undergraduate concerns
Post on 22-Jan-2016
18 Views
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
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
top related