Undergraduate Concerns

Brought to you by the representatives of:

AUWiCSEE, CSUA, HKN, IEEE, UPE, XCF

4/26/2001Undergraduate Concerns - Faculty Retreat 2001

2

Overview

Transfer Student Difficulties Upgrading Infrastructure Course Concerns Curriculum

4/26/2001Undergraduate Concerns - Faculty Retreat 2001

3

Transfer Student Difficulties

Transfer students feel lost– want more guidance, before and after admission

Buddy System Recommendation: designate one EE and one

CS professor to advise transfer students

4/26/2001Undergraduate Concerns - Faculty Retreat 2001

4

Upgrading Infrastructure

Courseware on Unix Reallocating EE 40 lab Faster Machines

4/26/2001Undergraduate Concerns - Faculty Retreat 2001

5

Infrastructure: Courseware on Unix

A machine running Unix can serve 10 students– A Windows machine serves only 1 student

Unix software helps ease the space crunch Courses which could do better

– CS 160: gcc tools for PDAs– CS 184: bmrt and OpenGL for Unix– CS 186: Postgres or MySQL, instead of Access

4/26/2001Undergraduate Concerns - Faculty Retreat 2001

6

Infrastructure: EE 40 Lab

EE 40 lab has very high end equipment EE 40 students don’t need all that power Upper division EE classes could use more

equipment Recommendation: move the equipment to the

upper division labs and buy cheaper components for EE 40

4/26/2001Undergraduate Concerns - Faculty Retreat 2001

7

Infrastructure: Faster Machines

Unix machines in Soda are too slow– under load, machines cannot keep up with typing

Need about $50k a year to upgrade Unix lab machines and servers

Recommendation: Add a $20 course fee to CS 61 series– every other science class with major infrastructure

has a course fee

4/26/2001Undergraduate Concerns - Faculty Retreat 2001

8

Course Concerns

Single person projects in lower division We feel a number of classes could be improved

– CS 162– CS 184– CS 186– EE 20– EE 40 and 42– EE 122

4/26/2001Undergraduate Concerns - Faculty Retreat 2001

9

Course Concerns: Single Person Projects

We like single person projects– ensure that all students do the same amount of

work

CS 61B and CS 61C students who do single person projects are more prepared

Recommendation: make all CS 61A projects single person except for the first project

4/26/2001Undergraduate Concerns - Faculty Retreat 2001

10

Course Concerns: CS 162

Nachos project is poorly architected, does not reflect reality

Too much work for TAs and professors to support the courseware

Solution: a crack team of students is working on designing new courseware– should be ready for Spring 02– contact babylon@csua for more details

4/26/2001Undergraduate Concerns - Faculty Retreat 2001

11

Course Concerns: CS 184

Course is out of step with current trends in computer graphics

Recommendation: more time on splines and surfaces, less time on 2D graphics– if students complain about the algebra, enforce the

math prerequisite

4/26/2001Undergraduate Concerns - Faculty Retreat 2001

12

Course Concerns: CS 186

Students want more in-depth coverage– “not a design course”

Course project framework is broken– Bugs mar the learning experience, frustrate

students

Recommendation: bring back Prof. Wang’s projects (Spring ’99: 6.6/7.0 HKN rating)

4/26/2001Undergraduate Concerns - Faculty Retreat 2001

13

Course Concerns: EE 20

Inconsistent from semester to semester Disconnect between book and lecture Material not appropriate for freshmen

– Math 54 should be a prerequisite Driving students away from EE Recommendation: institute surveys every half

semester- works for CS 61C

4/26/2001Undergraduate Concerns - Faculty Retreat 2001

14

Course Concerns: EE 40 and 42

EE students feel unprepared for upper division classes after 40

Recommendations: – less time on IC fabrication– bring back important topics

BJTs, op-amps, Bode plots

– merge EE 40 and 42

4/26/2001Undergraduate Concerns - Faculty Retreat 2001

15

Course Concerns: EE 122

Inconsistent material and projects Fewer topics, more depth Must have stronger textbook

– use Richard Stevens’ texts– industry-standard, used by students today

Recommendation: a faculty member needs to take charge of the course

4/26/2001Undergraduate Concerns - Faculty Retreat 2001

16

Curriculum

Foreign Language Courses Positive Changes Guaranteed Course Sequences

4/26/2001Undergraduate Concerns - Faculty Retreat 2001

17

Curriculum: Foreign Languages

Very difficult for EECS students to become proficient in a foreign language– need to take 20 units per semester to satisfy EECS

requirements while learning a foreign language

Recommendation: Allow two advanced courses in one foreign language to count towards breadth requirements

4/26/2001Undergraduate Concerns - Faculty Retreat 2001

18

Curriculum: Positive Changes

Relaxing L&S CS requirements– makes L&S CS as flexible as EECS

TA Track– helps get motivated TAs– doesn’t aggravate class overcrowding

4/26/2001Undergraduate Concerns - Faculty Retreat 2001

19

Curriculum: Guaranteed Course Sequences

Overwhelming majority of students think it is a BAD idea

Inflexible if student’s interests change Limits student choice of professor

– against the spirit of academia Unfairly penalizes students who break the

sequence– professors not willing to commit to teaching courses

Delays graduation of seniors

4/26/2001Undergraduate Concerns - Faculty Retreat 2001

20

Key Recommendations

Institute transfer student pre- and post-admission advising system

Implement course fees for lower division lab courses– use funds to improve computing infrastructure

Abandon guaranteed course sequences

4/26/2001Undergraduate Concerns - Faculty Retreat 2001

21

Authors

Galen Hancock – galen@csua - CSUA Treasurer, undergraduate TA

Joe Jamp – jjamp@hkn - HKN Peter Loer – ploer@upe - UPE President Paolo Soto – paolo@xcf - root@cory, XCF Paul Twohey – twohey@csua - CSUA President, HKN,

undergraduate TA Byron Yu – byu@hkn - HKN Department Relations