th biannual cs retreat spring 2011 - new jersey institute ......1 18th biannual cs retreat spring...

1

18th Biannual CS Retreat Spring 2011

Every_semester@Reading_Day (May 4th 2011) Recap The 18th CS retreat was held on a combined reading + snow replacement day which made for challenging scheduling for faculty and administrators. Joe Leung proposed a process for course assessment. Sarah Vandermark overviewed the innovative advisement + professional development framework that has been developed. Alex Gerbessiotis surveyed the state of the field with his (un)usual and dazzling command of metrics. Andrew Sohn and Jon Kapleau addressed the lower level undergraduate problem-solving and language landscape. Chengjun reviewed research at the undergraduate level and OCC transfer student Kaitlin Lackey recalled her positive experience in CS. List of speakers and topics

0945-950: Dean Narain Gehani - Introductory Remarks

Acting Chair Mike Baltrush - Introductory Remarks

0950-1000: Joseph Leung - Proposed Curriculum Review

1000-1040: Alex Gerbessiotis - State of Discipline CS@US, CS@NJIT

1040-1100: Sarah Vandermark - Professional Development Sequence

1100-1120: Andrew Sohn - CS288 Programming Practice

1120-1140: Jonathan Kapleau - CS Language Landscape in Lower Level

1140-1215: Intermission for Lunch

1215 -1235: Chengjun Liu - Undergraduate Research in CS

1235-12:55: Kaitlin Lackey - Undergraduate Viewpoint on CS

Contacts [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ;

[email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ;

[email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ;

[email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ;

Proposed Review of CS Curriculum - Prof. Joseph Leung

After brief introductory remarks by Dean Gehani and Interim Chair Mike Baltrush, a late request by

Prof. Leung to discuss a curriculum proposal was obliged. Dean Gehani had asked Joseph to think about

possible ways of improving the CS curriculum. In response, Joseph asked to address the retreat about

what might be called "Quality of Program" issues. His proposal is to perform a type of rapid self-

assessment in the Fall semester this year. The assessment would initially address graduate courses, then,

later, undergraduate courses. Joseph proposed brief 15 minute overviews of one course per week,

presented by the/a course instructor to the department at a weekly meeting. Based on this faculty would

identify updates and/or changes to the courses. Alex Gerbessiotis recommended the process begin with

core courses. Barry Cohen thought the process would clarify what was happening in courses, their

mailto:[email protected]













2

interconnections and the programming experience expected. He suggested a tentative format for the

presentations. The department Chair and the CS faculty will address this matter more formally in the

Fall.

Note: Because of scheduling constraints for faculty, a last minute change in the schedule was made,

with Sarah Vandermark's presentation being moved before Alex Gerbessiotis' State of the Department

and Field address.

Professional Development Sequence and CO-OP - Sarah Vandermark

Sarah Vandermark spoke about the new format for interacting with CCS students. This approach

strongly depends on the newly developed sequence of professional development courses CS 107, CS

207, and CS 407, which are required for all CCS students. Each course is one credit and the advisors,

Sarah and Megan, meet with the students once weekly. In addition to the topical content of the courses,

they also provide a major advantage in that the advisors get to know the students early in the program,

on a one-on-one basis, and much more closely than had been the case previously. Each advisor meets

75 students over their (three) sections. Sarah believes she is able to get the students to learn how to

advise themselves. An important outcome is that because of the advising opportunities the classes

present, there are fewer registration and advising problems. Sarah plans to revamp CS 107 so it involves

more group projects so students gain experience in working in team and group environments, improving

their associated social skills. CS 207 currently emphasizes fundamental career and professional

development capabilities like communication skills, resume writing, and interviewing and uses among

other techniques mock interviews. All of these skills are profoundly related to ABET educational

requirements that previously have been inadequately covered in the program(s). These innovations

represent a major self-improvement in our academic process. Advisor Load becomes an issue with the

teaching requirements for these sections. Sarah mentioned that the timing scenario is to run CS 107 in

the Fall semester, CS 207 in the Spring semester, and CS 407 as a Junior level course which could be

split between the Fall and Spring semesters to even the teaching course load.

One of Sarah's fundamental objectives, partly motivated by her own work experience at Northeastern

University in Boston, is to create a culture where CCS students "want to do CO-OP". The key

objective is to dramatically increase the number of students taking CO-OP. Half the students who do

take CO-OP are eventually hired at the position. According to Sarah's analysis, the basic barrier to

higher CO-OP rates has been simply lack of knowledge. This is being rectified as a side-effect of the

professional development courses which greatly expand student awareness of these opportunities, their

benefits and how to go about making them happen. Sarah's objective is to increase the number of CO-

OP students so that within three years an average of 100 students out of the entire population of CCS

undergraduates will take CO-OP.

Concerning the opportunity for advanced education, Alexander Gerbessiotis observed it is important to

inform students in these courses of the traditional deadlines for GRE's if they intend to pursue graduate

studies and the possibilities of Ph.D. level education. At the graduate level, Kathy Price remarked on

opportunities for Practical Training.

3

State of the Program - Prof. Alex Gerbessiotis

Alex presented his usual meticulously researched analysis of the academic and job situation for

Computer Science. US News' widely cited ranking ranked NJIT overall as 139th

in US in 2011 while

115th

in 2010, illustrating how the ranking is subject to major changes with slight perturbations in the

underlying data. A key factor in undermining NJIT's US News ranking is its low 17% four-year

graduation rate (compared for example to 65% for College of NJ, 50% for Rutgers NB and 30% for

Stevens), NJIT being 4th

from the bottom of almost 30 NJ universities listed! This single factor

constitutes 25% of the US News and World Report score on which ranking is based. Ali Mili remarked

that, given the visibility and impact of these rankings and their sensitivity to possibly slight changes in

the inputs, it's worth exploring modest internal improvements or tactics that could disproportionately

affect the rankings. In another major ranking, the Chinese ARWU survey ranked NJIT as tied with

schools like NYU, Rice, Edinburgh and University of Montreal.

The appeal of the computing profession remains very high with correspondingly remunerative salaries.

According to surveys at cnbc.com software engineering is ranked as the best job in America. Relating

salaries and academic programs, the web site payscale.com ranks colleges based on the reported salaries

of their alumni (but beware its unnervingly restrictive license agreement that affects its use). In terms of

starting salaries for engineering degrees, payscale.com ranked computer science fairly close to other

major engineering degrees, with the exception of petroleum engineering which was off the charts in

terms of starting salaries, close to twice those of other engineering fields. Remarkably, NJIT was ranked

11th

among US engineering schools by payscale.com, with Harvey Mudd (a third of whose students are

National Merit scholars and which is rated best undergraduate U.S. engineering program among non-

doctoral institutions), Caltech and MIT as the three highest ranked in the same ranking. NJIT was

ranked 5th

among top state universities in the same respect. The position of system administrator had the

highest salary for computer administration jobs (at over 130K per annum).

CS employment prospects remain strong. After a slight dip in 2008-09, the National Assoc. of

Computer Consultant Businesses statistics show the number of positions is almost back to its historic

high in October 2008. To gain a sense of current regional demand for software positions, Alex

recommended checking indeed.com (for example, enter: CS Newark jobs with 25 mile radius, as the

search criterion). The indeed.com site has some interesting data visualizations for examples of which

we refer to slides on Alex's attached presentation. Alex also references the website naceweb.org

(National Association of Colleges and Employers). That site provides extensive information on the job

market for college-educated individuals, with special articles, surveys, job outlook reports and so on.

You can find interesting tidbits there such as that employers (currently) hire 40% of their new hires from

former interns. Other interesting topics considered by Alex included expected competencies for

prospective employees by major employers like Google, Facebook and Twitter.

Enrollment in academic computing programs is strong. The Taulbee Survey shows a 10% increase in

CS enrollment with a 15% increase in female enrollment. Alex's presentation has detailed historic data

and projections on national and NJIT enrollments. The most notable point is that NJIT MS CS new

students will be UP, other categories being slightly down or the same. Projected enrollment for Fall

2011 is: 320+ for BS CS, 201+ for MS CS, and 50 for PhD CS, about 30 up in total from last year.

4

CS 288 Intensive Programming Practicum - Prof. Andrew Sohn

Andrew Sohn was enlisted to teach CS 288 Intensive Programming because of last minute changes in

the teaching schedule. The problems he used for the course were selected from an intensive computer

science course at Stanford, though one given to Stanford freshmen CS majors. After his recent

experience he says he is inclined to rename the course "moderate to weak programming" instead of its

current title. His underlying focus was teaching problem-solving in computing rather than language

skills per se. Examples included shell scripting and implementation of Linux commands, intelligent

search, web processing problems that entailed traversing the DOM (Document Object Model) during

real-time retrieval of web pages and extracting features of the code (related to understanding the

operation of web crawlers), simple chat application, socket programming, etc. Languages ranged from

Bash to C (40%), Python (20% - a Python DOM library was used), PHP, MySQL, XML, et al.

According to Andrew 80% of the students (3/4 of whom were juniors and seniors, even though the

course is nominally sophomore level) were ill-prepared, unable to implement even routine algorithms

like tree-traversal, while the remaining 20% were up to the challenge of designing, planning, developing

and implementing solutions to reasonably challenging problems. Part of the pedagogical problem is that

students violate the order in which they are supposed to take courses, like taking the presumably

terminal capstone course before CS 288! Subsequent discussion involved course content and

sequencing, Barry Cohen noting the presumed focus of CS 288 and whether it utilized C or C++, which

appeared to be disputed. Alex Gerbessiotis remarked on the curricular locus of topics like tree traversal,

covered somewhat in CS 114 but addressed more deeply in CS 435, after CS 288. The sequencing and

breakout of topics among these courses appears to need review, and perhaps modified and standardized.

Andrew believed the take-home message of his experience was that a significant majority of the students

lacked understanding of the fundamentals, and so addressing that should be the at the heart of any efforts

at CS curricular improvement.

Post-retreat, Jim McHugh mused on the underlying difference of opinion between Barry and Andrew on

how to best address the challenges we face in instruction in programming. On the one hand, it seems

Barry focuses on the failure of conventional approaches to successfully teach programming principles

and skills to the mass of students and maintain their interest in the field; while Andrew addresses the

need for challenging problem solving experience, which is currently under-realized and which, when

presented, only the best students seem able to successfully tackle. There seems to be roughly a 70-30

(or 80-20) percentage split between the student populations addressed. The introductory python course

nurtured by Barry particularly suits the 70% mass population, at least in respect to its manner of

introducing programming (which is distinct from its roadmap and communications objectives).

Andrew's efforts at problem-solving and programming escalation work with a 30% elite population

(though the idea is to eventually extend this to a majority of students). Both the Cohen and Sohn

strategies seem appropriate for different 'parameter regimes' of student capability. While resolving the

dilemma presented by a bifurcated student population is problematic, we might benefit from a sort of

unified Coh'n-Sohn viewpoint that explicitly confronts one root issue: how to deal effectively with vastly

different student levels.

5

CS Language Landscape in Lower Level - Prof. Jonathan Kapleau

Jonathan Kapleau, prompted by his own background in philosophy, began his presentation by

underscoring that "you can't think without language". Language-wise the lower level landscape covers:

CS 100 (Python) and CS 113-114 (Java). In CS 280 (Programming Language Concepts) he expects

students to gain command of the language they don't know well (Java if they know C++ and C++ if they

know Java). To expose them to C, he "throws" C at them, with sample C programs. Concepts like

function pointers emphasized by Andrew Sohn are required for the class projects. In Jonathan's version

of CS 288 he focuses on C (as opposed to specifically C++), the Bash shell, and advanced programming

techniques. Ali Mili inquired about the software prerequisites for the discrete math related courses CS

241 and CS 341 (Foundations of Computer Science I and II) which require CS 114 and CS 280

respectively.

Undergraduate Research in CS - Prof. Chengjun Liu

Chengjun Liu is a member of the Institute Undergraduate Research Committee. He mentioned a number

of funding opportunities available to support undergraduate research. Five (only) were made available

this year through a provost funding initiative. Interestingly, beginning this year Yehoshua Perl has a

grant from the NLM (National Library of Medicine, under NIH) which provides funding for 10

undergraduate students. Chengjun also noted that John Federici has arranged for two student projects

supported by CACI, a major IT support company based in Arlington. Chengjun observed that he himself

encourages projects with a research angle in his undergraduate AI course. Ali Mili asked Chengjun if he

was aware of how CS support for undergraduate research compares with that of other departments but

Chengjun was not privy to the statistics. Alex Gerbessiotis observed that supplemental requests for

generous undergraduate support can be made as a component of NSF grant applications. Jason Wang

observed that such support is about 6K per annum for undergraduates.

Undergraduate Viewpoint on CS - Kaitlin Lackey -

CS senior Kaitlin Lackey transferred to NJIT from OCC (Ocean County College). Her transition to

NJIT from the county college went well; she contrasted the treatment of C++ in the county college,

which was mainly syntax oriented, versus the more advanced approach at NJIT. Kaitlin chose the

combined community college + NJIT route because of the cost benefits, especially from the first two

years, and because she liked NJIT's program. She currently works in the research group of Yehoshua

Perl and Jim Geller where she has learned a great deal about group research. Kaitlin believes this

experience has been highly beneficial, preparing her for working in groups in "the real world", a

capability she thinks will prove invaluable. In terms of coursework, Kaitlin liked the structure of Ted

Nicholson's CS 490 where 70% of the grade was based on a group development project. Three students

were involved in each project. The team's responsibilities included coming up with the idea for a project

that was substantial enough to take the whole term to develop. Kaitlin felt that the CS program would

benefit from more courses like this. Though she had some exposure to Linux, she would like to have had

significantly more, believing it would provide students better access to courses like CS 433 Intro to

Linux Kernel.

6

Appendices I. Alex Gerbessiotis State of Discipline CS@US, CS@NJIT

II. Andrew Sohn CS288 Programming Practice

III. Jonathan Kapleau CS Language Landscape in Lower Level

IV. Chengjun Liu Undergraduate Research in CS

V. Kaitlin Lackey Undergraduate Viewpoint on CS

Alex. Gerbessiotis, CS DepartmentCS DepartmentCS DepartmentCS DepartmentAlex. Gerbessiotis, CS DepartmentCS DepartmentCS DepartmentCS Department

Computer ScienceComputer ScienceComputer ScienceComputer ScienceAlex. GerbessiotisAlex. GerbessiotisAlex. GerbessiotisAlex. Gerbessiotis


CS RETREAT: Spring 2011

Payscale.comPayscale.com


CS RETREAT: Spring 2011


Best Jobs in Americahttp://www.cnbc.com/id/40950977?slide=11


Rankings :CS, NJIT


Rankings 2011: US News &WRRankings 2011: US News &WRRankings 2011: US News &WRRankings 2011: US News &WR2010 2011

NJITNJITNJITNJIT 115115115115 139139139139CSCSCSCS 91919191 91919191EngineeringEngineeringEngineeringEngineering 86868686 92929292IS IS IS IS ---- ----MathMathMathMath 98 98 98 98 98989898PhysicsPhysicsPhysicsPhysics 133 133 133 133 133133133133ChemistryChemistryChemistryChemistry RNPRNPRNPRNP RNPRNPRNPRNPUSNWR: http://grad-schools.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-graduate-schools/top-computer-science-

schools/rankings

Glossary: RNP: Ranked but rank not published, NR: Not Ranked


What undermines NJITWhat undermines NJITWhat undermines NJITWhat undermines NJIT’’’’s rankingss rankingss rankingss rankings


Rankings 2010/2011Rankings 2010/2011Rankings 2010/2011Rankings 2010/2011(international) (national)

ARWUARWUARWUARWU NRCNRCNRCNRCNJITNJITNJITNJIT NRNRNRNR NRNRNRNRCS CS CS CS 52525252----75*75*75*75* 66666666----104/128 (3104/128 (3104/128 (3104/128 (3rdrdrdrd qrtl)qrtl)qrtl)qrtl)IS IS IS IS NRNRNRNR 96969696----119/128 (3119/128 (3119/128 (3119/128 (3rdrdrdrd qrtl)qrtl)qrtl)qrtl)MathMathMathMath NRNRNRNR NRNRNRNRAppMathAppMathAppMathAppMath ---- 18181818----23/34(323/34(323/34(323/34(3rdrdrdrd qrtl)qrtl)qrtl)qrtl)PhysicsPhysicsPhysicsPhysics NRNRNRNR 90909090----142/162 (3142/162 (3142/162 (3142/162 (3rdrdrdrd qrtl)qrtl)qrtl)qrtl)ChemistryChemistryChemistryChemistry NRNRNRNR 135135135135----169/180(4169/180(4169/180(4169/180(4thththth qrtl)qrtl)qrtl)qrtl)ECEECEECEECE NRNRNRNR 61616161----100/128 (3100/128 (3100/128 (3100/128 (3rdrdrdrd qrtl)qrtl)qrtl)qrtl)

Note: * Ranked 76-100 previously

ARWU: http://www.arwu.org/SubjectCS2010.jsp World Ranking

NRC: http://chronicle.com/article/NRC-Rankings-Overview-/124721/ US Ranking

Glossary: RNP: Ranked but rank not published, NR: Not Ranked , USNWR: US News &World Report NRC:Natnl Research Council

ARWU: Academic Rankings of World Universities (Shanghai U –related)


ARWU (Chinese) RankingsARWU (Chinese) RankingsARWU (Chinese) RankingsARWU (Chinese) RankingsCS ranks 52-75 in 2010 vs 76-100 in 2009CS@NJIT tied with

NYU, Rice, Poly Turin, Edinburgh, Chinghua,NYU, Rice, Poly Turin, Edinburgh, Chinghua,NYU, Rice, Poly Turin, Edinburgh, Chinghua,NYU, Rice, Poly Turin, Edinburgh, Chinghua,UCSC, UWUCSC, UWUCSC, UWUCSC, UW----Madison, U Virginia, U Montreal, Madison, U Virginia, U Montreal, Madison, U Virginia, U Montreal, Madison, U Virginia, U Montreal, TU Munchen, Eindhoven IT, Korea AIST, UFTU Munchen, Eindhoven IT, Korea AIST, UFTU Munchen, Eindhoven IT, Korea AIST, UFTU Munchen, Eindhoven IT, Korea AIST, UF

CS@NJIT beats

BU, McGill, BarIlan, PSU, Shanghai JiaoTong, BU, McGill, BarIlan, PSU, Shanghai JiaoTong, BU, McGill, BarIlan, PSU, Shanghai JiaoTong, BU, McGill, BarIlan, PSU, Shanghai JiaoTong, ETH Lausanne, HK PolU, CathLeuven, MSU,NTUSTETH Lausanne, HK PolU, CathLeuven, MSU,NTUSTETH Lausanne, HK PolU, CathLeuven, MSU,NTUSTETH Lausanne, HK PolU, CathLeuven, MSU,NTUST


Payscale.com: Best Engin. CollegesPayscale.com: Best Engin. CollegesPayscale.com: Best Engin. CollegesPayscale.com: Best Engin. Colleges


Payscale.com: Best NE US CollegesPayscale.com: Best NE US CollegesPayscale.com: Best NE US CollegesPayscale.com: Best NE US CollegesRanks 1-12Ranks 1-12


Payscale.com: Best NE US CollegesPayscale.com: Best NE US CollegesPayscale.com: Best NE US CollegesPayscale.com: Best NE US CollegesRanks 13-31Ranks 13-31

27th27th


Payscale.com: Best State UniversitiesPayscale.com: Best State UniversitiesPayscale.com: Best State UniversitiesPayscale.com: Best State Universities


Payscale.com: Top NJIT degreesPayscale.com: Top NJIT degreesPayscale.com: Top NJIT degreesPayscale.com: Top NJIT degrees


Taulbee Survey!


Taulbee SummaryTaulbee SummaryTaulbee SummaryTaulbee Summary266 Institutions queries (= 184 CS + 30 CE + 22 IS + 29CANADA)

195 Institutions responded (= 150 CS + 12 CE + 18 IS + 15CANADA)

Most data are for Fall 2009-Spring 2010, except for new stdnts (Fall 2010)

[NJIT did not respond]

Highlights of the summary [Full report to follow in Mid May 2011]

BS degrees UP +11% (includes CS/CE/IS, US/CAN)

BS/CS degrees USA +9% vs 5.5% 2009 CAN UP 15%

BS/CS degrees (women): 14% (CE 10%, IS 14.5%)

BS enrollment USA UP +10% CAN DOWN -8%


Taulbee SummaryTaulbee SummaryTaulbee SummaryTaulbee SummaryBS MS PhD Remarks

Degrees 9008 up 6851 up 1501 same vs +6%,-7%,-8% resp(F09-S10) 12501=9008+1592+1900 9542=6851+765+1926 1772=1501+271 (the year before)

female:14% 21% 19% 12�14%, 21�19% 2009/2010change

PhD Enrollment: 12666 in CS (15038=12666CS+1378CE+994IS)

PhD NewStudents: 2561 in CS (2962=2561CS+216CE+185IS)

Averages: Degrees BS: 60, MS: 45, PhD:10

(per Dept) Enrollment BS:250, MS: * PhD:84

New Stdnts BS: * * MS: *** PhD:17

NJIT Degrees BS: 45 MS: ~ 80 PhD: 3-5

Enrollment: BS: 301 MS: ~ 200 PhD: ~50

New Stdnts BS: 72+34 MS: ~90 PhD: 3-7


SECTION 1

EMPLOYMENT PROSPECTSfor

Computer Science students


Payscale.com: Best Degrees


Indeed.com


Indeed.com: Administrator jobs


Naceweb: Spring 2011 salary survey of new graduates http://www.rpi.edu/dept/cdc/NACE%20Spring%202011%20Salary%20Survey.pdf

Average salary per major

# $[2011] $[2010] Change

Average salary per major

# $[2011] $[2010] Change


BS/MS in Computer Science or related field/degree, and/or equivalent work experience

A solid foundation in CS, with strong competencies in data structures and algorithms

Fluency in one or more of: C, C++, Java

Familiarity with one or more of: Python, Perl, Shell, PHP

Expertise in analyzing and troubleshooting large-scale distributed systems

Knowledge of IP netw, net analysis, perf. and app. issues using standard tools like tcpdump

Strong skills in C and/or C++, scripting languages, Python and Shell highly desirable

BS in Computer Science or related technical discipline, or equivalent experience.

Large systems software design and development experience, with extensive knowledge of Unix/Linux.

Coding skills in C or JavaScript/AJAX, database design and SQL, distributed or concurrent systems, and/or

knowledge of TCP/IP and network programming are a plus.

A solid foundation in computer science, with strong competencies in data structures, algorithms, and

software design.

Expertise in data structures, algorithms and complexity analysis

CS jobs 2011: Google skills


Pursuing a B.S. in Computer Science or equivalent experience preferred - M.S. or Ph.D. a plus

Experience developing and debugging in C/C++ on *nix

Experience building large-scale server applications and reliable software

Experience with scripting languages such as Perl, Python, PHP, and shell scripts

Experience in auction theory and/or machine learning

Expert knowledge of algorithmic game theory, auction theory

Ability to translate theoretical research into practical applications

Knowledge of relational databases and SQL

Prior experience with building platform technologies a plus

Expertise in programming languages and/or compilers a plus

High levels of creativity and quick problem solving capabilities

Configuration and maintenance of Apache, memcached, Squid, MySQL, NFS, SSH, DNS, and SNMP

Experience with Data warehousing architecture and data modeling best practicesl Knowledge of Hadoop, HBase and Hive highly preferred

CS jobs 2011: Facebook skills


B.S. Computer Science or equivalent experience

Experience securing large-scale web applications and APIs

Strong programming capabilities two or more: C, C++, Assembly, Python

Experience with secure development and debugging in Ruby, C, Python, JavaScript, and Java

Extensive experience with data warehouse environments

Demonstrated combination of DBA, analytical, and engineering skills.

Familiarity with Map/Reduce-style architectures like Hadoop.

Strong algorithms and data structures background

Good software engineering skills (e.g. unit testing, code reviews, design documentation)

Familiarity with machine-learning techniques and information retrieval

Strong background in statistics and probability

Knowledge of TCP/IP, HTTP, security, storage, and LAMP stack

CS jobs 2011: Twitter skills


Employment History : Computing Jobs @ US

NACCB BLSFeb 2011 : 3,998,500Feb 2010 : 3,838,100Sep 2009 : 3,810,900Feb 2009 : 3,940,000Oct 2008 : 4,046,000* Feb 2008 : 3,948,000** Oct 2007 : 3,740,000 Mar 2007 : 3,620,000 Mar 2006 : 3,560,000 3,472,000Dec 2002 : 3,369,000 Dec 2001 : 3,527,000 3,455,000BLS : US Bureau of Labor Statistics BLS : US Bureau of Labor Statistics BLS : US Bureau of Labor Statistics BLS : US Bureau of Labor Statistics *amended from 3,916,000 in retreat F08*amended from 3,916,000 in retreat F08*amended from 3,916,000 in retreat F08*amended from 3,916,000 in retreat F08NACCB: National Assoc. of Computer Consultant Businesses **amenNACCB: National Assoc. of Computer Consultant Businesses **amenNACCB: National Assoc. of Computer Consultant Businesses **amenNACCB: National Assoc. of Computer Consultant Businesses **amended from 3,800,000 in retreat F08ded from 3,800,000 in retreat F08ded from 3,800,000 in retreat F08ded from 3,800,000 in retreat F08


SECTION 2

Computer Science Education@USA


2010 TAULBEE Survey+HISTORYhttp://www.cra.org

Newly Declared CS Majors BS degrees

Median per Department median per Dept

Academic Year Median per Department

CS enrollment Degrees Granted

F98 14000 108 97/98 50000 360 7900 45

F00 15958 100 99/00 56000 300 10200 58

F04 10900 50 82 03/04 50000 260 532 14000 71 188

F05 7952 42 63 04/05 40000 220 385 11808 60 164

F06 7798 44 67 05/06 34898 200 313 10206 52 99

F07 7915 46 66 06/07 30000 170 271 8021 43 74

F08 8400 50 58 07/08 32000 170 264 7406 37 62

F09 9380 55 67+45 08/09 33000 190 287 7000 40 45

F10 72+34 301Taulbee Survey (March 2010/May 2010)

CS/NJIT


SECTION 3

Computer Science Education@NJIT


CS HISTORICAL DATABS MS PHD TOTAL

NJIT2010 6102 2398 426 8926CCS2010 916 566 69 1551

2010 301+25 (?) 198 52 551 (actual)2009 287 227227 51 5655652008 264 307 53 6242007 271 392 52 7152006 313 424 51 7882005 385 446 57 8882004 532 463 66 10612003 730 549 64 13432002 908 585 56 15492001 1025 643 43 1711


SECTION 4

Enrollment Fall 2011

(projections)


April 20 SummaryNJIT BS : Apps DOWN New students UP

NJIT MS : Apps UP New students UP

NJIT PhD: Apps DOWN New students DOWN

NJIT Enrollment: UP

CS BS: Apps DOWN New students DOWN (but solid)

CS MS: Apps UP New students UP

CS PhD: Apps slightly UP New students may be SAME/DOWN

CS Enrollment: UP UP {CS Dept or CCS enrollment another matter}


April 20 BS ApplicationsUNDERGRADUATE PROGRAMS

Applications Accepts Deposits

@NJIT4000 -10%, @NJIT2500 -3%, @NJIT550 +15%

@CCS470 -10%, @CCS270 -20%, @CCS80 -10%

@CS240 = , @CS140 -15%, @CS30 -30%

Transfer Apps: Up 10%

Transfer Accepts: Up 20%


Graduate ApplicationsGRADUATE PROGRAMS

Applications Acceptances

MSApps@NJIT4000 +30%, MSAcc@NJIT1800 +25%, PhDApps@NJIT560 = PhDAcc@NJIT67 -50%

MSApps@CCS1000 +20% MSAcc@CCS476 +12%

PhDApps@CCS135 +50% PhDAcc@CCS12 -50%

MSApps@CS700 +30% MSAcc@CS 300 +20%

PhDApps@CS110 +20% PhDAcc@CS12 -20%??


BS programs: April 20 projectionsProgram FTF Tra RA Total FTF Tra RA Total

Actual 2010 Fall numbersActual 2010 Fall numbers Projections for FALL 2011Projections for FALL 2011

CSCS 7272 3434 99 115115 5353 3737 ?? 9090

Binfo 2 1 1 4 2 2 ? 4

C&B 2 1 0 3 1 2 ? 3

IS 1 3 4 8 - 4 ? 4

B&IS 3 12 1 16 4 8 ? 12

HCI 1 0 0 1 - 0 ? 0

Web&IS 1 5 1 7 4 7 ? 11

IT 43 26 16 85 43 36 ? 79

Undecide 25 0 0 25 20 0 ? 20

CCS-tot 150 82 32 264 136 96 ? 232


MS, PhD programs:April 20 projectionsActual Fall2010Actual Fall2010Actual Fall2010Actual Fall2010 Projected Fall 2011Projected Fall 2011Projected Fall 2011Projected Fall 2011CS-PhD 5 3 Roughly the same to down

IS-PhD 5 1 Down

CS-MS 92 110 UP 15-20%

Binfo-MS 8 9 same

C&B-MS 6 7 same

SoftE-MS 4 5 same

IS-MS 66 67 same

B&IS-MS 22 22 same

IT&AS-MS 41 45 same

CCS-total 251 270 slightly up

NJIT-total 893 1100-1200 UP MS, DOWN PhD!


ENROLLMENTENROLLMENTENROLLMENTENROLLMENTProjected Fall 2011 Fall2010

Program BS MS PhD Total BS MS PhD TotalCS 320+ 210+ 50 580+ 301 198 52 551BINFO 8 25 0 33- 9 32 0 41C&B 10 10 - 20- 12 13 0 25SE 0 16 - 16 0 11 0 11IS 55 170 15 240- 65 176 17 258B&IS 55 65 - 120 47 60 0 107EM ? ? - ? 7 0 0 7HCI ? - - ? 9 0 0 9WIS 9 - - 9 7 0 0 7IT 435 - - 435 435 0 0 435IT&AS - 100 - 100 0 69 0 69


Computer Science

CS288

Intensive Programming Practice

Andrew Sohn

Wed, 5/4/2011

Objectives

intensive

programming

The Reality

• Weak to moderate practice

• Compared to the current programming

standard (standard to be defined

separately)

• Had to cut down the topics by 20% after

real-time in-class programming Test1

(total four tests including final)

Original schedule - intensive

• Week 1 Introuction to Linux and Bash shell scripting

• Week 2 Introuction to C

• Week 3 Sorting - simple slow methods such as selection sort to moderate merge and quick sort

• Week 4 Sorting - fast radix for both integer/float and internal/external record sortingTest 1: Programming test: 1-2:30 pm, Mon, 2/14/2011

• Week 5 Searching - depth first, breadth first using two problemss

• Week 6 Searching with intelligence - heuristic-based best first, implement GUI to demonstrate the result

• Week 7 Linux command - implementing a Linux command such as grep or diff

• Week 8 Linux command continuesTest 2: Written test: 1-2:30 pm, Thur, 3/10/2011

• Week 9 Audio processing - internals of MP3 encoder/decoder

• Week 10 Audio processing - implementing an encoder/decoder

• Week 11 Web processing - wget, DOM manipulation, extraction, XML generation

• Week 12 Web processing - simple file-based or mySql DB constructionTest 3: Programming test: 1-2:30 pm, Thur, 4/14/2011

• Week 13 Web processing - reading, plotting and presenting data using GUI.

• Week 14 Networking - socket programming

• Week 15 - Final exam, time and location to be announced at the Registra

Adjusted schedule - moderate

• Week 1 Introuction to Linux and Bash shell scripting

• Week 2 Bash shell scripting and Introuction to C - pointers

• Week 3 C structure handling with linked list

• Week 4 Sorting - simple slow methods such as selection sort to moderate merge and quick sort

• Week 5 Sorting - moderate merge sort, fast radix for integerTest 1: Programming test: 1-2:30 pm, Mon, 2/14/2011

• Week 6 Sorting - radix sort for floats; Searching - depth first, breadth first

• Week 7 Searching - breadth first, heuristic-based best first

• Week 8 Searching with intelligence, implement GUI to demonstrate the result; Linux command -implementing a Linux command such as grep or diff Test 2: Written test: 1-2:30 pm, Thur, 3/10/2011

• Week 9 Linux command continues

• Week 10 Linux command continues

• Week 11 Web processing - wget, DOM manipulation, extraction, XML generation

• Week 12 Web processing - simple file-based or mySql DB constructionTest 3: Written test: 1-2:30 pm, Thur, 4/14/2011

• Week 13 Web processing - reading, plotting and presenting data using GUI.

• Week 14 Networking - socket programming

• Week 15 - Final exam, time and location to be announced at the Registrar

Real-World Problems

• Directory tree traversing

• Sorting – selection, merge, radix – integer and float

• Search – depth, breadth, best, branch-bound, A*, and bidirection.

• Web – downloading stock market pages in real-time, parsing DOM, data extraction, XML generation, data injection to mysql database, selection from database, presentation to firefox, plotting graphs/charts in real-time

• Simple talk (socket programming)

Tools/Languages

• Bash (10%)

• C (40%) – mostly pointers, linked-lists, structure handling, function pointers

• Python (20%) with list comprehension

• PHP (10%) for dynamic pages,

• mysql (10%) with multiple tables (a lot of tables)

• DOM (5%) – level 1 for simplicity

• Sockets (5%) – low level network programming

• Some HTML, Java, XML.

Results

• Day 1: 39 students

• After Test1 (in-class programming): 30

• After Test2: 23

• After Test3: 23 (but some failing)

• Current status: --- + --- + ---

Issues

• Sophomore-level course

• 80% - juniors (23) and seniors (8) out of

39

• Seniors (8) to graduate after this course

• Many do not know how to traverse trees

and some will graduate after this course

Suggestions

• Undergraduate curriculum needs to be

overhauled – exigent situation – now!

• 2/3 of our students have little fundamentals

• Teach fundamentals, not flashy topics which

give false impression about computer science

• CS100 is counter productive – giving false

impression that problem solving is simple

CS Language

Landscape in the

Lower Level

Jonathan Kapleau

Purpose

• To provide information about

the current situation with

regard to programming

language instruction

• To promote discussion of the

merits of different programming

languages as it relates to

instruction

CS 100: Roadmap to

Computing

• Current language of

instruction:

– Python

• Introduction to problem solving

and programming

• Overview of the discipline

CS 113: Introduction to

Computer Science I


instruction:

– Java

• Introduction to programming in

Java

• Continuation of problem

solving

CS 114: Introduction to

Computer Science II


instruction:

– Java

• Introduction to data structures

and algorithms

• Using data structures to solve

problems

CS 280: Programming

Language Concepts

• Current languages of

instruction:

– Java

– C/C++

– Python

• More advanced programming

techniques

• Introduction to language

paradigms

CS 288: Intensive

Programming Practicum

• Current languages of

instruction:

– C

– Bash shell scripting

• Even more advanced

programming techniques

Undergraduate Research

NJIT undergraduate research program

10-week summer research program for current NJIT

undergraduate students this summer.

Goals:

for improving student engagement and retention

for a significant increase of undergraduate

research activities at NJIT

for complementing existing programs, such as the

Ronald E. McNair Postbaccalaureate Achievement

Program,

for involving more of our undergraduate students

in research experiences

Number of summer research awards

The program pilot that will run this summer has

guaranteed funding for at least five students

Provost Gatley is working with University

Advancement to obtain additional funds so that

more students can participate in the program this

summer

available for NJIT undergraduate students

mentored by an NJIT faculty member

Application

Research Proposal

Faculty letter of support

submitted to [email protected] on March 31,

2011.

Full details on the program can be found on my web

site, http://www.njit.edu/provost/.

Subject:UG cs research

Date:Tue, 3 May 2011 11:33:45 -0400

From:Yehoshua Perl <[email protected]>

To:Liu, Chengjun <[email protected]>

hi chengjunfor your infowe have this year again a grabnt for UG researchfrom NLM,employing about 10 students.

-------- Original Message --------

Subject:Undergraduate research opportunity

Date:Fri, 25 Mar 2011 16:07:43 -0400

From:Bracero, Isabel <[email protected]>

CC:Federici, John <[email protected]>, Carpinelli, John

<[email protected]>

On behalf of Dr. Carpinelli

Dear Member of the Undergraduate Research Committee:

John Federici is arranging for CACI, an industry

partner, to fund two student research projects, as

described in the attached file. Please take a look at the two job descriptions in the file. The

requested majors are just a guideline; qualified students in other majors should also consider

applying for these positions. If you know any students who would be qualified and interested,

please ask them to contact Prof. Federici ([email protected]) directly. Also, please share this

with your colleagues who might have qualified students for these positions.

Going forward, efforts such as this could be a good complement to the summer undergraduate

research program we are piloting this year. Whereas the students in the pilot program would

propose their own projects, this opportunity proposes the projects and seeks students interested in

working on them. Both strategies could be used to increase undergraduate research efforts at NJIT.

I ask that you start thinking about how we could institutionalize activities such as this as part of the

committee’s future work, so we can discuss this further at our next meeting.

CS Senior Kaitlin Lackey Retreat Remarks Spring 2011

I did not grow up playing video games and writing programs. I didn’t even decide

this is what I wanted to do until my second year of college. Coming to NJIT I felt

very intimidated not only being a girl but being someone who didn’t really know

much about programming or computer science. My lack of experience did not

matter as much as I thought it would – the education I received here has more

than made up for my lack of time involved in programming.

Last week I was showing my Mom a project I worked on for a class and she said to

me “You know I really feel like you’ve learned a lot in the past few semesters.

When you first started at NJIT and during the first semester or so I was nervous

for you but now it seems like you have learned so much and are prepared for a

job.”

I agree with her. When I transferred here, I knew a little C++ that I learned at

community college. Now, two years later I have learned Java and C++ as well as

how to manipulate a database using SQL and how to write web pages using

HTML, JavaScript, CSS, and more.

I have also had the opportunity to work with Dr. Perl and Dr. Geller’s research

group within the Computer Science department at the SABOC research center.

This opportunity has prepared me in a multitude of ways to enter the real world

with what Professor Blank calls a J.O.B. degree. Working in the SABOC research

center, I have developed my Java programming skills, learned how to work better

in groups, and been able to experience the research and development process of

a product first-hand. This type of experience is not something that you get in a

classroom.

In addition to complementing the Computer Science department, I would also like

to make a suggestion. I took CS490 this semester and thought the structure of

the class was great and I am looking forward to CS491 next semester. In this class

70% of the grade is a group project that I worked on with two other students. We

started the project the first week of class and gave our final presentation of the

project the last week of class. I think this kind of process has been beneficial to

my education for many reasons. First, working with a group is always a good

thing because this teaches you to interact with others, share your ideas, and to

work with and add to other people’s code. Second, we had to come up with the

idea for the project on our own – and this had to be something big enough for

three people to work on for an entire semester. We also had deadlines to meet

throughout the semester. The similarity of this class to a real world job is

something that I think the computer science department needs more of. If

possible, I think it would greatly benefit students if they had to take a class with

this type of structure more than twice as a computer science requirement.

I also think there should be more courses offered about the Linux operating

system. There currently are two Linux classes offered by Computer Science – but

they both have the same course description – one that looks pretty complicated

for someone who has never used a Linux operating system. I have been on a few

interviews recently for summer internships and at each one was asked if I had

experience with the Linux operating system and I had to say no. I didn’t know

that Linux was so prevalent in the “real world” of computer science. I think some

sort of introductory course that gets students acquainted to using Linux and

writing some small programs using it would be helpful and would make students

more interested in courses like CS433.

In conclusion, I am happy to receive my Computer Science degree from NJIT. As

with any college or department within a college, there is definitely room for

improvement. However, as I stated I believe the education I have received here

at NJIT as well as my experience in a research group has well prepared me to

enter the real world.

th biannual cs retreat spring 2011 - new jersey institute ......1 18th biannual cs retreat spring...

Documents