Department—Reasoning, Administrative Process and Curriculum Changes

EMPORIA STATE RESEARCH STUDIES

Vol. 53, no. 1, p. 55 – 63 (2022)

_____________________________________________________________________________________ Transitioning Computer Science major from the Mathematics Department to an Information Systems Department – Reasoning, Administrative Process and Curriculum changes

GEETHALAKSHMI SHIVANAPURA LAKSHMIKANTHa , LIZ DIERSa AND LIDAN FANb

a) Accounting, Information Systems and Finance Department, School of Business, Emporia State University,

Emporia, KS 66801 (glakshmi@emporia.edu and ldiers@emporia.edu )

b) School of Business, University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS 66045 (lidan.fan@ku.edu )

Incoming students may be confused to encounter the Computer Science (CS) major offered within different departments at different universities. It is found that the CS program is most frequently either in the School of Liberal Arts, sciences and Mathematics, or School of Engineering (specifically Electrical Engineering and computer science), or in the Dept. of Information Systems (IS) of School of Business. Graduating high school students find it often confusing to comprehend the difference in curriculum when the CS program is listed as a part of the Mathematics Dept. v/s an IS Dept within the same school. Scientific literature and studies have shown the advantages of having a CS program in an IS Department and the estranged relationship with the Mathematics Department. This paper explores the reasoning behind the transition of the CS program from the Mathematics Dept.to the IS Dept. of an AACSB accredited School of Business, of a Mid-west region, State University, with detailed description of the administrative process and the curriculum changes brought about from this transition. The information in this paper serves as a template for other universities that are working on a similar transition or contemplating the process with little (or incomplete) information at their disposal. Keywords: computer science, program transition, computer science and math, information systems, administrative process, state university program, computer science and business school.

INTRODUCTION

The term ‘Computer Science’ was coined way back in 1952 (Tedre 2014) as the science of computing, but only appeared in an ACM article (Fine 1959) in 1959. The addition of the term, ‘Science’ was much under debate during the early 60s as scientists believed that Computer Science was not about the science of computers (Matti 2006). In (Fine 1959) Louis Fein argued that it was vital to start Computer science as an academic program, much like Harvard starting a program in Management sciences, in 1921. The work of Louis Fein along with George Forsyth made this proposal come into action with universities deciding to add an academic degree program in Computer science. Purdue University in the US was the first University to add the Computer Science program, way back in 1962 (Knuth 1972). Since its inception there has been a lot of debate on the different terms used to describe this newly formed field of science, Computing science, computer engineering, software engineering, data science, data logy (Naur 1966) and Procedural Epistemology, where understanding the role of knowledge, belief, and action play an important role in both CS and Economics (Tedre 2011).

Another area of debate was the distinction between the various multi-disciplinary fields that are closely related. For example, Computer Science was more focused on understanding the concepts of logic, algorithms, and computing in general (Denning 1999), whereas Computer engineering was focused on the hardware components used in the field of computing. Information science and information technology are defined as the terms that involve the study of commercial computing systems in a practical setting that revolves around information collection, storage, and computation.

The next process in line to achieve the introduction of a CS program was to finalize the existing discipline that is more closely related to this new field of ‘Computer Science’. It was proven that the algorithmic focus of CS and logic building is more closely related to the mathematical sciences (Denning 1999) than any other existing field in academia.

Knuth, Donald E. discusses in (Knuth 1972) on how the newly formed discipline named, Computer Science, was similar and at the same time, different when compared to Mathematics. Here, he describes the similarity in dividing any field of science into two main categories, Theoretical and Applied, much like how Mathematics is broadly divided. It is also evident that both Mathematics and CS are based on man-made laws that can be proven, instead of nature’s laws. It is also important to note that the very first computer was built to solve mathematical equations at a higher computational speed.

It is this background and foundational connection that CS has with Mathematics that prompted the obvious decision to include the academic program of Computer science under the Department of Mathematical sciences, which in most universities at the time was a part of the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences. In the next section we explore how the field of CS curriculum design was insufficient with just the expertise brought by the Mathematical Sciences Department.

ESTRANGED RELATIONSHIP WITH MATHEMATICS

The CS program in universities across the US evolved as the discipline of CS and its definition evolved. It is important to note that as the field of CS in academia evolved its relationship with mathematics started getting estranged. Graves, D.F. in (Graves 1990) gives a detailed insight into the connection of a high schooler who is proficient in mathematics to be successful in a college level CS program. However, there was no evidence that supports that a student taking math-oriented programming courses has a similar effect. Norton in (Norton 1988) argues that most of the curriculum related issues in CS are largely unanswered by Math faculty as they have little to no experience in designing the CS curriculum. It is very rarely does one find math faculty members who are proficient with the and they are not many math professors who are proficient or have experience with programming and computer architecture and Operating systems, which define the core courses of the CS program. Computer literacy is a skill that comes with the science of computing, and it is not an essential skill that students gain from being a part of the Mathematics Department.

Any program taught at an educational institution is architectured, evaluated and adapted to suit the needs of the society and is required to always, offer technical relevance to aspiring students enrolled in the program. Programs are designed and evaluated based on either the competency approach or the learning outcomes-based framework approach. In 2016, the Association for Computer Machinery (ACM) and the IEEE Computer society (Clear et al. 2020) worked on the Computing Curricula 2020 project, also known as CC2020, as an update to the Curricula 2005 document (Computing Curricula 2005). The main aim of this project was to examine the current state of curricular guidelines for undergraduate academic programs in Computing. It also presents a future direction for these programs in the world of Computing. The program evaluation was inspired by the CoLeaf (Competency Learning Framework) (Frezza et al. 2018) and was further refined as a competency-based educational framework (Frezza, Clear, and Clear 2020; Frezza, Daniels, and Wilkins, 2019). Accordingly (Computing Curricula 2005) defines the competencybased approach as putting the knowledge sets or entities delivered by a particular program, in the context of a task or job or associated disposition. On the other hand, the learning outcomes-based approach focuses on the knowledge and skills only. The CS 2013 report (Computing Curricula 2013) provides a framework that is based on the ‘Body of Knowledge’ that is sub-divided into 18 Knowledge Areas (KA), corresponding to an area of study in the world of Computing Science. Each KA is further divided into Knowledge Units (KUs) and Learning Outcomes (LOs).

When arriving at the competency model for Computing education, four main areas are said to be of influence, Knowledge, Skills, Dispositions and Task. It is also represented by the equation (Computing Curricula 2005):

Competency = Knowledge + Skills + Dispositions + Task.

Knowledge, being the first factor is defined as the ‘know-what’ dimension that can be understood as factual (Computing Curricula 2005). Skills refers to the ability to apply knowledge or ‘know-what’ to a particular task or job. Dispositions frame the ‘knowwhy’ dimension of competency. Task is the construct that frames the skilled application of knowledge and makes dispositions concrete (Computing Curricula 2005).

Accordingly, when applied to the CS program, the knowledge vocabulary for CS competencies is divided into 18 KAs, that is sub divided into 225 KUs. Some of the KAs of the CS program are Computer Engineering, Information Systems, Machine Learning et cetera. A detailed set of KUs for each KA and the corresponding Tier of mastery has been identified in (Computing Curricula 2005) and (Frezza et al. 2018). Accordingly, 18 KAs were identified for the program in Computing Science. Out of the 18 KAs, Mathematics and Statistics is defined as the Knowledge Area, PK 12 and categorized as Professional and Foundational Knowledge part of the program competencies for the CS Program. The need for professional and foundational knowledge is a well-defined problem in computing science and is studied at various levels and scenarios in literature (Billett 2009; Eraut 2010; Frezza, Daniels, and Wilkins 2019; Nylen et al. 2017; Waguespack et al. 2019). It can be inferred that the foundational knowledge offered by the Mathematics Department with courses such as Discrete Mathematics, Calculus, Statistics and Discrete Mathematics is only a part of the competencies required from a successful CS program. The Skills, Dispositions, and relevance to Tasks parts of the competencies defined above in the equation can only be offered by a department that focuses on these competencies through courses such as Programming and Problem Solving, Algorithms, Systems Programming et cetera that are not the expertise of the Mathematics Department.

Mathematics, as we all know is an integral part of everyday life, in the industry and society and is therefore an integral part of Secondary and post secondary education (Douglas and Salzman 2020). Mathematics education and the program in academic institutions has been well studied and results are frequently published (National Research Council 2013; National Academy of Sciences 2013; Transforming Post-Secondary Education 2018; Hacker 2016; Handel, 2016). Hacker in (Hacker 2016) mentions how advanced Math curriculum underpins new technology and the topics covered in a standard curriculum do not meet the needs of most students, workers, and citizens. Michael Handel (Handel 2016) has conducted extensive research on the use of Mathematics in workplaces and in his findings has found only about 22% of population use advanced mathematics and only 5% use Calculus. There is agreement over the need for Mathematics reform in terms of Program overhaul at secondary and post-secondary levels. It is also noted by the National Research Council (National Research Council 2013; Saxe and Braddy 2015) that mathematics is central to academic disciplines such as CS, Engineering, Social science, and partnerships between mathematics and other disciplines has become more common to keep up with the growing dynamics of these STEM fields.

An essential skill that a CS major needs to work in a professional environment is applying the knowledge of computing in the real world, such as data analysis, data processing, programming, office automation and computer architecture and organization. One can argue that the foundations of these skills lie in the field of applied mathematics, such as Algorithms and statistics. However, the similarity stops there. Designing a CS curriculum that is highly applied mathematics based does not offer the skill development required by a CS professional, but that of an Applied mathematician.

There are several publications that support the idea that a CS curriculum designed by the Dept. of Mathematics is incomplete with respect to the competencies expected of a CS major when they become part of the work force. For Ex: (Ellis and Kuerbis 1985) explores the development and validation of essential computer literacy competencies of a science teachers, (Rising 1983) discuss why it is essential to separate CS from Math, and (Wileman 1982) discuss the insufficiencies and relationship between mathematical competencies and CS aptitude and achievement.

In summary the CS program with its evolution has seen its transition away from the curriculum designed by Mathematics faculty and stepping closer to computational and information systems curriculum. In the following section we explore the pathway followed by the CS program at a Mid-west State University from the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences Dept. to the AACSB accredited information systems Dept. at the University’s School of Business.

TRANSFERRING THE CS PROGRAM FROM ONE DEPARTMENT TO ANOTHER – PATHWAY, AT A MID-WEST STATE UNIVERSITY

Emporia State University (ESU) was founded in 1863 and was first accredited in 1898. ESU has over 200+ undergraduate and graduate academic programs within its four colleges – College of Liberal Arts and Sciences (LA&S), School of Business, School of

Library and Information Management and The Teachers College.

Among the many departments and colleges at Emporia State University, the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences is the largest and was founded in 1971. The CS program was part of the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences Department at inception and offered by the Department of Mathematics and Computer Science.

The School of Business was founded in 1917. In April of 2002, ESU’s School of Business received Accreditation from the international accrediting agency called AACSB which is only granted to 5% of institutions worldwide. Among the various Bachelor of Science and Master of Science degrees that the school offers, we are only going to concentrate on the Bachelor of Science in Computer science program in this paper. The history and transition information of the CS curriculum considered here, in this paper is from 2004-2005 to date, 2020-2021 academic year.

The CS program was offered by the Dept. of Mathematics and CS until 2014. With the transitioning of the area of CS from being mathematical based to mathematical foundation based with emphasis on applied programming and computer organization and architecture, the CS academic program also transitioned to the Dept. of Accounting, Information Systems and Finance (AISF). The IS concentration curriculum that existed in the School of Business was closer to the CS curriculum outcome that was expected of graduating students than that offered by the Math department. Starting in 2014, the CS program is offered by the School of Business.

Even though the CS program has been in the University for long, and the course catalog listed very relevant courses to help the student achieve the best knowledge in CS with a foundation in mathematics and IS, the program needed review, change and implementation of the new curriculum to match the ever-changing world of CS and skill requirement. Another important reason for CS Curriculum review was, 2018 was the year when the CS program had reached its five-year milestone in the School of Business.

The following sections give a detailed account of the CS Curriculum changes, right from the time where it was a part of the Math Dept. to the time where it transitioned to the School of Business and finally to present day, with the updated curriculum. The administrative process conducted to execute this CS curriculum change is also detailed in the following sections of the paper.

It is unusual to transfer an existing degree program to a new college or school within the same university. During the time the Computer Science concentration was offered by LA&S, Department of Mathematics and Computer Science, many of the required courses were taught by School of Business faculty. The School of Business Information Systems and Computer Science (IS/CS) faculty expressed interest in rescuing the struggling program by transferring ownership of the program into the School of Business. After the transfer, the IS/CS faculty updated the degree curriculum requirements. In universities, even with struggling programs, enrollment numbers drive many decisions and degree programs are generally not given up without extensive deliberation.

Although many university policy manuals address the procedures for developing a new course or new program, many do not address the procedures to follow for transferring an existing program between departments in different colleges/schools. Normally, an intensive review process must be completed on campus, followed by the program proposal review and approval by the Board of Regents before it can go into effect. However, although this program was new to the School of Business, the curriculum for the CS major was previously approved.

The following section gives a detailed account of the administrative process conducted at various levels of the University, starting from the CS Dept., all the way to the President of the University to conduct a thorough review of the CS program and update it to the present-day curriculum.

CS CURRICULUM REVIEW – ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESS

The steps in the approval process will vary by university. Generally, any change is initiated by those closest to the subject matter, which in our case is the IS/CS discipline. The IS/CS faculty approved the transfer proposal, and it was then reviewed and approved at the department level. The School of Business Dean approved it and presented it to the Provost for University approval. It was then determined that this type of change did not require

Board of Regents approval. Although getting the change moved through all the approval steps can be a lengthy process, we were fortunate to move quickly because of the cooperation of the LA&S administration being willing to release ownership of the Computer Science program. The curriculum update required more steps in the approval process, including School of Business and university-level curriculum committees and Board of Regents evaluation and approval.

Be aware of the deadlines for publishing changes in your university catalog. Our annual university catalog is considered a contract with the students. Typical publishing deadlines are in the early spring for any changes to be included in the catalog for the upcoming school year. The university catalog typically includes the organizational structure and the curriculum requirements of all programs offered. Multiple catalog changes were needed to record the transfer of the Computer Science program into the School of Business, but initially the curriculum remained the same.

Our university catalog describes the Bachelor of Science Computer Science as a program designed for students who desire a major in computer science based on a sound foundation in mathematics (ESU Course Catalog, n.d.). The current curriculum requirements include:

Computer Science Core – 33 credit hours of IS/CS courses

Required Mathematics – 14 credit hours

Restricted Electives – 18 hours in selected IS/CS or Mathematics courses

Unrestricted Electives – 6 hours CS or Mathematics

The composition of the Restricted Electives for each student will be dependent on the choice of specialization in Data Analytics and Artificial Intelligence, Computer Security, or Advanced Programming. Students can now graduate with a degree in Computer Science with as few as 14 credit hours in Mathematics and no classes in Physics. Before transfer of the program to the School of Business, students were required to take 19 credit hours of Mathematics and 5 credit hours of Physics.

RESULTS OF CS CURRICULUM REVIEW AND UPDATING

We all agree that the field of CS is ever changing and keeping up with the dynamics of the field is possible only with periodic review and reform of CS curriculum, even though it is a challenging process. It is quite interesting to read the survey results (Jalics and Golden 1995) conducted nationwide (in the US, with over 185 participating CS Departments) that probes into the CS curriculum in the year of 1995 and compare it to the curriculum and program requirements of today. Denning and McGettrick in (Denning and McGettrick 2005) explain very well how the CS program taught in universities needs to be frequently recentered. Moller and Crick in (Moller and Crick 2018) propose a very interesting and practical University-based model that supports CS curriculum reform.

The CS curriculum review and updating conducted at ESU’s School of business also brought about a drastic transition that better supports the outcomes of the program. Increased enrollment in the CS program was one way we could measure the effectiveness of the program. Figures 1(a), 1(b) and 2(a) and 2(b) give a snapshot of the old CS curriculum and current and updated curriculum, respectively. The course catalog for the current academic year was retrieved from (ESU Course Catalog, n.d.)

One can easily notice the CS curriculum being heavy on mathematics courses in Figures 1(a) and 1(b) and being more application and real-world skill oriented with mathematics foundations in Figures 2(a) and 2(b).

Through several rounds of proofing, the modified program was included in the University’s catalog and became effective starting Fall of 2019.

Figure 1(a). Old CS Curriculum – Required courses

Figure 1(b). Old CS Curriculum – Electives Figure 2(a). Current CS Curriculum – Required

Figure 2(b). Current CS Curriculum - Electives

Figure 3. CS Enrollment – Fall 2000 to Fall 2021

These updated specializations and course curriculum changes resulted after hiring a consultant to review the CS program. The consultant encouraged changes to allow specializations for our students to have more relevance in the workplace. The changes also open options to students to continue with a Mathematics focus or to take advanced IS/CS courses. Students majoring in CS at that time were included in discussions before adopting the curriculum changes, and they highly approved of the specializations and reduction of required Mathematics courses. Figure 3 shows the comparison of enrollment numbers when the CS program was with the Math Dept. v/s School of Business. It is evident from the figure that after the CS Program transitioned and its curriculum reviewed, the school experienced growth in the number of students selecting CS as their major.

CONCLUSIONS

This paper summarizes the reasoning, administrative process and results of a CS curriculum change and details its transition between two schools within the same University. The paper also highlights the need for a periodic curriculum review and reform to the CS program as the field of CS is fast changing. It is also important for students and educators to be aware and ready, to maintain sustainability of the program while always keeping the program outcomes, current. The authors believe that it is important for higher education universities to recenter the CS curriculum periodically, at least once in 3-5 years, to offer the best skillset to its students.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Authors would like to thank the Biz Hornet Centre at Emporia State University’s School of Business and its student advisors for helping us retrieve CS course catalogs from the academic year 2004 to date and enrollment numbers from 2000 to date.

REFERENCES

ACM Computing Curricula Task Force (Ed.). 2013.

Computer Science Curricula 2013: Curriculum

Guidelines for Undergraduate Degree Programs in Computer Science. ACM, Inc. URL https://doi.org/10.1145/2534860 Billett, S. 2009. Realising the educational worth of integrating work experiences in higher education. Studies in Higher Education 34(7),

Nov. 2009, p. 827–843.URL https://doi.org/DOI:10.1080/030750708027065 61 Clear, A., Clear, T., Vichare, A., Charles, T., Frezza,

S., Gutica, M., Lunt, B., Maiorana, F., Pears,

A., Pitt, F., Riedesel, C., and Szynkiewicz, J. 2020 “Designing Computer Science

Competency Statements: A Process and

Curriculum Model for the 21st

Century.” Proceedings of the Working Group

Reports on Innovation and Technology in

Computer Science Education Denning, P. J. 1999. Computer Science: The

Discipline. 2000 Edition of Encyclopedia of

Computer Science, A. Ralston and D.

Hemmendinger, Eds. Denning, P. J., and McGettrick, A. 2005. Recentering

Computer Science. Communications of the

ACM, 48(11), p. 15-19. Douglas, D., and Salzman, H. 2020 Math Counts:

Major and Gender Differences in College

Mathematics Coursework, The Journal of

Higher Education, 91(1), p. 84-112, DOI https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2019.160239 3 Ellis, J. and Kuerbis, P. 1985, April. Development and Validation of Essential Computer Literacy

Competencies for Science Teachers. French

Lick Springs, IN, Annual Meeting of the

National Association for Research in Science and Teaching. Eraut, M., 2010. Knowledge, Working Practices, and

Learning. In Learning Through Practice:

Models, Traditions, Orientations and

Approaches, Stephen Billett (Ed.). Springer

Netherlands, Dordrecht, p. 37–58. URL https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-3939-2_3

ESU Course Catalog. (n.d.). Retrieved from Emporia

State University Catalog 2021-2022 University

Catalog, Retrieved from URL https://www.emporia.edu/documents/2880/Emp oria_State_University_20212022_catalog__updated_8.24.21_secured.pdf Fine, L. 1959. The Role of the University in

Computers, Data Processing, and Related

Fields. Communications of the ACM, 2 (9), p. 7–14. Frezza, S., Cajander, A., Pears, A., Daniels, M.,

Kann, V., Kapoor, A., McDermott, R., Peters,

A.K., Wallace, C., and Sabin, M. 2018.

Modeling global competencies for computing education. In Proceedings of the 23rd Annual

ACM Conference on Innovation and

Technology in Computer Science Education -

ITiCSE 2018. ACM Press, Larnaca, Cyprus, p. 348–349. URL https://doi.org/10.1145/3197091.3205844 Frezza, S., Clear, T., and Clear, A. 2020. Unpacking

Dispositions in the CC2020 Computing

Curriculum Overview Report. In Proceedings of the 50th Frontiers in Education Conference.

IEEE CS, Uppsala, Sweden, 9. Frezza, S., Daniels, M., and Wilkins, A. 2019.

Assessing Students’ IT Professional Values in a

Global Project Setting. ACM Transactions on

Computing Education Special Issue on Global

Software Engineering Education. Graves, D. F. 1990. Computer science and math:

Estranged partners in a changing world.

Education, 110(4), p. 486 – 489. Hacker, A. 2016. The math myth: And other STEM delusions. New York, NY: The New Press. Handel, M. J. 2016. What do people do at work?

Journal for Labor Market Research, 49(2), p. 177–197. DOI 10.1007/s12651-016-0213-1 Jalics, P. and Golden, D. 1995. A Profile of

Undergraduate Computer Science Curricula.

Computer Science Education, 6(2), p. 179-192. Joint Task Force for Computing Curricula 2005.

Computing Curricula 2005. Technical Report

September. ACM / IEEE CS. 62 pages. URL https://www.acm.org/binaries/content/assets/ed ucation/curricularecommendations/cc2005march06final.pdf, The Association for

Computing Machinery (ACM), The Association for Information Systems (AIS) and The

Computer Society (IEEE-CS) ISBN: 159593359X. Knuth, D. 1972. George Forsythe and the

Development of Computer Science.

Communications of the ACM. Matti, T. 2006. The Development of Computer

Science: A Sociocultural Perspective. Finland:

University of Joensuu, Faculty of Science,

Department of Computer Science and Statistics. Moller, F., and Crick, T. 2018. A University-Based

Model for Supporting Computer Science

Curriculum Reform. Journal of Computers in

Education, 5(4), p. 415-434. Nardelli, E., Forlizzi, L., Lodi, M., Lonati, V.,

Mirolo, C., Monga, M., Montresor, A., and

Morpugo, A. 2017. Proposal for a National

Informatics curriculum in the Italian school.

Technical Report. National Interuniversity consortium for Informatics. National Academy of Sciences. 2010. Rising above the gathering storm, revisited: Rapidly approaching category 5. Washington, DC: The

National Academies Press. DOI 10.17226/12999 National Research Council. 2013. The mathematical sciences in 2025. Washington, DC: The

National Academies Press. DOI 10.17226/15269 Naur, P. 1966. The science of datalogy.

Communications of the ACM, 9 (7), pp. 485. Norton, P. 1988. In search of a Computer

Curriculum. Educational Technology, 28(3), p. 7-14. Rising, G. 1983. Soundoff: Separate Computer

Science from Mathematics. Mathematics

Teacher, 76(8), p. 554-555. Saxe, K., and Braddy, L. 2015. A common vision for undergraduate mathematical sciences programs in 2025. Washington, DC, Mathematics

Association of America. Retrieved from URL https://www.maa.org/sites/default/files/pdf/Com monVisionFinal.pdf Tedre, M. 2011. Computing as a Science: A Survey of Competing Viewpoints. Minds and

Machines, 21(3), p. 361 - 387. Tedre, M. 2014. The Science of Computing: Shaping a Discipline. Taylor and Francis, CRC Press. Transforming Postsecondary Education - Math. 2018.

Main URL https:// www.tpsemath.org/

Waguespack, L., Topi, H., Frezza, S., Babb, J.,

Marshall, L., Takada, S., Veer, G., and Pears, A. 2019. Adopting Competency Mindful of

Professionalism in Baccalaureate Computing

Curricula. Proceedings of the EDSIGCON

Conference, Vol. 5 n4955. ISCAP, Cleveland,

OH, 17. URL http://proc.iscap.info/2019/pdf/4955.pdf Wileman, S. A. 1982. The Relationship Between

Mathematical Competencies and Computer

Science Aptitude and Achievement. Journal of

Computers in Mathematics and Science

Teaching, 2(1), p. 20-21