courses elsewhere.
The answer from me was negative. In addition, the department has never accepted a 100 level
course from another discipline in a MS program of study. However, some our CS students
enrolled in Dr. Ojoung Kwon's course, while others such as Rei Suryana worked on Dr.
Kwon's projects as programmers. Dr. Kwon was providing not only the expertise but also a
much needed environment completely lacking in Computer Science despite the presence of
database courses at the undergraduate and graduate level for years. As Database is a major
area in the education and the employment of the CS students, with companies such as IBM,
Oracle and Microsoft having their major revenue streams in both database products and
services, it is disheartening that the computing environment of CS is deficient to such a degree.
Incidentally, Pritesh, Chaitanya and other CS students were working on the PeopleSoft project.
Since this report is neither judgmental nor an examination of the cause of whatever ills faced
by the CS department, let me conclude this episode on a high note. I am pleased to say that the
students judgment was more than validated by the outcomes. Pritesh was recently hired by
Dean Gorman as their full-time system programmer, competing against a number of applicants
with vast experience in this bear market. Chaitanya was hired full-time recently database
administrator while still trying to finish his degree here by a local company to convert its
database to Oracle. Rei, also while finishing his degree now, was hired full-time to overhaul a
student information system of the UC Merced Office of School and College Relations. The
system was from UC Davis. Jaykummer got a full-time summer internship at Washington,
D.C. with the possibility of staying on full-time through the Fall if he wishes. Unfortunately,
he broke his leg and had to stay in Fresno. It is nice to report that his leg is now almost
In the Spring semester, Dr. Kwon, whom I have only once before at a university function,
contacted me to arrange a meeting with the CS faculty to explore the possibility of allowing
him to supervise some of our students in CSci 298 projects and other matters such as possible
electives available to the students from each other's department. He was impressed by the
performance of these CS students. Drs. Alameldin, Read, Seki and I met with Dr. Kwon and
Dr. Kathleen Moffitt and we explored a wide range of topics. Dr. Read and I had subsequent
meetings with Dr. Kwon, who incidentally was recently appointed as Coordinator of the IS
program (per Dr. Kwon during the Convocation) this past Spring semester. We had very open
and frank discussions about the state of affairs of the IS program at Fresno State. While this
report is on CS, it is important that I report on some of remarks of Professor Kwon, who is a
nationally renowned researcher in his own specialty. His status is reflected in his early tenure
and promotion to full professor after only two years at CSU-Fresno. He views the fields of IS
and CS as inseparable as the education of both IS and CS can benefit from each program's
2002-2003 Year End Report 9
The field of Information Systems has grown in the past several decades as much as Computer
Science. I can recall the day many years ago when I appeared on my own volition to support
IS and Professor Pete Simis in front of the GE Committee to include IS 50 in one of the GE
areas. It failed miserably. The importance of IS in the education of students was not
recognized by the GE committee then, but by now we are surrounded by it in every facet of our
lives. We shall return to this point later.
The failure of the GE Committee to recognize the merits of Professor Simis' proposal could
partly be attributed to the nature of the course IS 50 but strangely, the failure of a School of
Business in over 25 years to develop a full fledge IS degree program could only be attributed to
either a lack of vision or a lack of respect for the principle of diversity. More explicitly, as
applied here, diversity means that IS is fundamentally a different entity than a Business
program. Unless and until that is recognized, decades could be wasted as apparently was the
case here. This is really what brought Dr. Kwon to us. The CS students were just a catalyst.
I must point out that there are excellent faculty in IS at CSU-Fresno, from pioneers such as
professors Simis and Kelly Black to professors Solis, Moffit and Wielicki. Inspite of this,
there is no accreditable program in IS on this campus. Yes, there is a Business Administration
Major with an Information Systems Options which is a valid program in the abstract but not in
practice. But it is far from an IS degree. The weaknesses in the prerequisite structures of the
IS courses are obvious, none more glaring than that of IS 156 Database Systems. That was the
basis of our rejection although we certainly did not voice it to Professor Kwon.
Professor Kwon himself did so forcefully and pointed to the same course IS 156. It is
refreshing to meet two faculty that are direct and open in their critique of their own field.
Honesty is a prerequisite to building an excellent and lasting program. The need of an IS
degree on this campus is long overdue. The failure to develop such an adequate degree within
a School of Business is often because it believes that all programs must be a business program
within a business school. Before I go on, two points must be made clear. One, the Craig
School of Business is one of the very best business schools in the CSU system. Second, the IS
Option is labeled as an option within a Business Administration Major. It is clearly and
honestly identified. In the words of Professor Kwon, the IS Option, after satisfying the "GE
and Business School-wide requirements leaves only 30 units for IS courses and hence
impossible to meet the accreditation requirements of an IS degree. As a School of Business
degree, there are school requirements, then there are the GE requirements, and hence only
thirty units are left for IS courses."
While Tibet may be perhaps a part of China (clearly a proposition outside the scope of this
report), the Tibetan culture is not the Chinese culture. The situation of IS is a glaring example
of the result of a failure to respect the generalized principle of diversity. Two obvious
conclusions result. Either free the Tibetans or celebrate the Tibetan culture with a Chinese
state (this we have to wait till the next Millenium). People of the world came to the right
conclusion about Tibet. Many American institutions are now coming to the right conclusion
2002-2003 Year End Report 10
Many universities, especially those outside the United States (England, Continental Europe,
Australia, Hong Kong) have long recognized Information Systems as a separate discipline in a
new area. While information systems have originated out of the need of business applications,
its applications today are varied, from huge criminology systems and complex medical
systems, to real-time airline reservation and scheduling systems, all with its own internal logic.
Business concerns are only a part, sometimes a small part, of such a system. Today, Schools of
Information Sciences, or Information Systems or Information Technology or Informatics
abound with degrees in Information Systems, Computer Systems, Information Assurance,
Computer Science, Software Engineering and so on. In the United States, the strengths of our
Schools of Business have actually deterred this development. This is not unlike the fate of
minorities embedded in a dominant culture. But the trend is unmistakable as the first of such
schools has now appeared at the University of California, the School of Information and
Computer Science at UC, Irvine (http://www.ics.uci.edu/).
In the end, Dr. Kwon asked us to help address the most immediate problem first, namely the
weakness of those IS students on data-structures and file systems who take IS 158. Dr. Read is
expending a lot of effort to develop a CSci course specifically for the IS students. We also
pledged that we would continue our cooperation to see what additional joint or separate efforts
could improve the education of IS and CS students on this campus.
We should note that this was only a very small step taken by IS with us. A degree program fully
meeting the 2001 IS Model Program of IEEE CS and ACMIS 2002 - Model Curriculum and
Guidelines for Undergraduate Degree Programs in Information Systems is a long way off
(http://www.acm.org/education/curricula.html#IS2002). We should also note that at the highest
professional levels as represented by the two major organizations IEEE CS and ACM in the
information technology arena have now put out model curricula on CS and IS under their
auspices (http://www.computer.org/education/cc2001/final/index.htm). Many US universities
recognize this situation. One of the exemplary efforts was undertaken by the Pennsylvania State
University system several years ago. They created a School of Information Sciences and
Technology (http://ist.psu.edu/). Detail documents are available from the original proposal to a
recent 42 page report: IST Strategic Plan, fiscal year 2002-2003 thru 2004-2005 of their mostly
successful effort. The report is available at http://ist.psu.edu/about_ist/StratPlanNB.pdf. I
strongly urge all persons interested in developing exceptional programs in the area of
Information Technology to read this report.
Twenty five years ago, the efforts on IS (P. Simis and others) and the efforts on CS (B. Kehoe,
N. Harbertson) placed CSU-Fresno as one of the leading and earliest CSU campuses in
exploring both areas. The current state of IS and CS can be inferred from the comments so far.
We can learn a lot from the lessons of past history. But, most importantly, we must examine
what directions this campus would take in the future and its regard of the degrees of
importance concerning the educational programs in Information Technology.
Milestones 4 – Computational Paradigm
2002-2003 Year End Report 11
Dr. Read, Seki and I had a meeting with Dr. Barbara Birch, Chair, and Dr. William Lewis of
the Linguistics Department on their proposed Computational Linguistics Option in the BA
Linguistics degree. It requires a significant number of CS courses with additional electives.
The faculty also had subsequent email communications with Dr. Lewis. We are fully in
support of their new option and their new courses in this area also. The development of such
an option will benefit the students in both Linguistics and Computer Science.
The department continues to devote some of its resources (staffing) to the development of the
area in Bioinformatics. Although currently, we have only one course, taught by P. Lowe, as an
elective in the MS Professional Biotechnology program. Ongoing interactions continue with
the Biology faculty (B. Auernheimer, W. Read, P. Lowe). We anticipate that as molecular
biology and its affiliated industries will hold center stage this century, computer technology
will become increasingly an integral part of it. Indeed, Computational Biology is now a
The Physics Department and the Computer Science Department has agreed to explore a graduate
level program in Computational Physics. As the Physics Department has been developing a
medical physics program for some time, the initial efforts would center on courses which would
enhance their program in this area. Courses of a computational nature such as computer imaging
could be considered. A distinguished CSUF graduate of the Physics (BS) and Mathematics (BA,
MS), Bruce Hasegawa, Professor of Radiology and Nuclear Physics, UCSF Medical School and
UC Berkeley, would be a helpful source of advice
While we are on the Physics Department, one of the closest collaboration will come in the
decades ahead between CS and Physics as it is already currently going on at major research
institutions. The joint effort will be on Quantum Computing. As the current technology runs
into the limits of Moore's Law within the next decade or two, a fundamental shift will be
towards Quantum Computing. As far as computing is concerned, students well grounded in
Quantum Physics will be more important than the students grounded in Electrical Engineering.
Continuing interactions with the Physics faculty would build on that of past actvities (W. Read,
T. Wilson, G. Wei, S. Seki, H. Yeung).
Joint special MS program with Mathematics is also an ongoing activity. Jason Terry, with
outstanding undergraduate course work in Mathematics, Computer Science and Physics, was
persuaded to enter such a special graduate program designed by the CS and Math Faculty (W.
The above developments are instances of the evolving changes of many disciplines under a
paradigm of historic proportions. Whereas Mathematics and Statistics were employed in ever
more disciplines in the past century, it is apparent that a computational paradigm is broader
and of more practical power than these two important fields. Our educational system is slow to
recognize this, and in particular, the CSU General Education requirements have yet to
recognize this. By this, I do not mean a skill course or a programming course, but a course
where the fundamental and core principles of the computational paradigm are presented should
be part of GE. It would be of great value to every single student in college. Earlier, I have
2002-2003 Year End Report 12
described the efforts of Professor Simis. A GE course jointly developed by CS and IS
incorporating the core principles of the computational paradigm with illustrations from the ever
increasing complexity of information systems would be a positive change in this still young
Despite the limited resources of the department, it is in support of all academic disciplines
which profess an interest of incorporating a computational approach to their disciplines. In this
sense, the above are simply manifestations of this continuing philosophy.
In Milestone 3, we commented extensively on the state of IS. Perhaps more important to us, an
examination of where this institution is going and the role of Department of Computer Science
regarding this sweeping change due to the computational paradigm is due, especially in view of
the Plan of Excellency. However, this would be beyond the scope of an annual report.
Milestone 5 – Educational Developments
The Department has revived CSci 7 at the behest of Dr. Robert Monke and will be offering this
course again to the students in Liberal Studies. The department has stopped offering this
course years ago as replacement of its Macintosh computers gave way to cheaper PCs due to
budgetary constraints. The College of Education is providing the laboratories to run this
course. This is in addition to a PC based course CSci 5 for the Education student. Professor
Jerome Smith oversees this area.
Two of the members of the Department, Jerome Smith and Prudence Lowe are working
together to propose a course on Web Technology and its Use for the students of CSU-Fresno.
Such a course is both popular and important as distance learning and online courses continue to
proliferate throughout different disciplines. As more GE courses and others come online,
general knowledge such as the working of search engines, the logical construction of queries,
the use of bulletin boards, etc. and specific knowledge of our local system Blackboard would
become increasingly needed. Both are assisted by Dr. Auernheimer, Dr. Wilson and other
faculty in their attempt to formulate an appropriate course. Both have extensive experience
teaching in the medium.
One of the proposals for the fund drive was Critical Thinking and Computer Science (W. Read,
P. Lowe, T. Wilson, H. Yeung). Most educators believe that critical thinking skills are crucial
to successful academic pursuits, and that these skills should be inculcated in the student as
early as possible. The Department is developing materials suitable for online delivery to
earlier grades. Once complete, we would try to establish an UniTrak course in the 9-12 grades.
These are among some of the efforts of the Department to improve the education of students on
and off this campus.
Part III – Computing Environment
2002-2003 Year End Report 13
The biggest problem faced by the Department is its lack of laboratory space and an adequate
computing environment. I had the opportunity every semester to attend the meeting of the
CSU Council of Computer Science and Information Systems Chairs. It is held at one of the
southern CSU campuses in the Fall and in the Spring, it is held at one of the northern CSU
campuses. It was held at LA State, Monterey Bay, and Sonoma State in the Spring, 02 , Fall
02 and Spring 03 respectively. Numerous emails are also exchanged among the Chairs.
Survey questions were sent out by me regarding their computing environment. I have also
talked to a number of the CS Chairs directly. In the past, I have visited a number of the new
buildings housing the CS department before and after our work on the ClassRoom Building,
now renamed Science II.
When the Computer Science Department joined the School of Engineering, there were only
three simple agreements. One, that resource would remain neutral, second, that the
Department would move into the ClassRoom Building and three, that the School would
eventually be renamed the School of Engineering and Computer Science. The move was
strongly supported and encouraged by the Provost's office. A careful and detail process was
followed by the Department and approval was granted after appearing before a number of
university committees. A simple but central document containing the agreement was approved
at all levels.
This annual report is not the place to revisit these issues other than to state the fact that we are
not part of now renamed ClassRoom Building, Science II, and our laboratories are devoid of
any meaningful computing environment. Window 98 is the environment in our main lab with
access to a UNIX environment often with significant software necessary to support an
undergraduate and graduate program missing. The laboratory goes down with a frequency
incommensurate with the frequencies of the labs of other Schools on this campus. This has
occurred to my basic course C Sci 41 every semester. Other faculty reported the same
problem. An attempt to reconfigure the lab and with the server directly connected the campus
network has taken over eight months – still not completed.
Students come in with better and more advanced environments on their own machines. Ours is
the result of the reduction to the lowest common denominator as other students and also
visitors have made insulting remarks concerning our lab environment and the state of the
machines. Remarks such as "you want to see the worst computers, go to Computer Science."
The department does not have a machine of its own. I exclude the desktop machine Dr. Wilson
administers himself for his courses as it has taken a tremendous toll and time away from his
duties as a faculty. Technical support is almost non-existent. But it is the lack of "chemicals"
that really hurt.
To explain the situation faced by the faculty in Computer Science, an analogy would be
helpful. If we were a Chemistry Department, this would be a department with almost no
chemicals, little test tubes and laboratory space. It does have a couple of unstable "Freshman
labs". Organic labs, inorganic and quantative analysis labs are nowhere to be found. The
chemistry storeroom is almost empty. Software of different types are analogous to the atomic
elements, the inorganic and organic compounds necessary in any Chemistry program. In fact,
2002-2003 Year End Report 14
in many cases, in order to conduct our experiments, we have to obtain special samples from
other institutions. In the computing world, especially after the magnanimous free software
movement spearheaded by Richard Stallman, free software are available from many sources. It
is learning and building based on a sufficiently rich environment of software and libraries of
software that students can progress beyond the few thousand lines of code if they have to write
from scratch. It is the mixing of chemicals that lead to learning and discovery. Computer
Science is as an experimental science as any, perhaps even more.
Free software are the specimens on which an academic program can experiment and build
upon. They have to be made available to the students, configured and set upped in some
machines in some environment. A well maintained machine by the Department is the minimal
analogy to a Chemistry laboratory where students can conduct their experiments. As an
example, Rei Suryana (4.0 GPA) is doing a 298 project on handwriting systems, a current
"hot" area with the Microsoft PC Tablet. It requires significant theoretical and practical
support from other researchers and in particular, parsers of Graph Grammar (an outgrowth of
the 60's in the 70's and 80's). In his case, important free software are available from
researchers at Cal Tech, UI, Urbana-Champaign and University of Ottawa, Canada. These
software had to be configured in a machine available to the Department. This requires both
technical and hardware support. Even assuming that all this can be done on Rei's own PC,
there is no continuity. The instructor (H. Yeung) certainly cannot put all the projects of his/her
students on his office machine. It won't run there. After Rei leaves, his and his instructor
efforts lead to no accretive value to the program. No continuing projects of some complexity is
possible under the current situation. As of now, Rei's project has to be simplified or discarded
as the current environment is not sufficient to support it. Pritesh Parekh is doing a 298 project
on speech recognition protocols over the net. Where is the equipment and space for him to do
his project? These are only two examples.
In fact, the lack of technical support was one of the strongest complaints in the last CS
Program Review as voiced by the graduate students. The suggestion by the panel of evaluators
was to have fixed office hours for the technical staff. Little could they anticipate that not only
no technical support is available to the graduate students, little is available to the faculty years
after this problem was identified and supposedly to have been corrected. This state of affairs
has existed for at least the past four years.
The space in the ClassRoom Building for CS consisted of several Introductory computer labs
plus six special labs (AI, Graphics, Software, System, Software Engineering and Hardware)
with additional rooms for projects, machines, graduate students, st and faculty (from the
11.5.92 Floor Plan). This is not far from other CSU programs moving into their new facilities.
The conclusion is that the CS Department has no machines of its own except for one
maintained by Dr. Wilson for his Web programming courses, no technician and little space
with a computing environment about the worst in the CSU. This is a dismal situation in view
of the Department functioning well above its mode and level SFR and is also the largest in
terms of foreign students on campus, fully 50% larger than the next program (ECE) and 100%
more than the third ranked MBA program (Student Data Book Fall 2002).
2002-2003 Year End Report 15
Part IV – Faculty Activities
This is based on the reports of the faculty and on my own observation. Some of the faculty's
activities related to the milestones have been reported in Part II.
The primary focus of the faculty is on the education of the students. I would first point out that
many classes are run contrary to their classification resulting in larger lectures with multiple
labs. This often leads to lower quality in the instruction and also lower performance in the
students. Assigned time is almost never available for independent studies and project
supervision in a program with over 300 undergraduate majors and over 100 graduate students.
Because of the computing environment, extraneous efforts have to be spent in the teaching of
the students. Interruptions due to the instability of the main lab McKee Fisk have led to
occasional losses or cancellations.
Another factor adds to the difficulty of some of the faculty. Computer Science is a highly
specialized field and hence the teaching duties of many of the faculty are fixed on their
specialty. Some courses had lab components and others don't and this results in differing
amounts of work for different faculty although the WTU's are the same. The changes in the
core courses as explained in Milestone 1 will lead to greater equity among the instructors of
those courses although the upper division courses have not been addressed.
The faculty continues to participate in many department, college and university committees.
All the faculty served in various functions for the department. Earlier, the advisory roles for
student chapters were mentioned (B. Auernheimer, W. Read, G. Wei). Dr. Read delivered
lectures to high-school students in a UniTrak course Engr 1T. The previous two years, Jerome
Smith was providing that service. Dr. Read continues to serve as the Assessment Coordinator
for the department as well as the primary budget officer in explaining many of the ongoing
budgetary situations to the faculty. Dr. Jin serves as the Graduate Coordinator. This role is time
consuming having to manage one of the largest and most complex graduate programs on
campus. Part of the complexity comes from students without the equivalent of a bachelor degree
in computer science is admitted to our program from many foreign countries. Determining
course equivalence and competence level involve extensive reading of transcripts and
documents, providing placement examinations at the beginning of each semester and numerous
personal interviews. Dr. Seki continues to oversee the articulation of courses from other
colleges, especially the ones from community colleges. The complexity can be gleamed from
the six different freshman sequences in computer science in the most recent model curriculum
Computing Curricula 2001 established by our professional organization
The faculty continued to attend conferences and workshops despite of the lack of any travel
funds. Dr. Wei is the most active, having attended six different conferences and workshops on
database, storage systems, system administration. Many of the faculty (B. Auernheimer, W.
Read, S. Seki, G. Wei, H. Yeung) continued to participate in state and regional meetings of
2002-2003 Year End Report 16
IMPAC. The Intersegmental Major Preparation Articulated Curriculum project (http://www.cal-
is a unique intersegmental, faculty-designed and faculty-run project to ensure that students transferring from the community colleges
to UC and CSU are prepared for work in their chosen major and can avoid having to repeat coursework. The project is funded by a
five year, $2.75 million grant that enables faculty from the three higher education systems to meet regionally to discuss issues,
concerns, and academic procedures that impinge upon the transfer of students in those majors.
At the College level, we report the following. Dr. Read served as the College Consultative
Body Chairperson for the third time. Dr. Alameldin continued to serve as Chair of the
Academic Affairs Committee while Dr. Auernheimer and Dr. Wei were on the Personnel
Committee. Dr. Seki was on the Graduate Committee and Dr. Alameldin and Dr. Read were
on the Budget Committee. Dr. Jin was on the Research Committee. Dr. Auernheimer also
chaired the College Ad Hoc Computer Committee. Dr. Read also chaired the Ad Hoc Space
Committee. Dr. Wilson served on the Ad Hoc Student Evaluation Committee.
At the University level, Dr. Wilson served as the Department Representative to the Senate, and
also served on the Library Subcommittee and General Education Subcommittee. Dr.
Auernheimer was a member of IETCC and chaired the Web Support Council Subcommittee
and was also a member of the Smittcamp Family Honors College Council.
Professor Jin has completed his book on Computer Organization. Final galley proofs are with
Tsinghua University Press. He has also started on another contracted text on Distributed
Computing for Tsinghua University Press. Professor Jin was the leading computer scientist in
China, holding the Chair of Computer Science at Tsinghua University, the leading technical
university of China. He oversaw the approval of the first 12 doctoral programs in Computer
Science in China. He built generations of their computers and operating systems. His textbook
on computer organization was the standard text in China for decades. In addition, Professor Jin
has been a visiting professor at MIT, Munich, Germany, and Penn State among other places. It
is an honor to see that his newly rewritten edition will be published and widely used in China
as were all his previous texts with his affiliation as a faculty of CSU-Fresno.
Dr. S. Seki
S. Sakamoto, S. Seki, & Y. Kobuchi, Cellular Topographic Self-Organization under
Correlational Learning, Proc. ESANN, pp. 119-124, 2003.
Dr. Brent Aurenheimer
R.M. Vick, B. Auernheimer, M.E. Crosby, M.K. Iding. Student Learning Through
Collaborative Decision Making: Analysis of the Effect of Temporal Patterns on Output
Proceedings of ED-MEDIA 2003. Honolulu. June 2003.
R. Vick, M. Crosby, B. Auernheimer, M. Iding. Emergence of Shared Mental Models During
Distributed Teamwork: Integration of Distributed Cognition Traces. Proceedings of HCI
International 2003. Crete. June 2003.
2002-2003 Year End Report 17
R. Vick, B. Auernheimer, M. Crosby, D. Chin. Enriching the Pedagogical Value of an
Asynchronous HCI Course: Adding Value Through Synchronous Collaborative Knowledge
Building. Proceedings of HCI International 2003. Crete. June 2003.
R.M. Vick, B. Auernheimer, M.E. Crosby, and M.K. Iding. Collaborative E-learning across
institutions: Effects on End-User Satisfaction. Proceedings of SITE 2003. Albuquerque,
Iding, M., Klemm, E.B., Crosby, M.E., Auernheimer, B. and Vick, R. Using the World Wide
Web in the Classroom: Addressing Issues of Cognitive Load and Critical Evaluation Skills.
Short paper at SITE 2003. Albuquerque, March 2003.
M.E. Crosby, M. K. Iding, B. Auernheimer, E.B. Klemm. Judging the veracity of web sites.
Proceedings of ICCE2002, December 2002.
M.E. Crosby, M. K. Iding, E.B. Klemm, and B. Auernheimer. Critical Evaluation Skills for
Web-Based Information: "Lies, Damned Lies" and Web-Based Information. Proceedings of
ED-MEDIA 2002. Denver, June 2002.
2002-2003 Year End Report 18
None of the above statements in this report should be construed as statements with malicious
intent. The negative statements on the failure of the Department of Information Systems and
Decision Sciences of the Craig School of Business to develop a degree program in Information
Systems for the students of this campus is something that must be said. IS is important to CS
and I have taken the liberty of commenting on this situation without knowing much of the local
history or the rationale behind the IS effort. However, I am conveying the sentiment gathered
from talking with some of the Chairs in the system-wide Council meeting when IS has no
representation from FSU for many of the past meetings, including the last three I attended, and
the sentiment of many of the students over the years seeking an IS degree.
Many of the situations faced by CS and IS are negative. Negative statements are simply a
reflection of the situation. Again, I have not addressed the underlying cause of the descent of
the CS program. This matter should be taken up in a different forum, and in fact, is important
enough to be taken up in another forum before any meaningful assessment and plan for
excellency can be executed.
In IS and CS, a phrase often uttered when one needs to think outside the box is
It just does not compute!
In the case of the IS Option, when there is left only 30 units to work with, no group of faculty
can ever produce an IS degree. The failure after all these years to establish an IS degree on
this campus is a fitting case of “It just does not compute!” Following the Penn State model, IS
should be moved out of the Craig School. The positive consequences are immense.
With the “New California” Initiative at Fresno State, with the fabulous (to IS and CS people)
CMS Project coming to fruition, with the Fund Drive, a new beginning for the IS program and
its IS faculty holds almost unlimited possibilities.
It is the right time to build a NEW HOUSE.
2002-2003 Year End Report 19
Hello -- This is the best I can do under the circumstances They are
all conference presentations published in conference proceedings. All
of them were refereed I believe.
I don't know if you include publications from June 2002 or June 2003.
You can delete the ones you need to - brent
R.M. Vick, B. Auernheimer, M.E. Crosby, M.K. Iding. Student Learning
Through Collaborative Decision Making: Analysis of the Effect of
Temporal Patterns on Output Proceedings of ED-MEDIA 2003. Honolulu.
R. Vick, M. Crosby, B. Auernheimer, M. Iding. Emergence of Shared
Mental Models During Distributed Teamwork: Integration of Distributed
Cognition Traces. Proceedings of HCI International 2003. Crete. June
R. Vick, B. Auernheimer, M. Crosby, D. Chin. Enriching the Pedagogical
Value of an Asynchronous HCI Course: Adding Value Through Synchronous
Collaborative Knowledge Building. Proceedings of HCI International
2003. Crete. June 2003.
R.M. Vick, B. Auernheimer, M.E. Crosby, and M.K. Iding. Collaborative
E-learning across institutions: Effects on End-User Satisfaction.
Proceedings of SITE 2003. Albuquerque, March 2003.
Iding, M., Klemm, E.B., Crosby, M.E., Auernheimer, B. and Vick, R.
Using the World Wide Web in the Classroom: Addressing Issues of
Cognitive Load and Critical Evaluation Skills. Short paper at SITE
2003. Albuquerque, March 2003.
M.E. Crosby, M. K. Iding, B. Auernheimer, E.B. Klemm. Judging the
veracity of web sites. Proceedings of ICCE2002, December 2002.
M.E. Crosby, M. K. Iding, E.B. Klemm, and B. Auernheimer. Critical
Evaluation Skills for Web-Based Information: "Lies, Damned Lies" and
Web-Based Information. Proceedings of ED-MEDIA 2002. Denver, June 2002.
2002-2003 Year End Report 20
Hi, Diane and Walt:
Here are the figures from Computer Science. Please accept my apologies
for being late.
Note: The figures below pertain to internal computer science operations.
For example, a number of the students who should receive tutoring do
seek out help from
the Tutorial Learning Center, although the results are not necessarily
uniformily positive. The number who obtain employment is to the best of
our knowledge at this time.
MILESTONE INDICATORS OF SUCCESS
Goals 5, 12, 17, 18, 20, 31, and 37
Prepared May 16, 2003
Goal 5. Strengthen and coordinate a comprehensive program that will
provide adequate staff, technology, training, recognition and support
faculty and professional advisors to ensure that all students have
access to high quality advice and counsel on academic programs and goals
for their careers.
Indicators of Success:
The percentage of continuing students receiving advising in the academic
year has been nearly 100%. This is expected to remain nearly constant
since all students have been required to receive advising prior to
registration each Fall semester. A registration hold has been placed on
each student who has not received advising the previous academic year
until they receive advising. The
inability of PeopleSoft to support this advising effort reportedly will
corrected soon and this program will be continued.
New faculty is mentored regarding advising duties.
Goal 12. Strengthen support for faculty professional development
opportunities that promote excellence in areas of teaching, research,
creative activity and service in order to meet the diverse and
needs of our students, state and region.
Indicators of Success:
For tenure and probationary faculty, the following opportunities were
provided and they are also shown as a percent of the total faculty:
Support for teaching: 0 full-time faculty of 10 full-time faculty
participated in one or more related activities.
2002-2003 Year End Report 21
Support for research: 0 faculty received and participated in
opportunities for research and development.
Support for creative activity: 0 faculty received support to pursue
Support for service: 1 faculty received support to pursue service
Goal 17. Develop honors programs in each of the Colleges and Schools.
Indicators of Success:
0 students of 30 students (___ %) who qualify for a college honors
by having the appropriate GPA are enrolled in this honors program.
Goal 18. Introduce components into all academic programs that will
further engage students in the learning process as active partners with
their teachers and mentors.
Indicators of Success:
0 number of students are receiving tutoring of approximately 60 students
who should be receiving tutoring. This represents 0 % of the students
should be receiving mentoring.
32 number of 32 students graduating during the academic year have worked
on senior individual or class projects or completed appropriate advanced
0 students participated in special project class(es) of 0 students
requiring special project class(es).
4 students participated in the VIP for Cooperative Education, or other
cooperative education or internship opportunity. This represents 80
percentage of the available positions for cooperative
Goal 20. Establish ongoing processes and criteria to assess the
excellence of performance in five major areas: academic programs;
post-, and non-tenure track faculties; student performance;
systems, operations and support; and external collaborations,
partnerships, centers, and institutes.
Indicators of Success:
Academic Programs: 0 of 1 the programs in the department/college are
Pre-, Post-, and Non-Tenure Track Faculties:
2002-2003 Year End Report 22
3 faculty ( 1 Pre-Tenure Track, and 2 Non-Tenure Track faculty) were
evaluated representing a total of 3 faculty ( 1 Pre-Tenure Track, and 2
Non-Tenure Track faculty).
6 Post-Tenure faculty of a total of 7 Post-Tenure faculty submitted
faculty activity reports.
0 students of 0 students taking the Engineering-In-Training, Land
Surveyor-In-Training examination, or equivalent, passed the examination.
6 graduating seniors out of a total of 20 graduating seniors are
for graduate study.
7 graduating seniors out of a total of 20 graduating seniors have
employment in the discipline of study following graduation.
Administrative Systems, Operations and Support:
_ e-mails/memorandums/letters of complaint were received, and _
complimentary e-mails/memorandums/letters were received.
Exit surveys of graduating students indicate that the students rated
support from the department and deans office as __ on a scale of 1 to 5.
Exit surveys of graduating students indicate that the students rated
support from outside of the college as __ on a scale of 1 to 5.
Department of Computer Science
2002-2003 Year End Report 23
MS1 Revision and university approval of BS degree requirements and MS degree
requirements. Both the BS and MS degree revisions are due the continuing broadening
of the application of computer science and technology into increasingly diverse areas
and the restriction of only offering one degree. As a result, the requirements have to
allow greater flexibility to meet the changing landscape of both employment and
MS2 Faculty agreement to develop BA degree in Computer Science with options in Software
Engineering and Multimedia and Telecommunications. Additional option areas include
an Information Assurance option which will involve both Mathematics and IS in its
MS3 Discussions with Information Systems faculty as to joint efforts in strengthening the
education provided to Information Systems and Computer Science students. This
involves exchange graduate project supervision and acceptance of certain courses in
each other's department. Computer Science will offer a special course for IS majors on
data-structures and file processing to cover one of the weakness of the IS curriculum.
MS4 Efforts towards developing a Computational Sciences interdisciplinary area. It
resulted in an agreement with the Physics Department to develop a jointly administered
graduate degree program in Computational Physics, with initial efforts in the area of
medical applications. Department also agreed to provide significant course support to a
Computational Linguistics option in the Linguistics BA degree. Another is the
continuing effort in the area of Bioinformatics with CSci 101 as an elective in a MS
MS5 Agreement to renew a course for Liberal Studies majors in the College of Education
this Fall semester. Department has almost completed the work on a new lower division
course on Web technology and its Use to be introduced next year. In the area of the
education of 8-12 students work is continuing on a grade appropriate Web-based
critical thinking course, which will eventually be made available to school districts.