Wednesday, July 30, 1997
Dr. Art Karshmer, Department Head
Computer Science Department
New Mexico State University
Box 30001/Dept 3CU
Las Cruces, NM 88003-0001
Subject: 1997 Board of Advisors' Report
The Board of Advisors to the NMSU Computer Science Department serves at the pleasure of the Department Head. The Board was put in place to review the research, curriculum, and general status of the Department and to make observations and recommendations to the Department Head and to the community at large on an annual basis. Our principle areas of responsibility are reporting on what is going well or is improving in the Department and making frank recommendations on areas that, in the Board's opinion, need additional focus. This is the Board's report for 1997.
We recognize, of course, that all of you -- Department Head, faculty, staff, and students -- struggle with these same items on a daily basis and understand them in considerably more depth than we do. In this light, we believe our chief value to you is to provide an outsider's perspective and to point out changes in the Department that are easier to see when year-to-year comparisons are made. We hope the observations and recommendations we make this year will prove helpful by providing this different viewpoint.
The Board would like to extend its thanks to all those who participated for their frank and candid discussion of the situation in the Department and for the obvious effort that went into preparing and delivering all the explanations and presentations of the work of the Department and of CRL.
Again this year we are happy to report that our observations confirm what you already know: In the year since our last visit the situation at NMSU's CS Department has continued on the track of positive change we've noted for some years now. As an example, we were pleased to note that the major problems we heard last year from the students regarding the presentation of the qualifying exam seem to have diminished to some extent this year. The change when viewed over the course of the few years is remarkable.
The research review was a good meeting; one of those rare times a meeting is actually useful and for the most part, time well spent. In general the presentations were pretty good, but they were all over the place in content, running the gamut from nearly content-free to content-rich.
Recommendation: Develop general guidelines for the Research Review presentations, to help the presenters make them more uniform in content and depth. Also, copies of the slides would be useful for the board members (at least) to aid in following and for taking notes.
The video conference call was likewise valuable, but could have been made more so with a bit better organization. In particular, an action list including:
could help considerably.
Based on everything we saw and heard, the CS program at NMSU is basically sound. Additionally, there is clear improvement in many of the areas reported on last year. But, of course, we have a few observations to make.
The proposed addition of a Java course is an excellent step toward modernizing the curriculum. If there is not a complementary course in Object Oriented analysis and design (we didn't discuss it), you may wish to consider adding one. It is our sense that the importance of the OO approach "on the outside" is not as well reflected in the curriculum as it might be.
Undergraduate students feel the load in A&S too great. Meeting both A&S and CS requirements is viewed as a real burden. See our recommendation on this subject in the section on making NMSU CS a compelling place to come.
Students, particularly undergraduates, indicated they would like more "industry related" courses, such as networking, event-driven software, object-oriented software.
Given that the growth in CS student population has leveled off over the past few years, recruiting seems to be a problem: The issue is how to make coming to NMSU compelling. There are a number of actions you could take that came up in the discussions during our visit:
Recommendation: Develop a compelling CS story on a web site, featuring the department's professors, research, co-ops, internships, labs, etc. Assign a primary web master (there are students who are more than willing to do this) to develop the site and proactively solicit content from the faculty.
Recommendation: Develop Internet-related courses, especially in Java, CGI's, Perl, Object Oriented methodology (analysis, programming, OO databases, data mining, networking, etc.) Develop a forum for engaging in social aspects/issues of computers and the Internet, such as decency issues vs. freedom of speech.
Recommendation: Develop multiple "tracks" for CS majors; for instance, CS Academic, Industrial (applied), and Scientific (e.g., cross-functional courses, such as Computational Biology, Defense, Space). The cross-functional courses could count toward A&S requirements for the specific area, in order to reduce student load.
Recommendation: Strengthen alliances with industry and develop new ones to increase the opportunities for students (and faculty) to work in and with industry.
Recommendation: Consider creating the position of "Operations / Business Director". The person holding this position would be responsible for communication, industry alliances, recruiting, inter-campus and inter-university cooperatives to combine efforts, developing outside sources of revenue and the myriad of operational aspects of running a department. To not be a burden on the department's budget, the first responsibility of the person holding this position would be to increase the department's outside funding by at least enough to cover the cost of the position.
Communication problems have been a consistent theme in the Board's reports over the last few years and it is clear that, although the situation is improving, problems in that area are with us still. It is obvious that many students and much of the faculty are trying hard to be available, open, and communicative. But there appear to be major breakdowns and inconsistencies among various professors. A universal comment from students was (perceived) lack of action and follow-up.
Recommendation: Make focusing on communications a consistent, concerted and clear priority from the top.
- Establish a single point of communication between faculty and student representatives. Make sure all communication goes through them and make them accountable for appropriate dissemination.
- Post fliers and make sure all students get e-mail regarding forums, meetings, BofA, etc. at least a week in advance of the meeting.
- With the student representatives, develop a prioritized list of problems to be resolved. Assign a "directly responsible individual" to drive and "own" the problem and its resolution. Include regular communication to everyone about the progress toward resolution. It is OK to decide not to solve a problem, but it is critical to be clear what was done and why (e.g., no funding, out of departmental control).
- Consider distributing (possibly an abridged version) of the feedback from the BofA to the students.
Lastly, the Board's time with the students was excellent, but, in our view, too short. In the past few years, as the number of things to do has grown but the length of our visit has not, the time available for us to spend with students has grown too short.
Recommendation: Add at least 1/2 hour to the time for the graduate and undergraduate students to talk with the BofA. If possible, schedule these sessions at a time when there is a minimum of time conflict with classes. Coordinating it with the pizza party might be helpful.
Recommendation: Well ahead of the meeting, actively encourage students to participate or at least to send questions and concerns to the student representatives.
As we've discussed in the past, we have seen a long, steady improvement in the Department over the last several years. Each year, one or two of the major problems we saw in the years before get solved and a few new ones arise. Your hard work is clearly bringing results.
We sincerely hope you will view these observations and recommendations as helpful -- that's the sole reason we make them. And we look forward to seeing you again next year.
Sincerely,
The Board of Advisors
Stoughton Bell
David L. Ehnebuske
Dick Gemoets
Ann Hayes