Mission and Personal Statements

Contents Below (scroll down for each)

Mission Statement(s)
Objectives and Philosophy for Achieving This
Specific Teaching Responsibilities
My Testing Philosophy
My Grading Philosophy

1. Mission Statement(s)

I have two missions. My primary one is as a computer science educator. My secondary mission is as the Ackerley Computer Science and Technology Scholars Program director.

As a computer science faculty member, my mission is to educate Graceland students who seek understanding and practical experiences in the computational sciences. I prepare them for productive careers in those fast-paced and ever-changing fields that involve problem solving with computers.
As Ackerley Program Director, my mission is to promote curricular and extra-curricular scholarship within the programs of computer science and information technology, bringing academic recognition to our program of study, our students, and our faculty.

2. Objectives and Philosophy for Achieving This

Objectives Regarding Educational Mission

To keep current in the field of computer science and, to a lesser extent, information technology, through the following:

read or browse through a wide variety of professional publications
attend conferences for educators of computing topics
participate in workshops related to courses I teach or might teach
take formal CS or IT courses
dialog with other professionals through email, listservs, and newsgroups

To be a good teacher in this field, through the following (a partial list, specific to my teaching style and philosophy):

To teach a given topic with an eye toward the larger context of the discipline, the profession, the historical trend, and how it will likely impact the student later in the program or beyond. I believe I am good at doing this because I take time to develop such context with metaphors and stories.
To be honest with students about what I know and don't know and acknowledge those who can shed light on anything that I lack knowledge or experience with. I believe that CS/IT faculty should not be defensive or uncomfortable with students who know more about this or that technicality, but rather should embrace and take advantage of it. Related to this is to give a reasoned "best guess" about how something works whenever I do not or cannot know, and then to explain how a professional in the field does such reasoning so that the student can model this.
To assign well defined problems since that is the key to student learning in this field characterized by problem solving. In addition, to encourage students to add impressive extra features to personalize their work since this adds to the problems a student will encounter. I expect this of "A" students.
To encourage use of the computer lab through in-class activities and generally being available to answer lab questions throughout the day and night. Students working in the lab avoid the sense of hopelessness one gets working on difficult problems alone, and it promotes collaborative learning where students seek help and learn from each other.
To give working computer solutions to simplified versions of a complex problem as a starting point for students to improve on. This has the following benefits:

it gives the student a model for clearly written code;
it gives the student a template for thinking about the problem;
it provides, for immediate reference, a built-in collection of examples of the language's syntax (esp. the basic structures) which is a benefit to those not completely familiar with the language; and
it gives one practice in reading computer programs which is essential since most practitioners are called on to modify existing code rather than develop code from scratch.

Objectives Regarding Ackerley Director Mission

To facilitate Graceland University having a premier Computer Science program I have outlined the following objectives:

To attract and retain top students through scholarships and program activities
To help attract and retain top faculty through stipend and development incentives
To challenge and invigorate the scholars (i.e., scholarship recipients) through meaningful projects and events
To offer enriching opportunities for non-scholars (as well as scholars) and encourage participation (e.g., guest speakers, program contests)
To enlist the scholars to help with planning, brainstorming, and implementing a program that engages and benefits the other CS and IT students.

3. Specific Teaching Responsibilities

The courses that I am primarily responsible for teaching are:

Intro to Computers and Applications (GNRL 1190) - Fall/Spring
Principles of Computing (CPSC 1100) - Fall
Telecommunications (CPSC/ITEC 3230) - Spring
Programming Languages (CPSC 3400) - Fall
Database Concepts (CPSC/ITEC 3440) - Spring
Compiler Design (CPSC 4380) - alternate years
Computer Architectures (CPSC 4400) - alternate years
Senior Project I (CPSC 4800) - Fall/Spring (co-sponsor with Farnham)
Senior Project II (CPSC 4810) - Fall/Spring (co-sponsor with Farnham)
Internship and Independent Studies - arranged basis

Courses I taught in spring 2003 that may or may not be taught again in the foreseeable future:

Programming with Java (CPSC/ITEC 3200)
TCP/IP/SNMP and Network Programming (CPSC 3900)

4. My Testing Philosophy

Here are some of my thoughts which influence how I put together an exam for my courses:

50% of the points on a test should be easy to achieve by students in the course, even those who are not good students. This is because 50% is still at a "level of failure" and I think it should not be too difficult to reach this level. However, a random person outside the class should not be able to reach 50% (hence, all answers to any multiple-choice questions should sound plausible to the clueless).
10% of the questions should be difficult, yet attainable by the students doing "A" work (i.e., students who read the text, take notes, and think about the subject).
Partial credit should be possible. I have even been known to award partial credit on multiple choice questions if certain wrong choices are clearly better than others and represent some degree of study. On computational and programming problems I identify different elements in the problem solving process that are present and grade accordingly.
I should not be too stingy with partial credit on essay questions up to 50% of its value. If a student takes the risk to give an answer to a question he/she is unsure of, I am likely to score 50% for seeing some degree of clarity of thought which shows that the student correctly interpreted the question. Understanding the question is important in Computer Science.
A test should have a mix of directed knowledge and comprehensive parts. Thus, if I have a multiphase computation, I like to test the students independently on both phases, without having to worry about how to grade a phase 2 which has been overly simplified by an error in phase 1. On the other side, I like also to include a comprehensive problem that calls on the student to integrate everything without a lot of hints.
Not everything that was covered in class needs to be tested. That is why participation and attendance should count in the grade.
The test itself can be a learning process. In some cases I will ask questions that were not well covered in the course by adding extra instructions or hints that make it a reasonable question. This reflects my belief that, to a limited degree, it is okay to expect new connections in the mind of the test taker during a test (the "ah hah" experience).
I should be able to handle the computational elements of the exam in 1/3rd the time I expect students to do it in.
There should be some flexibility on my part for students who wish to continue the exam beyond the end of the class period. On the other hand, there should be some incentive to get students to complete them on time (I sometimes add a bonus problem which only counts for those handing in the exam by the appointed time).
I should be willing to answer a student's question during the exam to clarify something, but if I feel such response would be a benefit to the rest of the class I will somehow distribute that information to everyone (e.g., chalkboard or announcement).
I like to have a variety of types of test questions (if not on a given exam then throughout different semester tests) that include the following:

those that test specific techniques learned, independent of any larger context to avoid the problem of grading mistakes with cascading effects
those that are comprehensive in which each of several techniques must occur in its proper place and in some larger context
those that test knowledge of common terms and ideas, especially those one should be familiar with if involved in class and reading the text
those that test easy-to-remember information for anyone attending class
those that can be easily graded and which have no "partial credit" factor (e.g., multiple choice for automatic or TA grading of part)
those that require open-ended writing and analytical or creative thought

5. My Grading Philosophy

Here are a few of my thoughts regarding grades. This is not intended to be complete and does not specify what I expect from an A, B, C, or D student (for now, I assume that to be what is typically understood or intuitive by most faculty). It is more likely a list of ideas that are specific to my classes, possibly different from some other teachers.

I try to see that attendance, or lack thereof (including tardiness), counts for something in the grade. I do so because I cover some things in class that are not necessarily evaluated in a test or homework assignment. So there is added value in being present. How I account for this has changed over the years and in different classes, but it is an element that I try implement.
I like a grading scheme simple enough so that students can easily do the math to track where they stand. To this end I assign points to each homework assignment, test, quiz, or project, that reflects relative values (e.g., a 50-pointer being 5 times more important than a 10-pointer). However, I am trying to use a grading scheme (in my Database course) that weights categories of work differently (homework/projects/exams) to see how students like that and to see if I can maintain this "simplicity" factor in some way.
For simplicity and consistency, I advertise 90%, 80%, 70%, and 60% for my borderlines between grades A, B, C, D, and F, respectively. I am guided by the standard notions of what these stand for. I have at times lowered certain borderlines if it seemed reasonable and honest to do so. I would take into consideration how grades cluster as well as the performance of past students in the same class. For instance, if the top students in class range between 89% to 92% and I believe they perform like previous "A" students in the course, then I am likely to consider 89% as an A. But, I would not if another cluster of grades exist in the upper 90's (in which case I stick with the advertised borderline).
I believe that teachers should not lower their grading borderlines without good reason, otherwise they contribute to grade inflation. A student who ends up on the A/B borderline in most classes should get an A in half of them and a B in the other half in order for the GPA to reflect his/her academic performance. If all instructors stick to their borderlines then this will occur. Grade inflation should be avoided since it reflects poorly on the institution and diminishes the value of grades earned by past students.