A Curriculum Framework for Evolving an Information Technology ...

Session F4F

A Curriculum Framework for Evolving an Information Technology Program1 Kenneth L. Alford,2 Curtis A. Carver,3 Eugene K. Ressler,4 and Charles W. Reynolds5 Abstract - Curriculum development is always a challenging and interesting experience since it usually must be done while continuing to teach and support an existing curriculum. This paper outlines a methodology for the creation of a new Information Technology major at the United States Military Academy at West Point, New York. The methodology uses the notion of a three-course thread of existing courses that typically have a shared prerequisite structure. Over time, these threads can evolve as new courses and new threads are developed. The new West Point Information Technology major consists of a fourcourse core curriculum, multiple three-course threads, and a senior-level integrative experience. Information Technology threads cover a wide range of topics in depth, including such diverse subjects as sensors, computer programming, information assurance, electrical engineering fundamentals, computer science fundamentals, computer theory, information systems engineering, databases, network and web technologies, and human factors. Students are allowed to select three threads. Index Terms – Information Technology, curriculum development, Electrical Engineering, Computer Science. INTRODUCTION Managing the necessary tension between immediate operational needs and new initiatives is common to all organizations. An army committed to defending its current position must yet find resources to launch an offensive. A manufacturing company that keeps costs low must yet find resources for new product development. A faculty member who wants to be a good teacher must yet find time for research and ongoing professional development. And, a university committed to teaching its students in existing programs must yet find resources to commit to new program development. Thirty years ago, mathematics departments and engineering colleges struggled to commit the resources needed to develop and teach curriculum in the new computer science discipline. Today, universities with mature computer science

programs struggle to find the resources to develop new curricula in information technology. The next section BACKGROUND of this paper reviews the information technology movement in American higher education and mentions the attempts of some universities to find resources to support it. THE PROBLEM section describes the challenge to an academic institution posed by finding resources to implement a new curriculum and the middle path strategy undertaken by the U.S. Military Academy to meet the challenge of developing a new curriculum in information technology with existing faculty resources while continuing to maintain the quality of existing programs. The INVARIANT section describes the attributes of an academic major that must be maintained during the transition to a new curriculum. The DESIGN section gives the overview of the design strategy and the THREADS and THEMES sections describe its application at the U.S. Military Academy. A CONCLUSION closes the paper. BACKGROUND The ACM model curriculum in Computer Science has always had a theoretical and mathematical orientation; yet, some have felt there was a need for a curriculum with greater focus on the application of information technologies. During the 1990’s a small, but growing number of universities were developing computing curricula that were alternatives to the traditional computer science curriculum. Often, these alternatives had an emphasis on the use of the technologies that underlie the World Wide Web: networks, databases, web site development, and human computer interactions. One of the earliest IT curricula was offered by Rochester Institute of Technology [27]. Others include Brigham Young University [2], Georgia Southern University [31], and George Mason University [32]. Other early efforts include the IT emphasis within a Computer Science curriculum at James Madison University [26] and the Computer Science curriculum in a liberal arts environment at Allegheny College [9]. As early as Denning [10], there was recognition that an IT movement was emerging. About this time, Computing

1 The views expressed are those of the authors and do not reflect the official policy or position of the United States Military Academy, the Department of the Army, the Department of Defense or the United States Government. 2 Kenneth L. Alford, Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, Thayer Hall, Building 601, United States Military Academy, West Point, NY 10996, [email protected] 3 Curtis A. Carver, Office of the Dean, United States Military Academy, West Point, NY 10996, [email protected] 4 Eugene K. Ressler, Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, Thayer Hall, Building 601, United States Military Academy, West Point, NY 10996, [email protected] 5 Charles W. Reynolds, Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, Thayer Hall, Building 601, United States Military Academy, West Point, NY 10996, [email protected]

0-7803-8552-7/04/$20.00 © 2004 IEEE October 20 – 23, 2004, Savannah, GA 34th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference F4F-16

Session F4F Research Associates [7] formed the IT Deans Group to provide leadership for this movement. Originating from a common interest session at Snowbird 2000, the group was organized around schools of computing, schools of information, and/or schools of information technology with heads that report directly to the Provost or Chief Academic Officer at a university. The group met several times over the next several years, growing to representation by more than 40 institutions. Independently, and about this same time, several schools started an ad hoc discussion in June 2001 to form a professional organization and to begin an accreditation process for IT curricula. The first Conference on Information Technology Curriculum began in December 2001 [20]. This group grew to participation by over 50 schools in 2002 and formed the Society for Information Technology Education (SITE) [28]. SITE was formed at meetings at Brigham Young University in June 2001, at Georgia Southern University in May 2002, and at Rochester Institute of Technology (RIT) in September 2002. SITE elected officers, formed committees, began development of curricula, and began development of accreditation standards. In July 2003, SITE became officially recognized by the ACM as SIGITE (Special Interest Group Information Technology Education) and held its fourth meeting at Purdue University in October 2003. And, it has begun discussions with ABET/CAC about accreditation of IT programs [15, 16, 17]. Numerous descriptions of the colleges, programs, curriculum and courses in Information Technology programs have appeared (Chase [3], Couterminer and Pfeiffer [5], Chenowet [4], Chu, Gorgone, Dasigi, and Spooner [6], Docherty, et. al. [11], Isaacson and Auter [18], Mitchell [22], Owen [23] Reichgelt, Zhang, and Price [24], Spooner [29], Taft [30], White [31], Cooke [8], and Ekstrom and Renshaw [13]). There are so many of these IT initiatives in advance of a formally adopted model curriculum that empirical studies attempting to define this spontaneous IT movement have appeared. All these reports find that IT and IS curricula place greater emphasis on networks, databases and web development than CS which places its emphasis on software development and mathematical or theoretical treatments. IT and IS are furthermore distinguished by the greater emphasis on business topics in IS (Anthony [1], Landry, et. al. [19], Lunt, et. al. [21], and Reichgelt et. al. [25]). Ekstrom and Lunt [14] is a recent effort to describe the emerging IT discipline as including five key areas: Programming, Networking, Web Systems, Databases, and Human Computer Interfacing and goes on to argue that “we have come to understand that IT students require depth, but not depth on how to implement technology components. IT students require deep knowledge of the interfaces between technologies.”

THE PROBLEM Over the past several years, IT curricula have been developed in a variety of organization units. Some universities have introduced IT in the CS department and staffed it with the same faculty as CS (East Tennessee State University, Indiana State, LaSalle University, Southern Polytechnic State University, and the United States Naval Academy, for example). Some have introduced IT as a new program, independent of CS, with its own faculty variously housed in a joint department, a new department, or a new college (Radford University, George Mason University, Georgia Southern University, New Jersey Institute of Technology, Rensselar Polytechnic Institute, Rochester Institute of Technology, University of Maryland-University College, University of South Alabama, Brigham Young University, Macon State College, Purdue University, University of Houston, and others). Any university that develops an IT curriculum must decide how to implement it. One approach is incubation of the new program within an existing organization, employing no additional faculty or new courses. The shortcoming of this internal approach is that students may fail to develop a sense of community or ownership when they perceive that courses are not designed for them, nor are they taught by a faculty committed to their program. Another approach is a new organization with new faculty and new courses. The shortcoming of this external approach is heavy resource and curriculum development demands. A third approach is middle ground––a plan that allows migration from internal to external approaches over a period of time as resources become available and as new courses are developed. The IT program at the United States Military Academy follows the third approach. It will be offered for the first time in the 2004-05 academic year with no additional faculty resources. The new USMA IT major is organized under the IT Program that is part of the Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science. Prior to the creation of the IT major, the USMA IT program taught two mandatory onesemester IT courses—the first to freshmen and the second to juniors. With the exception of one new course that is being developed specifically for the IT major, all other courses offered for students majoring in IT are existing courses that are taught as part of the Computer Science, Electrical Engineering, Mathematics, Systems Engineering, Social Science, Civil and Mechanical Engineering, and the Behavioral Science and Leadership programs. INVARIANT ATTRIBUTES OF AN ACADEMIC DISCIPLINE A conclusion to be drawn from the foregoing is that IT is rife with change. New programs are being formed in varied ways while the field, the technology, and educational and professional expectations of program graduates are all changing. As such, any solution to the problem of IT curriculum implementation must be based on a methodology by which curriculum changes occur in a well-ordered fashion,


Session F4F while maintaining the essential attributes that characterize all academic disciplines. For this discussion, this paper adopts the attributes of an academic discipline given in the academic strategic plan of the U.S. Military Academy [34]. An academic discipline must have: •

A Central Core of Method and Theory. This core serves as an introduction to the explanatory power of the discipline, provides a basis for subsequent work, and unites all students in a shared understanding of its character and aims. The historical development of the method and theory should be presented.

•

Demonstrates How Knowledge is Acquired. While mastery of a body of knowledge is important to mastery of a discipline, inquiry is what leads to knowledge and understanding. The student should also be acquainted with some of the "dead ends" of the field--notable experiments, theories, and intellectual undertakings that failed.

•

Demonstration and Validation of Final Mastery of the Discipline's Complexity. The program should culminate in a substantial project undertaken after a sound grasp of the fundamentals of the discipline has been established. In the American Association of Colleges' (AAC) view, this experience provides two great lessons: the joy of mastery, the thrill of moving forward in a formal body of knowledge and gaining some effective control over it, integrating it, perhaps even making some small contribution to it; and the lesson that no matter how deeply and widely students dig, no matter how much they know, they cannot know enough, they cannot know everything. Depth is an enemy of arrogance.

•

Experience with the Discipline's Wide Range of Topics. Care should be taken, however, to avoid programs consisting of a hodgepodge of courses. Conversely, a program requiring courses from only one department is no guarantee of depth.

•

Experience with the Discipline's Variety of Analytical Tools. The student should be acquainted with the tools' history and assumptions, and provided a strong sense of their limits and power as instruments for understanding nature and society.

This paper holds that any implementation of an IT curriculum must maintain these attributes as change occurs.

•

A Course Sequence that Presumes Advancing Sophistication. Successful performance at increasingly higher levels demands the knowledge or techniques acquired in previous courses. Sequential learning builds on blocks of knowledge that lead to more sophisticated understanding and encourages leaps of the imagination and efforts at synthesis. As students advance, they work increasingly with the primary tools of their concentration.

Our proposal of a methodology for managing curricular change in IT programs is to propose a meta-curriculum defining an invariant framework, which enforces the attributes above while allowing continuous, orderly change in the selection of courses that defines the curriculum. Our framework proposes that a curriculum consist of several depth threads. A depth thread is a collection of three or more courses that meets the following criteria:

•

Some Understanding of the Discipline's Characteristic Questions and Arguments. This includes the need to acquaint the student with the questions the discipline cannot answer and the arguments it does not make.

• •

Offers a Complex Structure of Knowledge. Complex structures of knowledge may themselves differ substantially in character and still offer depth. The complexity of the field or discipline may derive predominantly from the intricacy of its materials, such as bringing together a comprehension of different systems of knowledge, as in management. It may derive predominantly from the continuous relevance of a substantial and cumulative history, as in literature. Further, it may derive from the crucial interplay between continuous observation and developing, articulated theoretical base, as in engineering and economics.

•

•

•

Requires Multiple Dimensions. Study in depth cannot be reached merely by cumulative exposure to a specific subject matter, and therefore usually requires exposure to offerings of more than one academic department.

DESIGN

•

It has a name that is simple, descriptive, and relevant. It does not share more than one course with another thread. It builds on a prerequisite structure or other logical relationship among its courses. It offers a complex structure of knowledge, wherein discovery is appropriate as a teaching and learning methodology.

Some threads may be required and some may be elective. In addition, our invariant framework requires a final integrative experience that validates the final mastery required of any academic discipline. Depth threads are initially drawn from courses already existing at the university. Not surprisingly, they tend to follow existing prerequisite chains. Over time, depth threads may change, new depth threads may be introduced, and former depth threads may be dropped. The framework achieves both depth and breadth through the organizing concept of depth threads. Each thread has prerequisite or other logical structure that imparts depth. The


Session F4F required independence of the depth threads and the requirement to complete several different depth threads imparts both breadth and multiple dimensions. The requirements for complex structure of knowledge and a central core of method are fulfilled to the extent that they are already fulfilled by the academic disciplines from which threads are drawn and the ability to designate some depth threads as required and others as optional. FIFTEEN THREADS The 15 depth threads in the USMA IT major include: 1. Computer Science 3-Course Foundation Fundamentals of Computer Science Databases Distributed Application Engineering 2. Information Systems Analysis Fundamentals of Information Systems Engineering Economy Analytic Engineering Management 3. Human Factors Engineering Analytic Engineering Management Cognitive Psychology Human-Computer Interaction 4. Machine Intelligence Data Structures Design & Analysis of Algorithms Artificial Intelligence 5. Software Systems Design Data Structures Advanced Programming Concepts Programming Languages 6. Networks Intro to Computer Architecture Network Management Networks 7. Foundations of Computing Discrete Math Design & Analysis of Algorithms Computer Theory 8. Information Assurance Network Management Information Assurance Politics of Information Warfare 9. Language Systems Computer Theory Programming Languages Compiler Design

10. Electrical Engineering 3-Course Foundation Digital Computer Logic Basic Electrical Engineering Military Electronic Systems 11. Circuits Introduction to Electrical Engineering Introduction to Electronics Electronic Design 12. Telecommunications Engineering Mathematics Signals and Systems Telecommunications 13. Sensing Engineering Mathematics Fields and Waves Remote Sensing 14. Digital Technology Intro to Comp Architecture Advanced Computer Architecture using VHDL Design with Microprocessors 15. Robotics Electric Power Engineering Dynamic Model and Control Mechatronics The IT major requires that a student complete the Electrical Engineering or the Computer Science Three-Course Foundation, three additional depth threads, and an integrative experience. To facilitate student understanding and counseling, program literature gives several thematic descriptions of possible programs for illustration. Examples of these follow. When combined with an integrative experience, each of these is a complete program. (See Figure 1.) FOUR SAMPLE THEMES 1. Information Technology Theme Computer Science 3-Course Foundation Thread Information Systems Analysis Thread Digital Networks Thread Information Assurance Thread 2. Digital Networks Theme Electrical Engineering 3-Course Foundation Thread Circuits Thread Digital Technology Thread Digital Networks Thread 3. Information Systems Theme Computer Science 3-Course Foundation Thread Information Systems Analysis Thread Software Systems Design Thread Human Factors Engineering Thread


Session F4F 4. Robotics Theme Electrical Engineering 3-Course Foundation Thread Circuits Thread Digital Technology Thread Robotics Thread This paper defines IT to be the means “by which the state of the physical world is sensed and, along with other knowledge, is disseminated, stored, transformed, processed, analyzed, presented, used to make decisions about actions, and used to initiate and control actions” [12]. The central core of the IT major is the body of method, theory, and tools employed to harness information technology. This core includes elements of computer science, electrical engineering, information systems, systems engineering, human factors, physics, remote sensing, and other established disciplines, from which the courses of the IT major are drawn. However, IT is necessarily not just a combination of these disciplines. Rather, the IT course selections are focused on the methods, theories, and tools of these disciplines that explain principles and allow one to analyze the characteristics and capabilities of technologies for purposes of problem solving by combining them in systems—generally the science-oriented courses of these curricula. On the other hand, the IT major is distinguished from any of the related majors in that it does not emphasize the detailed understanding of design and construction of the individual technological artifacts, which are the purview of engineering curricula. The basic premise of IT—that physical media and systems can be used to acquire, encode, store, transmit, distribute and display information in a way that solves problems for people— is complex and inspires life-long learning. It entails many diverse physical phenomena that we can understand only through science, the harnessing of these physical phenomena in basic technology components for sensing, communication, storage, etc., the creative organization of such components in systems, the integration of such systems into human processes, and the analysis and assessment of systems and processes in order to improve them. The deep complexity and immense opportunity for innovation in this elaborate discipline easily absorb the intellectual energy of a lifetime. The immediate, observable benefit to people of an excellent technological solution conveys the greatest satisfaction to the designer, providing the ultimate motivator for the student to continuously improve in expertise and to seek more and varied experience.

Figure 1. Relationship between IT Threads and Themes.

The IT major validates mastery of the discipline through an integrative experience. The desired outcome of the IT major is that the graduate will be able to develop an IT application that supports user decision-making and subsequent action. The IT integrative experience provides the student with the opportunity to develop such an application. It both provides realistic practice in a complex design process as a learning experience and validates that the student has achieved the desired outcome. Program graduates develop an IT application using a standard engineering design process that includes requirements elicitation and analysis followed by solution specification, design, implementation, and verification and validation. The design problem to be solved will include social, political, economic and ethical dimensions. This design process will comprise the integrative experience required for all IT majors. Students will organize in teams to work on their design problem. CONCLUSIONS We have briefly reviewed the history and nature of IT programs. We noted that they are invariably born and live in a sea of change. We adopted a set of essential characteristics of all academic disciplines and proposed a meta-curriculum of depth threads that can be used to maintain these essential characteristics, even as rapid curricular change occurs. Concurrently, depth threads afford students a remarkable degree of choice in course selection. We described one curriculum organized in this manner with some details on its


Session F4F structure, goals, and assessment standards. We submit that this methodology could be broadly useful to IT programs in many settings.

[22]

Mitchell, William. Information technology education one state’s experience. Journal of Computing in Small Colleges, Vol. 17, No. 4 (March 2002).

[23]

Owen, William. Focus Tracks: Specializing in IT Education. CITC4'03, October 16-18, 2003, Lafayette, Indiana.

[24]

Reichgelt, Han, Zhang, Aimao, and Price, Barbara. “Designing an Information Technology Curriculum: The Georgia Southern University Experience”, Journal of Information Technology Education, Vol. 1, No. 4 (2002), pp. 213-221.

[25]

Reichgelt, Han and Barry Lunt, Tina Ashford, Andy Phelps, Erick Slazinski, Cheryl Willis. A Comparison of Baccalaureate Programs in Information Technology with Baccalaureate Programs in Computer Science and Information Systems. Journal of Information Technology Education Vol. 3 (2004).

REFERENCES [1]

Anthony, Ed. Computing Education in Academia: Toward Differentiating the Disciplines. CITC4 ’03, October 16-18, 2003, Lafayette, Indiana.

[2]

Brigham Young University, College of Engineering and Technology, School of Technology. http://www.et.byu.edu/sot/it/

[3]

Chase, J. D., "The Design and Development of the College of Information Technology at Radford University," SIGCSE Bulletin Vol. 33, No. 1 (March 2001), pp. 416-7.

[4]

Chenowet, John D. Lessons Learned In The Development Of An Information Technology Concentration. Consortium for Computing in Small Colleges. Rocky Mountain Conference 2001.

[26]

Reynolds, Charles and Christopher Fox. Requirements For A Computer Science Curriculum Emphasizing Information Technology. SIGCSE ’96 Philadelphia, 1996.

[5]

Coutermine, Terry and Pfeiffer, Phil, "Implementing an IT Concentration in a CS Department: Content, Rationale, and Initial Impact", SIGCSE 2000. March 2000, pp. 275-279.

[27]

Rochester Institute of Technology, Rochester, New York. http://www.it.rit.edu

[28]

[6]

Chu, Bei-Tseng (Bill), Moderator, and John Gorgone, Venu Dasigi, David Spooner. Information Technology Curriculum Development. SIGCSE 2001. Charlotte, North Carolina (February 2001).

SITE. Society for Information Technology Education. http://www.sigite.org

[29]

Spooner David L. A Bachelor of Science in Information Technology: An Interdisciplinary Approach. SIGCSE 2000. Austin, Texas (March 2000).

[7]

Computing Research Associates (CRA). The IT Deans Group. http://www.cra.org/Activities/itdeans

[30]

[8]

Cooke, Daniel W. A Multidisciplinary Information Management and Systems Program: Pearl or Peril? CITC4’03, October 16-18, 2003, Lafayette, Indiana.

Taff, William J. Information Technology: A Degree In Computing. Journal of Computing in Small Colleges Vol. 17, No. 3 (February 2002).

[31]

[9]

Cupper, R. “Computer Science: A Proposed Alternative Track— Applied Computing.” SIGCSE 1998; pp. 20-23.

[10]

Denning, Peter J. The IT Schools Movement. Communications of the ACM Vol. 44, No. 8 (August 2001).

White, E. Bernard. Opportunities and Challenges to Developing A Bachelor’s Degree Program in Information Technology. Proceedings of the 2002 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition

[32]

Georgia Southern University. http://cit.georgiasouthern.edu/

[33]

George Mason University. http://ite.gmu.edu/bsit/.

[34]

United States Military Academy, West Point, New York. Academic Program. Available at http://ams-ext.usma.edu/public/curriccat/static/index.htm

[11]

Docherty, Michael and Peter Sutton, Margot Brereton, Simon Kaplan, Nilson Brown. The Information Environments Program: New Design Based IT Degree. ACE 2000, Melbourne, Australia.

[12]

"Educating Future Army Officers for a Changing World" 2002, available online at www.dean.usma.edu/aad/EFAOCW.pdf.

[13]

Ekstrom, Joseph J. and Stephen R. Renshaw. Database Curriculum Issues For Four-Year It Programs. 2003 CIEC Conference, January 2003, Tucson, Arizona.

[14]

Ekstrom, Joseph J. and Barry Lunt. Education at the Seams: Preparing Students to Stitch Systems Together; Curriculum and Issues for 4-Year IT Programs CITC4’03, October 16–18, 2003, Lafayette, Indiana.

[15]

Gorgone, John T. Information Technology: An Adolescent in the Arena. SIGCSE Bulletin Vol. 34, No. 4 (December 2002).

[16]

Gorgone John T. Information Technology Accreditation Criteria inroads – The SIGCSE Bulletin Vol. 35, No. 2 (June 2003).

[17]

Gorgone, John T. ABET’s General Accreditation Criteria to Apply to ALL Computing Programs. Inroads – The SIGCSE Bulletin, Vol. 35, No. 4 (December 2003).

[18]

Isaacson, Peter C. and David Auter. Thoughts on an Information Technology Bachelor’s Degree Program. Journal of Computing in Small Colleges, Vol. 16, No. 1 (November 2000).

[19]

Landry, Jeffrey P. and J. Harold Pardue, Herbert E. Longenecker, Jr., David F. Feinstein. A Common Theme for IT Degree Programs. Communications of the ACM Vol. 46, No. 11 (November 2003).

[20]

Lunt, Barry. Designing an IT Curriculum: The Results of the First CITC Conference, ASEE 2002.

[21]

Lunt, Barry and Han Reichgelt, Tina Ashford, Andy Phelps, Erick Slazinski, Cheryl Willis. What Is The New Discipline Of Information Technology? 2003 CIEC Conference, Tucson, Arizona (January 2003).
