, but this code // executes before the first paint, when

»Æ´óÏɸßÊÖÂÛ̳

is not yet present. The // classes are added to so styling immediately reflects the current // toolbar state. The classes are removed after the toolbar completes // initialization. const classesToAdd = ['toolbar-loading', 'toolbar-anti-flicker']; if (toolbarState) { const { orientation, hasActiveTab, isFixed, activeTray, activeTabId, isOriented, userButtonMinWidth } = toolbarState; classesToAdd.push( orientation ? `toolbar-` + orientation + `` : 'toolbar-horizontal', ); if (hasActiveTab !== false) { classesToAdd.push('toolbar-tray-open'); } if (isFixed) { classesToAdd.push('toolbar-fixed'); } if (isOriented) { classesToAdd.push('toolbar-oriented'); } if (activeTray) { // These styles are added so the active tab/tray styles are present // immediately instead of "flickering" on as the toolbar initializes. In // instances where a tray is lazy loaded, these styles facilitate the // lazy loaded tray appearing gracefully and without reflow. const styleContent = ` .toolbar-loading #` + activeTabId + ` { background-image: linear-gradient(rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.25) 20%, transparent 200%); } .toolbar-loading #` + activeTabId + `-tray { display: block; box-shadow: -1px 0 5px 2px rgb(0 0 0 / 33%); border-right: 1px solid #aaa; background-color: #f5f5f5; z-index: 0; } .toolbar-loading.toolbar-vertical.toolbar-tray-open #` + activeTabId + `-tray { width: 15rem; height: 100vh; } .toolbar-loading.toolbar-horizontal :not(#` + activeTray + `) > .toolbar-lining {opacity: 0}`; const style = document.createElement('style'); style.textContent = styleContent; style.setAttribute('data-toolbar-anti-flicker-loading', true); document.querySelector('head').appendChild(style); if (userButtonMinWidth) { const userButtonStyle = document.createElement('style'); userButtonStyle.textContent = `#toolbar-item-user {min-width: ` + userButtonMinWidth +`px;}` document.querySelector('head').appendChild(userButtonStyle); } } } document.querySelector('html').classList.add(...classesToAdd); })(); Assessment Plan Computer Science | »Æ´óÏɸßÊÖÂÛ̳

»Æ´óÏɸßÊÖÂÛ̳

Skip to main content

Assessment Plan

Program Educational Objectives

Within the general framework of a Reformed Christian, undergraduate, liberal arts education, as described in Calvin’s Educational Framework, and the Department of Computer Science , alumni of the »Æ´óÏɸßÊÖÂÛ̳ computing programs, five years after graduation, should be:

  1. Pursuing vocations in computing in a socially and ethically responsible way, as informed by a Reformed Christian world-view, in order to advance the kingdom of Jesus Christ.
  2. Engaging in continuing professional development in order to support life-long learning.
  3. Developing mastery of and exhibiting leadership in one or more areas of computing.
  4. Functioning well on teams by exhibiting Christian virtues such as servant leadership, humility, encouragement and stewardship.
  5. Applying their liberal arts education to effectively function in their personal and professional lives.

Student Learning Outcomes

We demonstrate that graduates of the »Æ´óÏɸßÊÖÂÛ̳ computing programs have the ability to:

  1. Apply computational concepts as appropriate to their discipline.
  2. Solve a computational problem, by:
    • Analyzing the problem and identifying the requirements for its solution.
    • Designing a computational system that solves the problem.
    • Implementing the system using current hardware and software platforms and tools.
    • Evaluating how effectively the system solves the problem.
  3. Communicate effectively through speaking and writing.
  4. Analyze the social and ethical issues surrounding the use of computing and its effects on society.

In addition to these program outcomes, all courses maintain their own course-level outcomes (see the individual course websites).

Assessment Plan

To keep pace with the dynamic discipline of computing, the Department of Computer Science assesses its student learning outcomes by doing the following.

  1. Internal Review
    • Graduating seniors take a major field test in the Perspectives on Computing course (), usually taken during the spring semester of their senior year. Computer science majors take the Educational Testing Services (ETS) . The CS-384 instructor provides the test results to the department for use in comparing our programs against other computing programs and to initiate change as appropriate.
    • Graduating seniors take a survey to assess their experiences in our department. This is, again, usually taken in the Perspectives on Computing (CS 384) course.
    • Faculty members undergo period reappointment procedures for the university. The department is formally involved in this process and uses the following .
    • The department curriculum committee evaluates the following things, proposing changes to the department as appropriate.
      • for Computer Science — Faculty members report their coverage of the required ACM CS knowledge units in each required course each time a new version of the ACM publishes a new version of the knowledge units and when a faculty member teaches a new course.

      • Key assignment data — The sample assignment work submitted by the faculty for the following key assignments:

        • CS 108 major project
        • CS 262 team project
        • CS 384 paper integrating faith and computing
        • CS 396/8 senior project

        The faculty provide top, bottom, and median solutions to each key assignment along with an evaluation according to the department , and the curriculum committee reviews the work. The rhetorical assignments given in CS 262 and CS 384 comprise the department’s rhetorical assessment program and are reviewed annually as part of the university-wide rhetoric program.

    • The department meets once per semester with its . These meetings are coordinated by the council, and the results are provided to the department by the department chair, who is the department's representative on the council.
    • Faculty and courses are evaluated by the university-wide course-evaluation program. This activity is administered by the academic deans each semester for selected courses and faculty. The results are provided to the department chair, who reviews them and forwards issues to the personnel or curriculum committees as appropriate.
    • The department curriculum committee reviews the program educational objectives, student learning outcomes, and assessment plan, recommending changes to the department as required. This is done on a three-year cycle.
  2. External Review
    • Every six years, the department undergoes an external review by an evaluation team from the Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology () as part of the accreditation process for its BCS program. This process is initiated by the department’s formal request for evaluation to ABET, and the resulting self-study questionnaire and ABET visitation report dictate changes to the department’s processes.

The department chair coordinates these assessment activities, referring the results to the department or department committee as appropriate. All formal review and action is done by the department and documented in the department meeting minutes. The department chair also produces an annual state of the department report summarizing these data and reviewing them with the academic dean during a meeting early each fall.

Updated in Fall 2024.

Loading...