CSE ACCREDITATIONREVIEW BY CAC & EAC

UC IrvineOctober 2, 2013

Accreditation Goal

Improve educational quality of the program

Program Education Objectives (PEO)broad statements about career and

professional accomplishments that are to be achieved within a few years of graduation

(these are defined by the CSE program)

Student Outcomes (SO)expectations of knowledge and ability that

are to be achieved before graduation(these are defined by CAC & EAC of ABET, with allowances for

local variation)

2

CSE PEOs

Graduates of the program will establish a productive Computer Science and

Engineering career in industry, government, or academia

engage in professional practice of computer systems engineering and software systems engineering

promote the development of innovative systems and solutions using hardware and software integration

promote design, research and implementation of products and services in the field of Computer Science and Engineering through strong communication, leadership and entrepreneurial skills

3

Student Outcomes

EAC defines 11 SOs, labeled a-k

CAC defines 11 SOs, labeled a-k

much overlap between EAC & CAC SOs

we define 23 aspects (Indicators) of the 22 SOs7 appear in both EAC and CAC SOs16 appear in only one of EAC or CAC

CSE defines 13 SOs, labeled a-m contain all 23 Indicators

4

Student Outcome Example

EACa. An ability to apply knowledge of (a1)

mathematics, (a2) science, and engineering.

CACa. An ability to apply knowledge of (a3) computing

and (a1) mathematics appropriate to the discipline.

CSEa. An ability to apply knowledge of (a3)

computing, (a1) mathematics, (a2) science, and engineering appropriate to Computer Science and Engineering.

5

Curriculum Review Process

Guide program development based on desired outcomes

Assessment: collect data on SO achievementDirect: Faculty Course Assessment Report

(FCAR)Indirect: survey graduating students

Evaluation: interpret data to measure progress of attaining goals

Recommendations to CSE Steering Committee

Make changes to courses, goals, and process Re-assess for continuous improvement

6

Curriculum (Steering) Committee

Continuously improve the programhttp://casa.eng.uci.edu/accreditation/program_improvements

Define PEOs and SO IndicatorsReview assessments and proposals for changeInitiate action for improvement via changes:

• program requirements (which courses are needed)

• course requirements (prerequisites)• course content• assessment process

7

Course Coordinator Responsibilities

Review Course Outline

• Catalog Data (course number, title, units, description, prerequisite courses)

• Required Textbook

• CLO (Course Learning Outcomes) = defined by coordinator• List of associated SO’s (EAC and CAC) for each CLO

• Prerequisites by topic – consistent with course prerequisites

• Lecture Topics

• Hours per week for Lecture/Discussion/Lab

• Grading Criteria (% allocated to project, hw, quiz, midterm, final)

Review Outcome Assessments• Suggest changes for prerequisites, topic coverage, CLOs, SO associations

8

Instructor Responsibilities

Assemble “packet” of all assignments

For assessed courses:• Provide 3 samples (good, avg, poor) of graded

assignments• Fill out FCAR

9

Example Filled-in FCAR

10

Percentage of CSE students achieving performance standards (2012-13)

g i j m1 2 3 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 3 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 2 1

Informatics 43 Introduction to 94 88 82 94 Software Engineering ct 17 17 17 17CSE 90 Systems Engineering and 100 96 100 96 100 100 96 Techn'l Communications ct 25 25 25 25 25 25 25CSE 112 Intro to VLSI 75 92 81 92 92 80 73

ct 26 26 26 26 26 25 26CSE 135B Digital Signal Proc'ing 41 88 94 94 39 94 65 Design ct 32 34 34 33 33 34 34CSE 142 Compilers and 87 97 90 Interpreters ct 30 30 30CSE 145B Embedded Computer 93 Systems Lab ct 28CSE 161 Design & Analysis of 88 88 88 Algorithms ct 17 17 17CSE 181A Senior Design Project 89 97 89 100 100 97 94 92

ct 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36CSE 181B Senior Design Project 39 50 94 83 100 92 81 86 94 83 89 86

ct 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36CSE 181CW Senior Design 75 97 72 100 100 100 Project (Writing) ct 36 36 36 36 36 36

AVG PERCENT ATTAINMENT 63 89 88 73 58 94 74 88 95 84 87 86 98 96 98 94 97 96 94 84 85 87 95 91

CSE Student Outcome Indicators 2012-13c Ld

fCourses ha keb

11

Percentage of CSE students achieving performance standards (2012-13)

CSE SO AVG percentIndicators attainment a b c d e f g h i j k a b c d e f g h i j k

a1 63 63 63a2 89 89a3 88 88b1 73 73b2 58 58c1 94 94 94c2 74 74d1 88 88 88d2 95 95 95e1 84 84e2 87 87f1 86 86 86f2 98 98f3 96 96g1 98 98 98h1 94 94h2 97 97i1 96 96 96j1 94 94k1 84 84k2 85 85L1 87 87L2 95 95m1 91 91

63 58 94 88 84 86 98 94 96 94 84 63 87 74 88 86 98 97 96 85 87 91Percent meeting Standards

EAC Student Outcomes CAC Student Outcomes

12

Percentage of CSE students achieving performance standards (2011-12)

g i j m1 2 3 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 3 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 2 1

CSE 90 Systems Engineering and 76 96 100 100 100 100 96 77 Techn'l Communications ct 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26CSE 121 Software Tools and 97 94 80 100 91 Methods ct 34 34 34 34 34CSE 135B Digital Signal Proc'ing 95 95 82 72 90 97 72 Design ct 39 39 39 39 39 39 39CSE 142 Compilers and 71 81 71 Interpreters ct 21 26 21CSE 151 Intro to VLSI 76 84 90 88 93 76 91

ct 43 43 43 43 43 43 43CSE 161 Design & Analysis of 88 80 52 Algorithms ct 25 25 25CSE 181A Senior Design Project 100 100 100 95 87 80 90 90 90 90 87 100

ct 23 23 23 40 20 40 40 40 40 40 23 23CSE 181B Senior Design Project 82 82 100 100 100 100 82 100 100 100 82 82

ct 23 23 23 23 23 23 19 23 23 23 23 23CSE 181CW Senior Design 100 100 100 97 97 100 Project (Writing) ct 39 39 39 39 39 39AVG PERCENT ATTAINMENT 86 89 88 81 89 99 87 100 100 88 65 92 94 98 94 94 94 92 85 89 100 80 87 83

kebCSE Student Outcome Indicators 2011-12

c LfCourses ha d

13

Percentage of CSE students achieving performance standards (2011-12)

CSE SO AVG percentIndicators attainment a b c d e f g h i j k a b c d e f g h i j k

a1 86 86 86a2 89 89a3 88 88b1 81 81b2 89 89c1 99 99 99c2 87 87d1 100 100 100d2 100 100 100e1 88 88e2 65 65f1 92 92 92f2 94 94f3 98 98g1 94 94 94h1 94 94h2 94 94i1 92 92 92j1 85 85k1 89 89k2 100 100L1 80 80L2 87 87m1 83 83

86 81 99 100 88 92 94 94 92 85 86 86 65 87 100 92 94 94 92 100 80 83Percent meeting Standards

EAC Student Outcomes CAC Student Outcomes

14

Percentage of CSE students who believe they perform well (2009-10 thru 2012-13)

Understand impact in econ’c, environ’l, societal context

15

2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13percent percent percent percent

survey question Indicator attainment attainment attainment attainmentmin 2.1-2.3,2.6 a1 65 84 64 44

min 2.4-2.5 a1 45 51 47 432.7 a2 65 72 65 52

min 2.8-2.13 a3 68 87 76 523 b1 78 85 81 724 b2 83 88 91 79

max 5.1-5.8 c1 69 66 88 57max 6.1-6.8 c2 71 85 88 69

7 d1 89 97 91 768 e1 89 97 85 839 e2 79 90 91 79

min 10.1-10.2 f1 83 90 88 69 min10.3 ,10.5 f2 75 63 81 56

10.4 f3 86 63 78 68min 11.1-11.2 g1 79 79 67 55min 12.1-12.4 h1 65 66 66 51

13 h2 74 73 72 6214 i1 97 97 91 7315 j1 68 81 78 6216 k1 90 87 74 4517 k2 86 97 87 7218 L1 76 84 65 55

min 19-20 L2 86 78 85 6921 m1 71 84 78 68

CSE SENIOR SURVEY (2012 quest #s)

maximum possible score = 5, performance standard = 4

Apply probability and statistics

Design system to meet needs with constraints

Understand legal and social issues and responsibilities

Can use current techniques for engineering practice

Apply computer science

Apply calculus, discrete math, algebra, symbolic logic