Report on Undergraduate Forum of March 25, 2014

The CSE Undergraduate Studies Committee (UGSC) organized the annual undergraduate forum on March 25, 2014 in DL 357. The forum started at about 5:30 pm and continued till after 7:00 pm, with most students staying on till near the end. The summary below tries to describe the main points that were made during the discussions. The summary is based on notes made by Dr. Paolo Bucci; many thanks to Paolo for taking detailed notes!

Students:

Zach Wein, junior

Brandon Mills, junior

Paul Tela, junior

Glen Gainer, senior

Donguk Kim, pre-CSE

Crystal Ceballos, pre-CIS

Tyler Rasor, pre-CSE

Kyle Hutchinson, pre-CSE

Richard Wong, pre-CSE

Ryan Mulac, pre-CIS(?)

Darren Ng, junor/senior

Bryon Foltz, pre-CSE

Alex Moen, junior

Michael Chen, sophomore

Samson Li Shi, sophomore

James Pan, sophomore

Faculty: Matt Boggus, Paolo Bucci, Suri Jayanti, Jeremy Morris, Neelam Soundarajan, John Thomas, Rafe Wenger, Xiaodong Zhang

Advising staff: Mary Jo Deerwester, Chelsea Norris, Nikki Strader

Systems staff: Michael Compton, Shaun Rowland

1. Everyone in the room briefly introduced themselves.

2. Xiaodong Zhang gave a brief presentation about CSE programs and the history of the evolution of computer science over the years and the prospects for current and future students.

3. Transition to semesters:
   • SW1: The first few weeks seem slow/useless (if you had already used Java).
   • SW1: Consider providing credit for labs; otherwise students do not take them seriously; flip side: but then the credit for other factors include exams may have to be reduced which we do not want to do since exams are the main mechanism used to ensure that students have, in fact, acquired the knowledge they are supposed to. But it may be possible to give some minimal credit for the labs to partly address this concern.
   • SW1/2: Seem to be working well.

   • Foundations 2: A lot of analysis of algorithms but not much design; other univresities seem to do both.
   • Math 3345: Similar topics as Fnds 1 but more in depth (proofs, logic stuff, ... useful in future?)

   • Sys 1: Consider doing assembly language before C to provide a more natural transition from the SW2 Bugs World project
     Consider having closed lab sessions (like in SW1, SW2)
     Some students struggle converting from references (as in Java) to C pointers

   • ECE 2000/2100: There is a large component of signal processing in the middle of the sequence: why? Ans: Maybe because ECE students also take this sequence and they need that material.
     Suggestion: Should ECE have a separate sequence for CS students?
     Big disconnect between labs and lectures ...
     In fact, these comments were also offered at a UGSC meeting in Au '14 and they were sent to ECE but we haven't heard back from them. Neelam will follow up with ECE.

   • Project courses: 3903 has not been offered recently but there seem to be a few students interested in the course. Either we should offer it at least once every other year or consider dropping it from list of courses so students don't expect it to be offered... There was a question whether the material in 3903 is covered in other courses. The answer was that some of that material is in the architecture course (3421) but without the heavy programming projects
     Has something been lost in the transition from 560 to 3901/3902? The intensity seems missing and 3901/3902 don't seem to prepare the student for real world in the same way as did 560 ...

   • Capstone courses: 5911 (Software applications) is an industry-driven project and useful in preparing students for the real world (although, again, perhaps not as intense as 560 was). The amount and type of work that the teams do can vary substantially from project to project. 5915 (Information systems) is very similar and, indeed, the courses tend to be combined in some sense; i.e., almost any project that might be appropriate for 5915 is probably appropriate for 5911 (although the converse may not be entirely true). Should we actually merge 5915 into 5911 and just drop 5915? It was also noted that 5911 lists 3231 (Software eng.) as a prereq and 5915 lists 3241 (Database systems) as a prereq. If 5915 is merged with 5911, this will have to be addressed and students in individual teams will have to be sure that they have the necessary technical background.
     As a general rule it was noted that prereqs (for the most part) are not enforced but students should have the listed prereqs and, if not, they should confirm with the instructor that they have the necessary background to take the course.
     IBM has expressed interest in creating a version of 5914 (Knowledge-based systems) that would be based on their Watson technology and tools. Eric is working with them on this and it is possible that a section might be offered in Au '14.

   • Database course (3241): There was a question about the assignments in the database course (3241) and the projects used in that course. There is a database design project for the class, but it is more of a design project than a programming project. SQL is taught in the class and SQL queries are required for the project but not at the scope of the project or capstone courses. The course is more of a conceptual course than a project course.

   • AI course (3521): There was a question about the assignments in this course. It does ask students to implement several algorithms but no big projects.

   • There were some comments about FEH courses: One student noted that the FEH/C course prepared him well for SW 1. Another had a question about why it was necessary to take the FEH course(s?) given that they were mostly about technical writing ... the answer was that it was required for all engineering majors.

4. What is the process used to determine which tech electives will be offered?:
   • Mostly historical precedent but this was the first year under semesters and we are still trying to figure it out.
   • Let the Advising Office know if you are interested in seeing that a particular tech elective will be offered. It may still not be but knowing of your interest (and the interest of other students) will help.
   • Consider volunteering for committees (Undergrad Studies and Curriculum Committees).

5. Schedule planning:
   • See the advisors! They will help with load balancing etc.
   • Capstone workload?: Depends on the the sponsor and the details of the project.
   • The two most time consuming courses are the project course and the capstone course. So plan (with the help of the advisors).

6. GPA for admission to the majors: The minimum GPA for admission to the CIS/CSE majors is currently 2.5. It is scheduled to increase to 3.0 starting in Su '14. But the demand for CS is so large that even with the increase to 3.0, we will be stretched beyond our capacity, given our faculty size, to handle the number of students who will be admitted. Hence, starting in Su '15, the required GPA will increase to 3.2. However, students who have a GPA of between 3.0 and 3.2 will be allowed to enroll in SW 2 and Fnds 1. If, at the end of those courses, their overall GPA is between 3.0 and 3.2 and their GPA in SW 1, SW 2, and Fnds 1 is 3.2 or higher, they will be admitted to the major.

   Question: If the GPA of a student who is currently in the major falls below the requirement for *admission* to the major, will he/she be kicked out of the major? Ans: No. Once a student has been admitted to the major, the only GPA-related requirements are dictated by probation policies.

7. Advising: The large increase in the number of majors (and pre-majors and students pursuing a minor) has meant that the Advising Office is also stretched to the limit. Currently, the ratio of students to advisors is about 700 to 1. The ratio across OSU is 500 to 1. (The national association of academic advisors recommends 350 to 1 as the right ratio.)
   We hope to hire an additional advisor soon.

8. Computing facilities: Michael Compton gave a brief overview:
   • The systems staff manage all computing labs.
   • The labs are funded in part with student fees.
   • Feedback is always welcome.
   • We created the 24 hr lab in DL 172 some time ago.
   • Trying to get cleaning crew into DL 172 more frequently. (There is also an ongoing effort to get 172 redone but the money has not yet been obtained.)
   • Group space: We used to have group space but with growing needs in the dept., that has been repurposed ... looking for additional space.
   • A question about possibly having card access to CL 112 was raised. The system staff will look into this. (CSE doesn't own/control Caldwell; and OSU has rules about this kind of access including such things as availability of restrooms, etc.)
   • Mac users: Someone suggested having a portion of the labs with Macs available in them; some capstone project sponsors want this. The response was that it is not as easy to manage Macs remotely as PCs.
   • The staff understands the importance of the capstone courses and wants to support them as much as possible.