CSE Faculty Course Assessment Report

FACULTY COURSE ASSESSMENT REPORT

Computer Science and Engineering 2015-16

CSE 112 Electronic Devices and Circuits

Academic Term: Fall 2015 Instructor: Henry Lee

Student Outcome Indicators (evaluations of CSE students only):

For each student outcome indicator, identify (1) the assignment (which quiz, quiz problem, exam problem, or project) was used to assess that indicator, (2) the maximum score possible on that assignment, (3) the performance standard for that assignment expressed in points and also as a percentage of max, (4) the number of CSE students who were assessed on that assignment, (5) the average score achieved by them expressed in points and percentage of max, and (6) the number and percentage of CSE students who achieved the performance standard.

This course assesses Outcome Indicators a1, a2, a3, b1, b2, e1, k1.

a1 – Students can apply knowledge of mathematics to Computer Science and Engineering

a2 – Students can apply knowledge of science and engineering to Computer Science and Engineering

a3 – Students can apply knowledge of computing to Computer Science and Engineering

b1 – Students can design and conduct experiments

b2 – Students can analyze and interpret data

e1 – Students can identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems

k1 – Students can use current techniques, skills, and tools necessary for engineering practice

Student Outcome Indicator	Assignm't used for assessing students	Max score avail	Performance standard score and % of Max	# of CSE students tested	Average score and % of Max	# and % of CSE students who met the standard
a1	Midterm Prob1	65	55 = 85%	49	60 = 92%	42 = 86%
a2	HW1	10	8.0 = 80%	49	8.2 = 82%	34 = 69%
a3	Mathematica HW2	10	8.0 = 80%	49	8.5 = 85%	38 = 77%
b1	HW2	10	8.5 = 85%	49	9.1 = 91%	38 = 77%
b2	HW5	10	9 = 90%	49	9.1 = 91%	37 = 76%
e1	Final Prob 3	30	21 = 70%	49	19.6 = 65%	27 = 55%
k1	Mathematica HW3	15	10.5 = 70%	49	19.6 = 65%	35 = 71%

What changes did you make in this course based on previous assessment results?

I covered the class at the same rate as last year. The class attendance was high. A few students are coming to office hours very consistently. Like previous years, students are very enthusiastic about the course, more so than students in similar classes for EE and CpE majors. The attendance rate is very high (nearly 90% on average). Although outcome indicator (i1) is not listed on this form, it was assessed in the course by a short surveys conducted during the second midterm (a take home exam during Thanksgiving break). The survey asked 3 questions: (1) list all professional clubs/associations in which the student is a member in the past year, and (2) list all extracurricular professional activities (seminar, internship, programming competition etc.) they have engaged in for the past year. The survey also asks students to cite a reason (or reasons) for joining or not joining the professional club/association and (3) your plan to engage in life-long learning to further your career. The results for the first two questions are summarized as follows. Of the 49 students who were assessed, 32 (65%) were members of clubs or societies and 17 (35%) were not; 40 (82%) have undertaken outside classroom professional activities and 9 (18%) have not. On the first question of the survey, 32 out of 49 students (65%) are currently members of one or more clubs/associations. The most popular ones are ACM and IEEE (last year's percentage was 58%). For the second question, 40 of 49 students (82%) have engaged non-classroom professional activities such as attending professional seminars, summer internships, on-campus mentorships, programming competitions, computer class tutoring, and entrepreneurships (last year's percentage was 83%). For those who joined professional societies, all cited professional development as their primary reason. Among those who did not joined any club/association, the most commonly cited reason was a lack of time, as they were either too focused on their class works, or had time conflict with their part-time works. One student declined Eta Kappa Nu invitation because he did not want to pay to join "a group of wealthy elitists". For question 3, all students has outlined their plans to be engaged in life-long learning. Based on the results of this survey, we judge that students show to a good extent an understanding, the need to engage in continual professional development and life-long learning.

What recommendations do you have for improving the course the next time it is taught?

I would like to introduce more examples of emerging technology. For example, discuss LiFi (a potential replacement for WiFi) and how it relates to the electronics and communication.

What recommendations do you have, if any, regarding prerequisite courses or other ways to improve student preparation for this course?

I still think it is too ambitious to introduce VLSI after a single circuit analysis class (EECS 70A). I would recommend at least 1 course on Electronics that introduces CMOS and CMOS circuits before tackling VLSI.

Note any Outcome Indicators for which under 70% of CSE students met the standard. What are the plans to address these issues?

outcome indicator (a2) showed 69% of CSE students meeting the standard. It was assessed using a slightly more difficult assignment than last year, and 1% below the 70% threshold is not a real cause for concern. outcome indicator (e1) showed 55% of CSE students meeting the standard. It showed the difficulty of introducing VLSI after a single circuit analysis class (EECS 70A), as addressed above. The recommendation is to take at least one course on Electronics that introduces CMOS and CMOS circuits to better prepare students on VLSI before this course.