Master of Computer Science

• Graduate Certificates (Not Applicable)

   

• Associate Degrees (Not Applicable)

   

• Master Degree

  At the end of their study at WSU, Master of Science in Computer Science students will:

  • Demonstrate the ability to apply knowledge of math, science and engineering.
  • Demonstrate the ability to design a system, component or process.
  • Demonstrate the ability to identify, formulate and solve computer science problems.
  • Demonstrate the ability to apply master’s level knowledge to the specialized area of computer science.

The WSU Master of Science in Computer Science (MSCS) program provides a timely path for students in Computer Science to pursue a graduate degree in a high-demand and growing discipline. The program blends scientific and engineering principles implemented through actual, practical, and applications-oriented experience as well as the intellectual study of computation. It is designed to provide a sound fundamental understanding of logic and of digital computer organization as well as the interaction between hardware, software, and the interconnection of system components. Ultimately, it is designed to help the bolster the careers of students that are interested in achieving a higher degree of learning and offers professionals in the local work force an opportunity to earn an advanced engineering degree, bolster innovation in the community, and thereby promote economic growth. Finally, for those students who are interested, this program provides the necessary preparation for doctoral programs at other institutions of higher learning.

Master of Science in Computer Science

Contact Information:

Dr. Bob Ball
Weber State University
1703 University Circle
Ogden, UT 84408-1703
(801) 626-7781

The assessment plan is executed using two types of instruments:
1.    Course assessment rubrics.
2.    Project thesis/defense assessment.
 
These assessment instruments are described below.

Course assessment rubrics

The course assessment rubric is a direct assessment instrument that articulates the expectations for student performance.  The rubric consists of three elements:
•    Dimensions (performance indicators)
•    Scale (levels of performance) of 1, 2, 3 or 4
•    Descriptors (descriptions of the levels of performance)

Each course in the MSCS curriculum grid has an associated assessment rubric that measures students’ performance with respect to the 4 student learning outcomes listed in Section C.  Through the continuous use of these rubrics, assessment at both the course and program level is an ongoing process that provides a measurable means of program improvement.

The course assessment rubric works as follows.  At the end of each semester, the instructor scores each performance indicator (PI) for the course.  A four-point scale is used.  The rubrics are designed with a “trigger point.”  If the score of a PI is 1 (unsatisfactory) or 2 (developing), the instructor initiates action to make course level changes with respect to the applicable PI for the course.  If the score of a PI is 3 (satisfactory) or 4 (exemplary), no action is taken by the instructor.  Then, the mean PI score for each course and section* is transferred to a program level “continuous course improvement” record, a document that summarizes the mean PI scores.  This spreadsheet utilizes a trigger point of 2.67 and if a mean PI score falls below the trigger point, the faculty at the program level must make significant changes to the course or the program to remedy the problem.  Thus, depending on the trigger points activated, both the instructor and program faculty have input to the continuous improvement process.

*CS 6010 and CS 6011 assessment data are recorded in the continuous course improvement record only for the semester in which the student defends.

Project Thesis/Defense Assessment

The thesis or project defense assessment is a direct assessment instrument that is completed by all faculty attending the final design review (defense) of a student’s thesis or project. This instrument assesses the student’s mastery of the program-level learning outcomes listed in Section C.
The thesis or project defense assessment instrument works as follows: Faculty attending a final design review answer four questions corresponding to the four learning outcomes listed in Section C.  Responses from these questions fall into a four-point asymmetrical Likert scale:
4 = strongly agree
3 = agree
2 = mixed, and
1 = disagree

The student’s committee chair calculates the mean response for each question. These responses are recorded in the Project Defense Assessment Report, which the chair submits to the program director.  The director computes a graduating cohort average for each of the four questions and enters those averages into the continuous improvement record.  If the mean value for any question falls below 2.67, the program faculty must initiate action to address the unsatisfactory learning outcome result(s).  Conversely, if all mean values are at or above 2.67, no action is initiated by the faculty.

• 2021-2022

   

• 2019-2020

  1)    First year student success is critical to WSU’s retention and graduation efforts. We are interested in finding out how departments support their first-year students. Do you have mechanisms and processes in place to identify, meet with, and support first-year students? Please provide a brief narrative focusing on your program’s support of new students:
  a.    Any first-year students taking courses in your program(s).

  At first we did not have anything in place because we were not sure what would be needed. After the first year we realized that students need help in understanding what a “thesis” is and how to succeed. As a result, we created an “information session” that we hold the first week of every semester. We also set up a website with frequently asked questions. We are currently working on handouts that will address commonly concerns and questions. We find that almost all of the students have the same questions. 

  b.    Students declared in your program(s), whether or not they are taking courses in your program(s)

  
  2)    A key component of sound assessment practice is the process of ‘closing the loop’ – that is, following up on changes implemented as a response to your assessment findings, to determine the impact of those changes/innovations. It is also an aspect of assessment on which we need to improve, as suggested in our NWCCU mid-cycle report. Please describe the processes your program has in place to ‘close the loop’.

  Similar to the above question in 1.a, we want students to succeed. In order to do that we realize that we need to assess how well students are doing. We currently evaluate each course and we will evaluate the success of each student at the end by assessing their thesis work. With the courses, we will look at how a course is performing and refactor assignments, lectures, exams, etc. accordingly when they are underperforming. 

  With students’ thesis, for example, if we find that students universally are lacking in one area then we will change the procedure that we use. For instance, change our proposal process so that it more explicitly states that it must cover topic X. We feel that by explicitly requiring in the future what we find deficit that students and faculty will be more aware of weaknesses and will focus on those areas. 

  Then, we will be able to determine if that change actually helped the situation by assessing the next round of students. If so, then we will have succeeded with those weaknesses. If not, then we will have to look for other remedies. 
   

  The full report is available for viewing.

• 2017

   

• 2016

   

• 2015

   

• 2014

   

• 2013