Page 1
Page 2
Page 3
Page 4
Page 5
Page 6
Page 7
Page 8
Page 9
Page 10
Page 11
Page 12
Page 13
Page 14
Page 15
Page 16
Page 17
Page 18
Page 19
Page 20
Page 21
Page 22
Page 23
Page 24
Page 25
Page 26
Page 27
Page 28
Page 29
Page 30
Page 31
Page 32
Page 33
Page 34
Page 35
Page 36
Page 37

S.00-72

• ?

Simon Fraser University

Memorandum

Senate

FROM:

J.M. Munro, Vice-President, Academic

External Review - School of Computing Science

External Reviews of academic units are conducted under Guidelines' approved

by Senate. The review process is intended to ensure that the quality of the department's

academic programs and research is high, that members of the department participate in

the administration of departments, and that the departmental environment is

conducive to the department's objectives. Under these Guidelines, Senate is expected to

receive advice from the new Senate Committee on University Priorities and to provide

feedback to the unit and the Dean.

The following materials are forwarded to Senate for consideration:

The External Review Report

The response to the External Review Report by the School

. ?

The comments of the Dean

The comments of the Vice-President, Academic

The recommendations from the Senate Committee on University Priorities

A representative of the School will be available at Senate as a resource person.

Motion

That Senate concurs with the recommendation from the Senate Committee on

University Priorities concerning advice to the School of Computing Science on

priority items resulting from the external review, as outlined in S.00-72

rrl

The Guidelines can be found at

http://www.reg.sfu.ca/Senate/SenateConirns/SCUP-ExReview.hbnl

Replacement Page 2 for Senate Paper S.00-72

SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY

Senate Committee on University Priorities

Memorandum

AMENDED

TO:

Senate

FROM: JoF

RE:

School of Computing Science

DATE:

External Review

The Senate Committee on University Priorities has reviewed the External Review

Report prepared on the School of Computing Science August 30, 1999, together with

the response from the School and comments from the Dean and the Vice President,

Academic.

SCUP recommends to Senate that the School and Dean be advised to pursue the

following as priority items:

TheSchool of Computing Science should submit a plan to SCEMP regarding

enrollment growth over the next 5 years. It is recognized that the success of

the five year growth plan will depend on adequate resources. This plan

should:

evaluate the demand for Computing courses by non-CS-majors and

identify what additions /revision are required to the curriculum to

enable Computing Science to most effectively expand service teaching

to non-CS students;

outline the balance envisioned for expansion of non-CS-majors

enrolments and the addition of new CS-majors FTEs;

C. ?

review the number of on-line courses available and assess whether

increased use of on-line courses would form part of a strategy for

increasing student enrollments within the School;

specify the resource requirements associated with the enrollment

growth plan and identify how these will be met;

indicate any curriculum revision required to implement the plan; and,

f. ?

identify what accountability measures will be introduced to evaluate

the plan and the impact of expansion over the five year period.

/ page 2

Page 2

The School of Computing Science, together with the Dean of Applied Science

and the Vice President, Academic, must find ways of achieving success in

faculty recruitment and retention efforts. Further expansion of the

Computing Science program should be developed in consideration of the

faculty resources required to preserve the quality of the program.

The School of Computing Science needs to address the issue of course

availability for computing courses for all students, and must increase the

number of lower-level undergraduate courses being taught by tenure-track

II,

SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY

Office of the Vice President, Academic

MEMORANDUM

TO: Senate Committee on

FROM:

J.M. Munro,

University Priorities

Vice President, Academic

SUBJECT:

External Review, School ?

DATE: June 8, 2000

of Computing Science

The report of the External Review Committee of the School of

Computing Science was submitted on August 30, 1999 following the review visit

on March 8-10, 1999. The response of the School was submitted on October 12,

1999 and the comments of the Dean of Applied Sciences on May 15, 2000.

My comments on this external review and the submission from the School

and Dean are as follows.

A review committee for an academic unit of this size would normally have

four members - three external and one internal. This review was carried out

by a committee of two external persons. Nevertheless, this is a balanced and

comprehensive review report.

Computing Science probably has a more dynamic environment than any other

academic unit in the University. This is partly seen in the rapid growth of

demand for admission to the undergraduate program and partly in the rapid

evolution of curriculum structure and subject matter. Steps have been taken

over the last nine months to deal with an emerging crisis situation in the

undergraduate program through directing additional funding to teaching

equipment, instructional resources, and staff. Further efforts are underway

now. Nevertheless, despite this progress the need to plan for the future of the

undergraduate program is still very pressing. The Dean's comments propose a

major expansion of funding to allow an increases of between 50 and 100

percent in undergraduate FIEs by expansion of the number of majors over the

next five to ten years. This may be inevitable, and even desirable, but

consideration should also be given to expanding enrollment in Computing

Science courses through an expansion of service teaching for Arts and Science

0 ?

students. This would have two advantages: it would cost less and it would

address the unmet demand of students in those Faculties for some Level of

access to Computing Science courses.

One of the many difficulties with a large expansion of majors in Computing

Science is the shortage of suitably qualified tenure track faculty. The review

report and the School's response do not contain explicit mention of this -

neither do the Dean's comments. Other information received from the School

of Computing Science suggests that all major computing programs in the

country are finding a dearth of available candidates for faculty positions this

year. This is no doubt both a supply (major industry demand for Ph.D.

graduates) and demand (attempted rapid expansion at many universities

simultaneously) problem- any realistic short-term plan for enrollment growth

will have to take account of this major impediment.

White the reviewers found that undergraduate students had generally

positive views of their experience in the School of Computing Science (the

review was done before the major registration problems last summer), there

were a series of concerns raised about the graduate program. These are

important and it is encouraging that the School has taken steps to deal with

many of these concerns.

The reviewers' observations concerning the excellent research reputation of

the School and the scholarly accomplishments of its faculty are gratifying and

we must not dilute this aspect of the School by too rapid expansion of its

undergraduate majors even more than at present and the School might in time

evolve into a unit with a large service teaching component and a smatter major

program with admission requirements similar to Engineering Science. I would

not recommend this as a preferred option, but it might be the best option if

some current trends were to continue.

9.ZK 4M""V

cc. R.G. Marteniuk

J. Delgrande

SKIMP 00-03

Faculty of Applied Sciences

Dean's Response

is ?

To The School of Computing Science's Response To Their External Review

May 16, 2000

The External Review of the School of Computing Science (CS), authored by Patrick

Dymond of York University and Janice Glasgow of Queen's University, in my opinion, is

an excellent review in that it covers many important issues faced by the School of

Computing Science. Equally well done is the School's response to the External Review.

The Response deals directly with the issues raised in the External Review and indicates

actions that the School will take in regard to the various issues raised in the External

Review.

My role in the process, as I understand it, is to comment on the Response of the School and,

in those areas that require additional resources, suggest ways and means of acquiring

- those resources.

In regard to the above, I wish to concentrate my report on the following issues raised by

the Reviewers and dealt with by the School in their Response. The Reviewers state on page

14 of their report

" ...if

the School is to maintain its current ranking among Canadian

computer science departments, then both the School and the administration must work

more effectively together to deal successfully with its problems. In our view, the principal

problems are student enrollments and faculty recruitment and retention."

If student demand for computer science courses is to be satisfied, CS must grow in faculty,

staff, and basic infrastructure support. A plan must be put in place to provide these

resources over a defined time period. As background to such a proposal, I wish to call

upon documentation that, in combination with the External Review and the Response from

CS can lead to a proposal for the necessary resources.

The Faculty of Applied Sciences' three year plan called for an increase to the size of the

School of Computing Science in terms of numbers of faculty, staff, and students.

The Plan pointed out that over the past several years the School of Computing Science (CS)

has increased its enrolment by 60 to 65%. Some of this growth was planned but a large

component was in response to a significant demand for its courses by students seeking the

CS major and by non-CS students seeking more knowledge about information technology.

The demand for courses and programs in CS should continue for some time. Currently

there is a significant demand for graduates from CS by the Information Technology sector

of BC, Canada, and indeed the rest of the world, where our graduates from CS are in

unprecedented demand. This demand, arising from the development of the knowledge

based economy, is unlikely to abate in the near future and in fact there will probably be an

increase in the need for people with various levels of IT knowledge. In Canada alone, it is

estimated that there is immediate need for 20,000 employees for the IT sector, many of

these requiring university degrees. As well, Nortel hires a full 25% of

all Canadian

university graduates in computer science and electrical/ computer engineering and could

use more. it is statistics like these that dictate that at SFU the demand for CS courses will

increase in the next few years far beyond the demand for courses in the other disciplines

noted above.

Related to this ongoing demand for computer science courses on the Burnaby Mountain

campus, is the role that Cs can play at the TIME Centre. As mentioned below, the School is

willing to develop credit and non-credit programs at the TIME Centre that will serve as an

important catalyst in the downtown IT sector. In this regard, SFU could be at the core of a

large IT development as Vancouver moves to develop the Gas Town and harbour area into

a large IT industrial area.

As the Faculty's and School's three year plans pointed out, increasing the size of CS will

also be an investment in high quality scholarship and research in that the School currently

enjoys a high reputation in Canada and abroad for the expertise and research productivity

of its faculty. This is reinforced by the External Review but, as noted, we must act quickly

and decisively if we are to maintain our high standing in regard to other Canadian

Universities.

Above and beyond the above plans, CS also has some short-term enrolment management

problems, the solutions to which are covered in their Response. However, these

management tactics will not solve the basic issue of unprecedented demand for computing

science courses, both from CS majors and non-majors alike. I think it is accurate to say that

CS faculty are unanimous in indicating that the School would like to attempt to meet a

good portion of this demand but the School needs additional: faculty; technical staff and

front office staff; TA support; teaching equipment; and space.

The Academic Vice-President's Office has helped to increase the resources over the past

two years to CS but this support, while much appreciated, is seen as necessary to help CS

maintain its current programs at a high level of quality. To attempt to meet some of the

unmet demand for undergraduate and graduate courses in CS, additional resources would

have to be made available.

THE PLAN

The plan is to garner resources to allow strong growth to be achieved in CS faculty, staff

and infrastructure support over a five to ten year. The specific areas targeted for growth

over this time are:

• The further development and enhancement of our newly approved specialist

undergraduate programs in Software Engineering and Multimedia Computing.

Related to the multimedia specialist program is a proposal for an interdisciplinary

initiative in Multimedia and Computer Graphics which has strong implications for the

graduate program.

• The deployment of faculty to the NewMIC initiative among SF0, UBC and TechBC,

UVIC, and Emily Carr at the Harbour Centre.

• The establishment of a "Software Skills" course sequence for non-computing students.

This could include individual courses as

well

as minor programs planned with the

Faculties of Science and Arts. Currently, there exists three courses, taught twice each

per year, that would form the basis of this sequence of courses. It should be noted that

the School has received SIP money to cover the current costs of offering these courses.

0 ?

0

An expansion of the graduate program from 110 students to a target of 150.

• The growing of the Alternative Routes to Computing program that is now being

offered but which the School would like to increase in numbers.

• Of high priority would be to bolster the Schools' involvement in the Pacific Institute for

the Mathematical Sciences and in the Mathematics Initiative in Technology and

Complex Systems. Both these initiatives are important to Computing Science in the

long-term and require increased faculty numbers to provide critical mass.

• A strong collaboration between the Faculty of Business Administration and the School

is possible in the Computing Science/Business Techo-MBA.

• The development of online courses. Two constraints on admitting more students into

the CS major have to do with space and equipment. One way to partially avoid these

constraints is to move towards putting as many CS courses online as is possible. The

School feels that several courses can be put online and taken by students from home,

thus partially alleviating the problem of space and equipment. Faculty, space and

human infrastructure would be needed to implement this aspect of the plan.

Financial Considerations

The overall plan is to increase the School of Computing Science in FTE students, CFL

S ?

faculty, and appropriate human infrastructure by 50% over the next five to ten years

through funding from SRI and to perhaps expand by as much as 100% via special funding

from the BC Government (i.e. ITBC - see below).. A 50% increase assumes the following:

• An average per FTE cost, in 1998/99 dollars of $6000.00 (not including space and

equipment)

• A total 1998/99 FTE of about

822(732

UG and 90 G)

• The total FTE grows tol248FTE

• The total FTh in at the end of the growth period is represented by 800 majors' FTEs, 298

service FTEs, and 150 graduate FTEs

• Funding the increase of 426 FTEs represents an increase of 426 X $6,000.00

$2,556,000.00 to the base budget of Computing Science which does not include the cost

of space and equipment needed to support the increased enrolment.

• Funding of approximately 15 new faculty positions would require annual costs in the

form of an average increase of $20,000 to thestarting salary. This is assuming that the

average $15,000.00 market differential is still present. This additional salary cost adds

$300,000.00 to the required total funding increase.

• Total request is for approximately $2,856,000.00

0 ?

^1-

The Proposed Funding Solution

• The Strategic Initiative Fund. It is proposed that approximately $350,000.00 per year

over the next five years be taken from the SIF for funding growth in Computing

Science.

• Targeted FTEs. If the provincial government continues funding targeted FTEs for

Information Technology purposes top priority be given to the School of Computing

Science to bring the total funding increase per year to $560,000.00 for a total of five

years (SIF plus targeted FTEs would equal $560,000.00 per year).

• CE! and KDF would be approached for new start up funding as well as major

infrastructure grants.

• The space issue. Growth is impossible without additional space being assigned to CS.

Even if the TEC (Technology and Environment Centre) Building is approved by the

Government this summer, it will be three years before this space is available. Off

campus space may have to be found to bridge to the new building. Lack of space

explains why the proposed growth take place over a five to ten year span in that earlier

rapid growth could not be accommodated even by off campus space.

Other Funding Considerations

• ITBC (Information Technology BC) ia an effort by UBC, UVic and SFU to get a

significant funding increase from the provincial government in IT related areas in the

BC universities. The proposal is to increase the IT related graduates from these three

universities by 100% over the next five years. Included in this proposal is an effort to

get a significant increase in federal funding (NSERC, CE!, etc.) for IT related research

areas. Funding for IT activities might be forthcoming to the extent that the senior

administration and the IT Faculties from each of the Universities can work together on

a unified proposal. The present proposal, increased by another 50% could be seen as

SFU's contribution to the unified proposal.

scij

00-03

AP.1

RESPONSE

of:

The School of Computing Science

to:

External Review of

The School of Computing Science

March 1999

The School appreciates the time and effort taken by Profs. Dymond and Glasgow, in visiting

the School in March and in writing their detailed and wide-ranging report. We recognize

that their task was made more difficult by the inability of the university to find an Internal

Reviewer, and by the very unfortunate illness of the third External Reviewer.

The reviewers made various

recommendations

and

suggestions,

under those headings, in

their review. These recommendations and suggestions made by the reviewers are addressed

below. The replies reflect the views of the School's faculty, staff, and students, all of whom

were invited to give their input to the reply.

Response to recommendations

Undergraduate programs

Recommendation 1

Mechanisms must be put in place to control and manage access so

that students have a reasonable expectation

getting the courses they need to make normal

progress towards their degrees. The School and University must work together to find fair

ways to allocate the still-scarce resources fairly.

We are working toward a better control of enrollments. Currently, a large majority

of our students are admitted into computing after completing 57 credits. The large body

of intending computing majors places great enrollment pressure on our courses. As well,

about 10% of the students attempt to improve their GPA by duplicating courses. The new

admission policy addresses both these issues by requiring students to declare early, and

disallowing duplicates for admission GPA calculation.

Students will shortly begin declaring at the end of their first undergraduate year; as well,

students with a sufficiently high GPA may declare on entry to SFU. At present, a high school

graduate may declare with an average of 93%.

For upper division students, we will be allowing students to take a maximum of three

Computing courses in a given semester; after three courses, a student's priority for a fourth

(or more) computing Course will drop significantly.

For the interim, we are addressing the current "bulge" in our majors by shifting teaching

resources to the upper division. As well, the VP Academic's Office has supplied up with

one-time funds to mount extra sections of four courses in the 2000-1 semester.

For the second point, we look forward to working with the University toward relieving

enrollment pressures.

Recommendation 2

significant increase in the total number

course sections offered

by the school is needed.

The number

sections offered by part-time and non-research faculty should be reduced

quickly as resources permit.

1! ?

For the first point: we agree, but we require resources in order to increase the number of

course sections. However, we have in the past year limited the maximum class size to 200

students; this is a reduction from our largest class size of 350 students previously.

For the second point: we agree in part, and subject to the caveat that our Lecturers

constitute an essential and valued part of our faculty. We note that the number of Lecturers

has not increased in the last 15 years, even though in the late 1980's the School grew by

13 research faculty. However we sympathize with the underlying problem that we see the

reviewers as addressing, that too many lower division courses are taught by non-research

faculty. Part of the problem is that we have a large number of upper-level courses; conse-

quently, research faculty are called upon to teach the upper-level courses, possibly at the

expense of the lower-level courses. We have addressed this latter point in the last year by

stipulating that a research faculty member can expect to teach approximately one third of

their courses at the lower division.

As well, we acknowledge that too many course sections are taught by sessional instructors.

(Although we note that for the five year period for which figures were available for the review,

1993/94 - 1997/98, the proportion of courses taught by CFL faculty rose from 69% to 75%

in the School while for the university as a whole it dropped from 69% to 67%.) We feel

that having sessional instructors in moderate numbers can be a healthy thing; for example it

allows Ph.D. students to obtain experience in teaching a course. However, in the last Spring

semester (99-1) we hired 18 sessional instructors and since then we have not hired less than

12 sessionals per semester, including a planned 12 sessionals for the Spring semester (00-1).

This is too many. Future hirings will help address this problem; we feel that future hirings

is may well include new Lecturers (but in balance with our research faculty). As well, our

plans for enrollment management will go a long way to helping ease our reliance on sessional

instructors.

In 1999 a total of 42 course offerings were taught by sessional instructors. Once we have

hired into open positions, this number can be further reduced only through an increase in

the faculty complement or a reduction in course offerings.

Recommendation 3

Multi-year planning and budgeting for the School's equipment and

software needs should be adopted.

Agreed. We are in a discipline where a certain portion of our equipment will predictably

go out of date in each year. One thing that makes planning difficult is the uncertainty over

the University's Equipment Budget. This makes long-term planning for equipment purchases

difficult, since funding isn't reliable yet in each year funds must, in one fashion or another,

be obtained.

The reviewers also raised a number of issues concerning the undergraduate program,

which we also address here. The reviewers state:

We are not taking a position on these points, merely suggesting they be thoroughly

examined by the undergraduate curriculum committee.

These points will be passed on to the Undergraduate Curriculum Committee for their

consideration, and the results brought forward to the next School Meeting. We include a

brief response here.

We were curious that there was no required project course for fourth-year students, that

there were no required courses focusing on professional responsibility and social issues, that

there seemed to be little overall integration of object-oriented programming approach in the

curriculum.

The suggestion of requiring a project for Honour's students has been raised from time to

time. We will be revisiting it.

Concerning a course on professional responsibility and social issues, we feel that this

is a good point. We do have a course, CMPT 320,

Social Implications

a Computerized

Society,

although this is not the same thing as a course

for

a computer professional concerning

professional responsibility.

The school is looking at the possibility of increasing the breadth of courses available to

fulfill the social aspects of computing requirement. The courses considered are:

. CMPT 320-3 Social Implications of a Computerized Society

. CMNS 353-4 Social Contexts of Information Technology

CMNS 354-4 Communication and Social Issues in Design

• ENSC 406-2 Social Responsibility and Professional Practice

• HIST 361-4 The History of Science: The 18th Century to the Present

. WS 204-3 Women, Science and Technology

One of these courses is ENSC 406-2, which is on social responsibility and professional practise.

The role of object-oriented programming in our curriculum will be reviewed.

The School may also find it worthwhile to pursue accreditation

its undergraduate pro-

grams by the CIPS Computer Science Accreditation Council, which provides a useful detailed

outside review

many undergraduate curriculum issues.

Agreed. There is a flurry of interest in further formalising the accreditation process, now

that the "Software Engineering" suit has been settled (in favour of Computing Science). We

will likely consider this in the coming year.

The programs in "Computing for Non-Computing Students" are important and should

be permanently funded. The cancellation

evening sections

introductory courses is also

regrettable.

Agreed, on both points. The Computing for Non-Computing Students programs are,

we feel, valuable for non-computing students being able to obtain Co-op and permanent

jobs, complementing and enhancing their skills in other disciplines. However, given current

resource constraints, we feel that first priority must be given to our Majors.

/13

Graduate programs

Recommendation

The School should take steps to reduce the completion time for M.Sc.

program.

We feel that one major reason for the relatively long average MSc completion time (8

semesters) is that several students work part-time, although they are registered as full time

(we do not have a part-time registration status). Funding for full-time graduate students

in Computing Science is available for around $17,000/year, but many students can earn 2-3

times that amount in local jobs. We cannot prevent the students from working, so we are

considering other methods for reducing completion times.

Reducing course expectations:

The course requirement for an M.Sc. by thesis was re-

duced from 6 to 5 as a result of the previous external review. At UBC the course

requirement remains at 6 courses, but students are encouraged to take 3 courses per

semester, whereas our graduates seldom take more than 2 courses per semester. One

way to preserve our breadth requirement of 5 courses, yet speed up the M.Sc. com-

pletion times, is to reduce the course workloads in the graduate courses, so that it is

feasible to take 3 courses in a semester. Students can then commence their thesis work

earlier than at present.

Reducing thesis expectations:

Many of our M.Sc. graduate students spend a great deal

of time on their thesis, which might be better spent working toward a Ph.D. thesis.

Improve the supervisory process:

It may be possible, through more vigorous monitor-

ing, to encourage slow students to complete faster.

Improve the quality of graduate students:

It may be that the weaker students who

are uncomfortable with writing in English take an inordinately long time to write up

their thesis work. We now have very high admission requirements for foreign students,

which should address this issue.

We will hold discussions to determine which alternatives offer desirable routes to take to

reduce the M.Sc. completion times.

Recommendation 5

The School should attempt to make graduate students feel more valued

as members of the university community. This may involve increased communication, as well

as an understanding of their roles on various committees.

We have recently held a vote on whether graduate students should have voting member-

ship on the faculty hiring committee. Of returned ballots the result was 18 in favour and

9 against. This was insufficient to allow the membership to change (for a change to the

constitution of the School we require 60% of the faculty to be in favour, not, for example,

60% of returned ballots). However it has opened up the dialogue within the school, and the

graduate students are feeling more involved in the decision-making processes now. As well,

for the faculty search committee, there will be time set aside for the graduates to meet with

a faculty candidate.

114-

Recommendation

The School should put more resources and effort into bringing exter-

nal visitors into the School for seminars or longer-term visits.

Agreed. This year we resurrected our (one-person) "Seminars" committee. We have a

"Distinguished Speakers" series, put on jointly with the Centre for Systems Science. We will

be putting resources into a forthcoming "Colloquium Series" of general-interest talks.

Recommendation

7 Graduate students be encouraged to choose research topics as early as

possible in order to help decrease the overall time to complete a degree.

To help the graduate students chose a research area, we offer a weekly seminar series

given by faculty on their research (CMPT 891). All new students must attend these seminars

during their first two semesters here.

Further, all 4 of the alternatives presented above for reducing the M.Sc. completion time

can also be applied to speeding up the search for a research topic.

Suggestion 1

The graduate committee review the requirements for the Masters program to

determine whether they are appropriate for this degree.

We will be holding discussions to see if reducing the number of M.Sc. courses from 5 to 4,

as well as reducing the course and thesis expectations, still leads to appropriate requirements

for an M.Sc.

Suggestion 2

The School look into whether there is some space available that would facil-

itate improved interactions among graduate students, or whether the current space could be

better utilized.

See the following item.

Suggestion

space planning committee be set up to study and report on the effects of

increased graduate enrollments in terms of laboratory and office space.

We have in place a Space Allocation committee for the current academic year, which will

review space needs (particularly for research laboratories, but for "public" School space in

general) and report to the School with recommendations for reallocating space. Part of their

mandate will be to review the effects of increased graduate enrollments on laboratory and

office space.

We agree with the reviewers that there is an overall space shortage; hopefully and pre-

sumably this will be addressed with the new Applied Sciences II building.

Research

Recommendation 8

There is a need for growth in the School. When considering new

faculty appointments, the School should consider those areas of research which are currently

under-represented and in high demand from graduate

"I.',

students.

We have been emphasizing "systems" areas in our hiring. Last year's advertisement

stated:

The ideal candidate will have demonstrated research expertise in a systems area,

such as database systems, software engineering, graphics, multimedia systems, distributed

systems or networking.

In the last recruiting year we were able to hire a person in the

Graphics area as well as in Database Systems.

For the current recruiting year, we will emphasize the same areas, which remain under-

represented, although rephrasing the advertisement to add emphasis to research excellence.

Recommendation

Criteria for merit evaluation, promotion and tenure should be devel

oped collegially by the School and communicated clearly to faculty members.

This was a major topic of discussion at the (subsequent to the review) School retreat. In

addition to the criteria set forth in the University's Policies and Procedures, the University

has instituted a new Workload Policy that allows for out-of-the-ordinary work arrangements.

Staff and Facilities

Recommendation 10

A review of the current tasks and expectations for the administrative

staff should be carried out and budget made available for additional staff as required.

A submission will be put forward to the VP Academic's Office for his consideration.

sRecommendation 11

The level of training for technical staff be considered and an appro-

priate budget be made available for keeping the staff up-to-date on equipment and software.

Good idea.

Suggestion

The ranking of technical staff in the School be examined with respect to similar

positions in computing services to ensure equity for the staff.

Agreed. Technical staff should be receiving equal pay for equal work regardless of the

unit in which they work.

Suggestion 5

A centralized (university-wide) inventory for software licenses be set up to

minimize costs for the School and other units.

We will follow up on this. A central inventory of all software purchased by the university

would allow the university to lower costs by identifying applications for which site licensing

would be cost effective. Other benefits, like interdepartmental technical support training,

volume discounts, or industrial contributions, would reduce the total software application

costs for the university. Where possible, centralized installation of software with a site license

would reduce also support costs.

//k

Gender and Equity Issues

Suggestion

The School should consider the possibility of training in gender issues and

equity for those individuals who sit on hiring or promotion committees.

The university provides seminars to this end. As well, the Faculty of Applied Science's

Equity Committee has a non-voting member sitting on our Faculty Search Committee.

Recommendation 12

Efforts to promote equity and fairness within the School should be

more recognized, encouraged and appreciated.

In our opinion, we are promoting equity and fairness strongly within the School. We

agree that efforts to promote equity and fairness should be recognized, encouraged and

appreciated.

scu 00-03

UNIVERSIT

Department of

Computer Science

s{Q

Tel

Fax

(416)

(416)736-5053736-5872 ?

i€ ?

UNIVERSITY ?

FACULTY OF PURE AND APPLIED SCIENCE

4700 KEELE STREET • NORTh YORK

• ONTARIO • CANADA • M3J 1P3

August 30, 1999

Professor John M. Munro,

Vice-President, Academic pro tern,

Simon Fraser University,

8888 University Drive,

Burnaby,

B.C.

V5A 1S6

Dear Professor Munro,

I am enclosing the results of our review of the School of Computing Science, conducted by

Janice Glasgow and myself last spring.

We both appreciated the opportunity to visit Simon Fraser. I hope the report will be helpful

to the University and the School.

C96

cc: Janice Glasgow, Queens University

External Review of

The School of Computing Science

Simon Fraser University, March 1999

Summary

The School of Computing Science at Simon Fraser University is highly-ranked among Cana-

dian computer science departments. The School has taken on a significant increase in under-

graduate enrollments without any significant increase in resources, and is now under-resourced

for the current workload. The School appears to be carrying out its mission as well as possible

under difficult circumstances. The School and the University face several challenges in address-

ing these severe undergraduate enrollment pressures and resulting problems, including faculty

recruitment and retention.

1 Introduction

The visit of the external review committee to Simon Fraser University took place March 8-

10, 1999. The charge of the committee was to: 1) assess the quality of the School, its faculty

and its teaching and research programs; 2) assess the quality of the School's administration,

the support and resource allocation for the work of the School, both internal and external; 3)

provide an assessment of the School's plans, and its external relationships; 4) identify needs

and opportunities for change; and

examine the three year plan of the School and the self-

study document produced by the School in preparation for the review. Terms of Reference were

provided by the School. We have also referred to the Senate Guidelines for External Reviews of

Academic Units.

Originally, the committee was to consist of four members - three external and one internal.

This became impossible because of the illness of one of the external members and because of an

inability to find a willing internal committee member. The University administration, the School

and the remaining committee members agreed that it was feasible and worthwhile to proceed on

the original timetable for the visit. The result was a committee with only two members, Janice

Glasgow and Patrick Dymond (Chair). This situation added stress and workload to the smaller

committee, both during the site visit and while preparing the report. However we believe that a

larger committee would not have differed significantly from ours in its conclusions.

In a three day visit it is of course impossible to fully understand or appreciate such a com-

plex situation as the School of Computer Science, its interrelationships with its members and its

/A D

relationships with the rest of the University. Our opinions are based on the self-study materials

provided to us, and on what we heard from those who spoke to us during our visit. The members

of the committee thank the many people who helped arrange our visit or provided materials, and

all those who talked with us to share their ideas about the School of Computing Science.

The committee has made several considered recommendations to the School and to the Uni-

versity. They are based on our view of the best interests of the University. These recommenda-

tions are numbered in the text. We have also more freely made suggestions concerning somewhat

less critical issues and possibilities which we nevertheless think should be considered (or recon-

sidered) by the School and University.

2 Undergraduate programs

2.1

Enrollments:

The School has about

560

majors and 460 intended majors for the B.Sc. in Computer Science

The School is one of the largest in the university in terms of undergraduate enrollments. This

is one of the causes of what can reasonably be called a crisis in enrollments. Other factors

contributing to this crisis are the School's direct entry mechanisms and cutoffs, and of course

the continent-wide phenomenon of increasing popularity of computer science programs with

students.

Cutoffs for admission are already at a very high level, and any further increase would seem

to be arbitrary. Students who do not get direct entry will have very little opportunity to en-

ter the School. Besides the students who have been directly admitted there are "five hundred

wannabees" trying to get in. Once admitted to the major, senior students have in some cases

been turned away from important upper level courses needed for their computing science major

as many as three terms in a row. Lower level courses are also packed. The result is a possibility of

serious student dissatisfaction with the university, along with excessive pressure on students and

on the School. We were told that "...it looks bad to force qualified students into other disciplines

when they have come to the university with the expectation of pursuing a degree in Computing

Science" and we agree—it looks (and is) bad.

Students now routinely try to enroll multiple times in courses, to improve their chances of

meeting the minimal standard for entering the upper years of the computing program. Students

are not always able to make the progress towards their degree each term to allow completion

of the undergraduate degree in nominal time frame. The class size increases resulting from

enrollment pressures generally lead to stresses on the quality of learning, despite the best efforts

of instructors, teaching assistants, technical and advising staff.

The enrollment problems were referred to by some faculty members in the School as pos-

ing a "grow/no grow" dilemma. Should the School try to accommodate the student demand by

increasing the number of faculty and technical resources needed? Or should they act to reduce

the number of students instead, in order to provide a good learning environment within exist-

ing resources? Of course the School cannot act unilaterally to resolve this problem, given the

importance of a balance in enrollments to the University's inter-faculty budget planning. We

discuss this further in Section 9. Certainly more planning is needed to provide reasonable access

to courses for students in the major.

Recommendation 2.1

Mechanisms must be put in place to control and manage access so that

students have a reasonable expectation of getting the courses they need to make normal progress

towards their degrees. The School and University must work together tofindfair ways to allocate

the still-scarce resources fairly.

2.2

Design

of programs

The overall structure of the undergraduate major programs is "normal", by which we mean

it is broadly similar to programs offered by other high-quality computer science departments in

universities across Canada. (As in most programs, there are a few idiosyncrasies that reflect the

School's history and the interests of its faculty members.) The program offers a good degree of

flexibility and breadth for students to follow their interests and to prepare them for co-op work.

The offering of a course in software engineering in year two is impressive, providing a strong

foundation for upper year courses and facilitating placement of students in the co-op programs.

Two specialist programs based on the major have recently been added, one in software engi-

neering and the other in multimedia computing. These both represent valuable and appropriate

specializations which will benefit students. (However we should note that there is currently a

legal controversy in many provinces in Canada over use of the term "Software Engineering" by

university programs which are not accredited by Professional Engineering Societies. We fully

agree with the School's position that the term "Software Engineering" denotes a recognized area

of study in Computer Science, rather than a part of the purview of Professional Engineering So-

cieties.) It would be valuable for the school to expand its ties to engineering, perhaps through

stronger participation in a joint computer engineering program.

The School should consider the question of whether it is possible under existing program

requirements for a student in the major to miss a significant amount of core material in computer

science if courses are poorly selected. The question of the depth of mathematics in the program

was also raised as a concern to us by some individuals. In our view an amount of mathematics of

about one quarter of the total number of courses, or a little less, is fairly typical of rigorous pro-

grams across the country, and by this standard, the number of math courses appears to be about

right. There remains the issue about the rigour and content of these courses, to be considered by

the department and its undergraduate committee.

There are some other issues regarding the School's undergraduate programs which the School

could usefully consider. (We are not taking a position on these points, merely suggesting they

be thoroughly examined by the undergraduate curriculum committee.) We were curious that

there was no required project course for fourth-year students, that there were no required courses

focusing on professional responsibility and social issues, that there seemed to be little overall

integration of Object-oriented programming approach in the curriculum. The School may also

find it worthwhile to pursue accreditation of its undergraduate programs by the CIPS Computer

Science Accreditation Council, which provides a useful detailed outside review of many under-

graduate curriculum issues.

Students

Students with whom we spoke seem to like the faculty and their courses. Although labs are

over-crowded and under-staffed, students felt they were given appropriate computing platforms

and software for their work. They like their Teaching Assistants for the most part. They had

complaints about the suitability of the campus dial-in access facilities, which provide an amount

of access time only appropriate for students who are not computer science majors. Resources

for advising of students in the School are too low, although this is mitigated somewhat by the

excellent advising provided to the students by advisors for the co-op program.

It is a matter of concern to us that junior students are exposed to largely "teaching-only"

instructors (lecturer/lab-instructors), and sessional (part-time) instructors. The extent of the

School's use of full-time (non-researcher) teaching staff was strongly criticized by reviewers in

the previous external review. The situation has not improved, and the amount of undergraduate

teaching delivered through sessionals and lecturer/lab instructors is still too high in our opinion.

However, we do not see how to avoid the use of non-regular faculty in the current circumstances.

In general, the School needs to offer more sections of its courses, not fewer. This concern is not

intended to impugn the value or dedication of these instructors, some of whom are among the

most popular and effective in the School. Nevertheless contact between students and full-time

(research-engaged) faculty members is an important component of a University education, and

is a key part of what distinguishes a university education from other kinds of post-secondary

education programs.

The programs in computing for non-computing students are important and should be perma-

nently funded. The cancellation of evening sections of introductory courses is also regrettable.

Recommendation

2.2

A signifi

cant

increase in the total number of course sections offered by

the school is needeL The number of sections offered by part-time and

non-research

faculty

should be reduced as quickly as resources permit.

2.4 Co-op program

The Co-op program is popular with employers and students. It provides good experience for

students, and appears to be well managed. We talked to several co-op employers who were very

satisfied with the program and viewed the students as well prepared and competent.

2.5

Technical resources

The adequacy of the computing equipment provided for the undergraduate programs varies

from course to course. The platform for one course requires use of a computer system using

two levels of emulations, and this is very slow. The technical staff seem to be dedicated and

ingenious in keeping the systems advancing. Their morale seemed good. It is clear that there

is a continuing need for software and equipment replacement in this field. Ideally long-range

planning for yearly upgrades should be undertaken by the School. It would be better to reduce

the number of computing platforms supported by the technical staff. Students (and the School)

should receive credit for lab hours in those courses requiring heavy use of specialized supervised

computer labs. Unfortunately there seems to be no university centralized IT support and software

inventory.

Recommendation

2.3

Multi-year planning and budgeting for the School's equipment and soft-

ware needs should be

adoptecL

3 Graduate programs

The School has a healthy and active graduate program with a steady enrollment of approx-

imately 100 students (though this number is now increasing).

he students who graduate from

the program are well-placed, with approximately half of the Ph.D. students entering academic

positions after graduation. There was some concern expressed about the length of time it took

for M.Sc. students to complete their studies, although it was observed that this has improved

over the last few years. The median time is now less than eight semesters with an average of 8.8

semesters (just under three years). Previously the average completion time was three years.

our view the current level is still too high, and is out of line with programs of similar quality in

other Universities. In many places the M.Sc. is nominally a one-year or four semester program,

and actual completion times typically average under two years.

Recommendation 3.1

The School should take steps to reduce the completion time for M.Sc.

program.

In general, the students seem happy with the supervision they received and the quality of

courses in the graduate program. However, it was mentioned that the time that faculty had

available to interact with students was variable (from very little to substantial).

3.1 Structure and Organization of the Program

Courses in the School are offered at the 700 and 800 level and cover a broad range of topics

that primarily reflect the research interests of the faculty.

The M.Sc. program has two options: a thesis option that requires the completion of five

graduate courses and a thesis, and a course option that requires nine courses and a project. Most

students choose the thesis option. The workload for this program is slightly heavier than that of

most Canadian university programs in computing, which may account for the length of time it

takes to complete the program. The Ph.D. program has a breadth requirement that is satisfied by

taking seven courses covering three main theme areas (theory, systems and applications). This

requirement replaces the previously applied comprehensive examination. A major requirement

of this program is a thesis consisting of original research carried out under the direction of a

supervisory committee.

Students expressed concern that there were some difficult constraints placed on completing

their course work based on the requirements and the terms in which required courses were of-

fered. For example, there may be few or no systems courses offered in a given term. They

said this problem, which sometimes resulted in longer completion time for a degree, is improv-

ing. We noted that the students seemed to be quite happy with the current chair of the graduate

committee, Stella Atkins, and with the committee in general.

There has been some discussion of cross-numbering fourth year courses with graduate courses,

• where the graduate course would have additional requirements. This option is being considered

because of the current strain the School is under in terms of faculty teaching. While this approach

is obviously financially appealing, it clearly increases faculty workload and acts to decrease the

quality of the course component of the graduate program. Its use should be restricted to excep-

tional circumstances.

3.2

Recruiting

The School is recruiting high quality students. However, there is a concern that the number of

good Canadian students applying to the program is decreasing. Because of workload constraints

on faculty, they are not as pro-active in recruiting as they have been in some past years.

There are an impressive number of female graduate students in the program (approximately

30%). This is higher than in most Canadian computer science departments. The School encour-

ages women applicants and the retention of these students.

Concerns

Several concerns related to the graduate program were raised by graduate students and fac-

ulty.

• Graduate students have a perception that they are not valued members of the School. This

perception is primarily a result of the constitution recently put in place by the School,

which they feel limits the participation and voting rights of students on various committees

in the School. In particular, they are concerned about not having a voice on the appoint-

ments committee. On the other hand, The School's practice in this area is consistent with

that of most computer science departments in Canada.

• Graduate students expressed a sense of isolation on campus. They stated that there was

little opportunity for them to interact with other students or faculty outside of class or their

individual labs. Partly this is based on the geography of the campus; students generally

come to the university only to work as there are no nearby facilities for informal or social

gatherings. As well, they did not feel that there was a comfortable location within the

School for them to interact. We were told that there was a graduate lounge but that this

was not adequate for their needs.

• Some faculty members expressed concern that the university did not recognize the value of

faculty time spent on co-supervision of graduate students. They felt that this was somewhat

discouraging to inter-disciplinary and collaborative research.

• There does not appear to be an as much active interaction with researchers from outside

the university as we expected. In particular, there appeared to be too few seminars given

by visiting researchers.

• Although the total number of applications for the graduate program is healthy, the graduate

committee is concerned about the quantity of good applications from Canadian students.

• Graduate students also expressed concern about the lack of systems support for students in

some of the labs. (The amount of technical support varies significantly from lab to lab.)

• As the graduate enrollment increases, laboratory and office space is becoming a serious

concern.

Id -^ 

Recommendation

3.2

The School should attempt to make graduate students feel more valued

as members of the university community. This may involve increased communication, as well as

an understanding of their roles on various committees.

Recommendation

3.3

The School should put more resources and effort into bringing external

visitors into the School for seminars or longer-term visits.

Recommendation 3.4

Graduate students be encouraged to choose research topics as early as

possible in order to help decrease the overall time to complete a degree.

Suggestion:

The graduate committee review the requirements for the Masters program to

determine whether they are appropriate for this degree.

Suggestion:

The School look into whether there is some space available that would facilitate

improved interactions among graduate students, or whether the current space could be better

utilized.

Suggestion: A

space planning committee be set up to study and report on the effects of

is ?

increased graduate enrollments in terms of laboratory and office space.

4 Research

The School has an impressive research record. Almost all of the faculty members have

NSERC research grants (many above the average amount). There is also a reasonable amount

of other funding from industry and granting agencies. The majority of the active researchers

are working in the area of theory and artificial intelligence. Other strengths include databases,

programming languages, hardware and distributed computing. Previously, graphics was also a

major strength of the School but because of recent departures, this area is not as active as it once

was.

4.1 Research Funding

Most of the NSERC operating grants in the School are in the average to above average cat-

egory for the discipline. There are also a few people who are in the upper end (greater than

$40,000) range for these grants.

Other sources of research funding for the School include grants from the Science Council

of BC, Networks of Centers of Excellence (M.ITACS, IRIS/Precarn, TeleLearning), and NSERC

Strategic Program. Several faculty also receive industry funding from companies such as INfEL,

Hewlett-Packard and IBM. Overall we view the level of extra-mural research funding as very

high, representing evidence of the strong research strengths of the School.

4.2 CSS

The Center for System Sciences (CSS), which is directed by Brian Funt, provides research

infrastructure for members of the School (and others.) The center appears to provide adequate

network and technical support. One concern that was mentioned with respect to infrastructure is

that there exists some tension between CSS and Computing Services personnel. Another concern

was that there is an ongoing need for individual labs to provide some internal systems support.

CSS provides other useful services for the School, including support for visiting lecturers, re-

search grant preparation, publicity, prize nominations, editorial assistance and conference travel.

On the whole, this center offers a valuable service that goes beyond the infrastructure pro-

vided in most computing departments in Canada.

43 PIMS and MITACS

The School is heavily involved with two major institutes. The Pacific Institute for the Math-

ematical Sciences (PIMS) is an NSERC funded institute set up in western Canada to promote

mathematical sciences. About half of the School have some involvement in this institute and its

existence and success at Simon Fraser is in a large part due to the efforts of Arvind Gupta, who

holds the position of Deputy Director. Both PIMS and MITACS (the Mathematics of Information

Technology and Complex Systems NCE) have provided for increased cooperation between the

School and the Department of Mathematics. They have also raised the external reputation of the

School.

4.4 Concerns

A primary concern in research (as well as other areas) is the attraction and retention of good

faculty. This is particularly noticeable in the area of computer graphics, where up until recently

Simon Fraser had a leading group of researchers. This is not an uncommon problem: many

universities in Canada are currently experiencing difficulty in hiring and retaining faculty in key

areas such as graphics, software engineering and systems, where there is a great demand from

both industry and university for highly trained individuals.

Another concern is the balance of research areas. At the moment it appears that the areas

of theory and artificial intelligence are well served (with well over half of the faculty working

in one of these two areas), whereas other key areas such as systems, databases and software

engineering, are not so well served. Since these are currently areas that many graduate students

wish to work in, the few faculty that carry out research in these areas may be comparatively

overburdened with supervision.

There is also some lack of balance in the School with regards to seniority and research ex-

perience. At the moment there is only one faculty member at the level of Assistant Professor.

Because of the lack of young faculty, it may be difficult for the School to adjust to the high

demands that are occurring in this ever-changing field.

• The committee was surprised that there was not more interaction with researchers at the Uni-

versity of British Columbia. There are some joint NCE grants, but we think there are many more

opportunities for joint research, visiting speakers, etc. between the School and the computing

department at UBC.

Some faculty members expressed concern over the difficulty in attracting industry money. It

was suggested that this, in part, may be due to the geographic isolation (with respect to many

of Canada's larger companies, which are located in Ontario or Quebec) of the university. It

was also thought that the university did not encourage contract research, particularly since it is

difficult (costly) to buy out of teaching responsibilities, which may be necessary to carry out such

research.

Recommendation 4.1

There is a need for growth in the School. When considering new faculty

appointments, the School should consider those areas

of research which are currently under-

represented and in high demand from graduate students.

1/30

Faculty and Organization

The faculty members for the most part seem to respect one another and to work well to-

gether. We did encounter descriptions of some personality conflicts and some concerns about

gender equity were expressed. Overall faculty members seem to be content with the degree of

faculty participation in administration of the School. They seem to be committed to making sure

the School does well across a broad range of activities, research and graduate studies to under-

graduate education. As mentioned above, the School is highly ranked in research, and this is a

major accomplishment of its faculty members. The faculty seem to be proud of the quality and

flexibility of their undergraduate program. The committee structure seems to be sound and work-

ing well in terms of faculty participation, although concerns were expressed about the degree of

participation of students on the important committees.

The associate faculty members are interested and well able to contribute to the School, al-

though they expressed some concern about lost opportunities for more interdisciplinary studies

due to "walls between decanal units". They would value increased opportunities for supervision

of computer science graduate students.

Overall faculty morale is at an acceptable level but not as highly positive as it should be.

Several plausible reasons were advanced for this. Many faculty members expressed a concern

that the School is falling behind in comparison to other computer science departments across

the country. This is partly due to the School not hiring many new young faculty members. The

School had achieved a strong national reputation at the start of the nineties, having climbed over

the previous decade to a ranking at or near the top of the "second tier" in the words of the last

review. (The first tier consists of the much larger and longer established departments at Toronto

and Waterloo.) The climb was partly accomplished through an exceptionally good record of

recruitment of young faculty members. We believe the School is still ranked at or near the top of

the second tier, but clearly its rate of improvement has slowed relative to that of other Canadian

departments. External perception of trends for improvement is now focussed more on other

universities which are more aggressively recruiting outstanding young faculty members. The

School has gone from being "bottom-heavy" then (having a relatively large proportion of junior

faculty members), to having only one assistant professor today.

In recruiting new junior faculty members, the School must of course build on its strengths,

13I ?

but it is clear to us that a broader coverage of some key areas would be most helpful. These

areas include the operating systems, software, databases, graphics, and other "systems" areas.

We think the School might benefit somewhat from a shift in balance of areas in these directions.

However significant opportunities to strengthen the School in other, less applied areas should

not be completely ignored. Another issue involved in faculty recruitment is the question of lab

space. There is a severe space shortage in the Faculty as a whole, and very careful planning for

adjusting space needs will be required to bring in new research faculty members.

There are also some morale issues caused by a perception by some faculty members that the

administration does not seem to fully appreciate the quality of the School's efforts and achieve-

ments, This is coupled with frustration caused by the School's inability to cope with high student

demand for its undergraduate programs. Some faculty members feel that the School's concerns

about enrollment pressures are not viewed as sufficiently grave by the senior administration.

Whatever the truth of this, it is clear to us that if the School is to maintain its current ranking

among Canadian computer science departments, then both the School and the administration

• must work more effectively together to deal successfully with its problems. In our view, the

principal problems are student enrollments and faculty recruitment and retention. The faculty

retention issue is being exacerbated by the heavy workload, by the salary cap, and by the the fact

that there are lots of opportunities elsewhere for faculty members in this area.

We found very broad, in fact near unanimous, support for the current chair of the School.

Even professors who were unhappy with their own merit evaluation or with some other decision,

praised the chair for his collegial approach and expressed hope he would accept a second term.

The preparation of the School's new constitution has created some bad feelings by specifying

somewhat less student participation than may have previously existed informally. The prepara-

tion of the constitution nevertheless represents a very significant effort which should benefit the

School.

There was some concern by some faculty members about the formulas and evaluation criteria

used for merit evaluations. Some felt the criteria did not provide sufficient encouragement for

working with industry. We recommend (as suggested by the chair) that the faculty members meet

to discuss these issues in general. We recommend they consider the role in merit adjustments

of contributions in industrial consulting and contract research, although we see little need for

change in weight We think the existing criteria

provide a good starting point for this discussion.

Recommendation 5.1

Criteria for merit evaluation, promotion and tenure should be developed

collegially by the School and communicated clearly to faculty members.

6 Staff and Facifities

The administrative staff appear to be a competent and well-organized group. However, given

the size of the School, the amount of support is on the low side. This is evident in several

respects: each staff member has a significant work load; there is no backup when someone goes

on holidays; there is no receptionist (this role is rotated among staff who already have a full

agenda); and the co-ordinator of academic programs and services is on leave (this may be the

result of the stress of being overworked). In terms of administrative staff resources, there is a

lot of stress and clearly some shortage of essential resources. The current half advising position

should be made permanent.

The shortage of administrative staff puts an added burden on faculty to carry out tasks (such

as photocopying, routine secretarial work, etc.) that would normally be handled by this group.

This is certainly not an efficient use of faculty time. It is important that the School should

support its faculty members to pursue contract and grant research by providing a high degree of

staff resources for the administrative management of these contracts and grants.

The systems staff and computing facilities appeared to be adequate for the current needs of

the School. However, with the ongoing increases in enrollment, the undergraduate labs are in

need of expansion. As well, the increased enrollment implies additional sessional instructors

who put added burden on the technical staff (particularly with regards to instruction). There is a

serious lack of training resources for technical staff.

Recommendation 6.1

A review of the current tasks and expectations for the administrative staff

should be carried out and budget made available for additional staff as required.

Recommendation 6.2

The level oftrainingfor technical staff be considered and an appropriate

budget be made available for keeping the staff up-to-date on equipment and software.

Suggestion:

The ranking of technical staff in the School be examined with respect to similar

positions in computing services to ensure equity

V33

for the staff.

Suggestion:

A centralized (university-wide) inventory for software licenses be set up to min-

imize costs for the School and other units.

It is a matter of concern to the School that the degree of administrative complexity of the

School is not fully recognized by the University. The operation of the School is administratively

complex because of several factors, including the large numbers of enrollments and the high

degree of funded research activity. In addition to these, there are large joint programs such as

those with business, there are large service courses operated for students in other Schools, the

programs all require the operation of labs with equipment and technical staff, and there is an

unusual level of advising needed, including advising for the co-op programs.

- -

7 Gender and Equity Issues

The School currently has three female faculty members and a healthy percentage of female

graduate students. Although gender equity was not considered a problem for most of the people

• who were interviewed in the review, there were comments that suggested that individuals (in

these cases female) did feel that they have experienced some unfair treatment. One particular

concern was with the hiring equity policy. The membership of the hiring committee has recently

been changed to exclude the membership of voting graduate students. This was felt by some to

reduce chances for hiring females. In addition, some incidents of explicitly sexist remarks were

reported.

It was expressed by one individual that tolerance, diversity and individuality used to be a

unique strength of the School, and that there has been a radical change away from this in the

last decade. It was also mentioned that the student body is now polarized, where most of the

non-Canadians are from only one part of the world.

Suggestion:

The School should consider the possibility of training in gender issues and equity

for those individuals who sit on hiring or promotion committees. (In some universities, such as

Queen's, such training is mandatory.)

There is a gender issues committee which seems to be useful and effective. The goal of

this committee is to recognize and lift barriers to equity. Concern was expressed that there is a

perception that this is light work, or less important than other kinds of School committee service.

40 ?

In our view this work should be highly valued by the School.

Recommendation

7.1

Efforts

to promote equity and fairness within the School should be more

recognized, encouraged and appreciated.

The School can be proud of its equity record in terms of numbers of female students; the ratio

is significantly higher than that of most Canadian computer science departments. As mentioned

above we did hear some anecdotal evidence of intolerant remarks. Difficulties in overcoming

gender bias in a recent faculty hiring case were referred to by several people. While the School's

committee chairs and those in senior positions appear to us to be sensitive to these issues and

well able to ensure they are taken seriously, there was enough mentioned to cause us to wonder

if there may be problems in this area after all. We believe that the School's members must work

on this issue themselves.

8 Library

In general, the library facilities appear to meet the demands of the School. Students (par-

are growing more dependent on the internet for resources the

The one concern expressed was that of the rising costs of journals in the information technol-

ogy area.

9 External Linkages and

Plinning

9.1 University Administration

As discussed in Section Two, the current undergraduate enrollment problems were described

by some faculty members in the School as posing a "grow/no grow" dilemma: should the School

try to accommodate the student demand by increasing the number of faculty and technical re-

sources needed, or should the School act to reduce the number of students instead, in order to

provide an appropriate learning environment within existing resources? Both the School and

the University Administration will have to work together to address the enrollment problems.

They must together deal with not one but two enrollment problems. The first is the "bulge" in

enrollments caused by lowering the numbers required for direct entry two years ago; the second

is the overall long-term student demand for computing science programs. The problems caused

by the bulge cannot be ignored, even if cutoffs for direct entry are raised to allow the bulge to

pass through the system, after which enrollments return to the status quo ante. As a long-term

strategy, we do not believe that it is prudent for the University to ignore the level of demand

for courses in Computing Science, or for the administration to view the situation as roughly

equiv1ent to that in other Schools and Departments which also may have some unsatisfied stu-

dent demand. In fact, we believe that in Computer Science, the level of unsatisfied demand and

the level of student dissatisfaction due to unsatisfied demand in Computing Science is excep-

tional. This exceptional level of demand is consistent with patterns elsewhere in the Province

and throughout North America. This is an issue that is currently being addressed by programs

such as ATOP in Ontario, where universities are receiving separate financial support from the

provincial government to try and deal with the rapidly expanding needs of computing programs.

In our view the appropriate approach to the "grow/no grow" question is for the Adminis-

tration and the School to jointly develop plans which address both sides of the issue, by doing

• some growing and also adding some additional enrollment restrictions and controls. There must

be an increase in resources to accommodate some of the demand. The University's reputation

may suffer if doesn't handle student demand properly. Furthermore, the strength of the depart-

ment may be diminished if quality suffers, and faculty morale problems will lead to additional

problems in faculty recruitment and retention.

10 Conclusion

In considering the history of Computing Science at Simon Fraser University, we observe that

the School became an unusually strong department in terms of national ranking during a time

(late seventies and eighties) when it was very difficult to build a first-rate computer science

department, due primarily to a national shortage of computer science faculty members. Since

then the University's commitment to having a top-ranked computing science department may

have waned somewhat. But the School is still strong and well-placed to renew its advance.

The School has many strengths, based on the quality of its people. It has a reputation for

quality and flexibility in its programs, and a high level of research activity. Although there were

internal conflicts a few years ago, the current administration (and in particular the Department

"3'

Chair, Jim Delgrande) have gone a long way in bringing the School back to a point where it could

flourish given resources for change and growth.

This is a time when the information technology industry is demanding increased enrollments

in computing programs. It is also a time when there are many research incentives for faculty

members in computing. In our opinion, if Simon Fraser identifies continued strength in Com-

puting Science as one of its priorities, the University has the opportunity to have a School of

Computing Science which continues to be nationally recognized as a leader.

Authors' email addresses:

dymond@cs.yorku.ca

janice @cs.queensu.ca

031 ?