Grounding Student Retention and Recruitment in Computer Science Programs in Sound Research Methodology and Data:

a CSU System-wide Workshop

October 24, 2003

Tyson Henry, Ph.D., Assistant Professor

Department of Computer Science, CSU ChicoCSU, Chico

530-898-5709 (office), 530-898-5995 (fax), tyson@ecst.csuchico.edu

Hilary Holz, Ph.D., Assistant Professor

Department of Mathematics and Computer Science, CSU Hayward

510-885-3458 (office), 510-885-4169 (fax), hholz@csuhayward.edu

Clarke Steinback, Ph.D., Assistant Professor

Department of Computer Science, CSU ChicoCSU, Chico

530-898-5418 (office), 530-898-5995 (fax), ranger@ecst.csuchico.edu

Initiative Focus

While student retention and recruitment is a significant problem in Computer Science (CS), little formal research has been done on the problem. At CSU Chico, as in many CS programs, almost half the students fail the first major course, and another half fail the second course. Yet only five six studies journal articles have been published in the last twenty years on student retention and recruitment specifically in CS, and of which four of thosehave focused on special populations. We propose to educate CSU computer science faculty on the current student retention and recruitment research, and to start a dialogue between the departments. This proposal provides a detailed outline for a one- day workshop on CS student retention and recruitment for CS faculty. 

Our objectives are to:

1. Facilitate the involvement of CS faculty in research on CS retention and recruitment (R&R):
1. Review CS Educational Research Design
2. Review the current research on R&R
2. Collect campus-specific data
1. Success stories
2. Barriers to implementation
3. Program specific decision points
3. Facilitate collaborative research projects on CS R&R
1. Discover similar needs and interests
2. Enable collaboration between campuses with similar needs and interests
4. Facilitate the start of a system-wide dialog on CS R&R
5. Address the specific problem of under represented student groups

We are requesting XXXX UPDATE THIS XXXXX $44165531. This money will be used to pay for the participants’ travel expenses and for printing workshop material.  Facilities costs and clerical support will be donated by CSU Hayward’s College of Science.

Participating Campuses: Bakersfield, Channel Islands, CSU ChicoChico, Dominguez Hills, Fullerton, Hayward, Humboldt, Sacramento, and Sonoma.

1. PROPOSAL NARRATIVE

1.A. Why do CS faculty need to do research on we need to ground student retention and recruitment in CS in sound research methodology and dataand how does that need relate to curriculum and instruction?

Having reliable information on which to base their student retention and recruitment (R&R) and retention techniques efforts would be effective with their target populations would allowenable CSU computer science programs to use resources wisely. Unfortunately, such information does not exist. A search of the education research database ERIC (1984-present) using the following descriptors: (School-Holding-Power or Student-Recruitment) and (college* or universit* or higher educat*) and computer science yielded only six journal articles, four of which focused on special populations. In generalAs a result, decisions concerning techniques used in student retention and recruitmentR&R are based on three sources: research on R&R in the sciences in general, research on student retention and recruitmentR&R in CS in special populations such as women and minorities;, research on student retention and recruitment in sciences in gener,al; and anecdotal information.

The difficulty with relying on research on R&R in sciences in general or on research on R&R in CS in special populations is that recent in-depth studies such as the WECE report show that techniques for female R&R which work in other STEM (science, technology, engineering, and math) fields do not, in general, work in computer science. [1] As techniques developed by working on the STEM fields as a whole have generalized to a wide variety of other STEM fields, the failure of the same techniques to generalize to CS indicates extreme caution in assuming that R&R techniques will generalize in any dimension when working in CS. In addition, progress has been made in increasing the role and representation of women in literally every other field studied within STEM in the last twenty years, while in CS, the percentage of undergraduate degrees and PhDs awarded to women has actually decreased. [2]

We have come to the conclusion that the solution to R&R in CS will require intimate knowledge of the CS educational process combined with rigorous educational research design to take advantage of that knowledge. Unfortunately, few CS faculty have expertise in education research, as CS education is not a well studied topic.  Neither IEEE nor ACM have a refereed journal dedicated to Computer Science education.  As a result, the vast majority of CS education research is done in Europe. CSU faculty deserve the opportunity to use their experience as a basis for solid education research, with commensurate improvements in curriculum and instruction. Retention and recruitment of students is a vital area of expertise for any academic program, and a natural research focus for CS education.

1.B. Our approach: skills development and collaboration via a workshop

We propose a one-day workshop evenly balanced between skills development, and collaborative brainstorming and data collection to start addressing recruitment and retention issues using sound research methodology. A proposed agenda for the workshop is given in Figure 1. Note that the speakers listed are tentative. .

The format of the workshop reflects this balance: each of the four principle sessions has a tutorial on one of our focus topics, followed by breakout sessions in which participants will collaborate on a question relating the topic to a departmental or system-wide concern. Finally, the participants reconvene to discuss the results of the breakout sessions. The workshop organizers will collate the results of the breakout sessions into the take-home products listed with each session for participants to put into immediate use.  After the workshop, the organizers will be responsible for facilitating the completion of the long-term products described in each session.

After the workshop, the organizers will analyze the results of the breakout sessions in combination with demographic data on each participating campus for dissemination via a journal article, preferably in Computer Science Education.

Lunch BoF format

WiFi Website for ongoing collaboration and communication after the workshop

Dissemination of results

To rest of world:

Publishing data collected in Computer Science Education

website mentioned above for continuing project

run session on topic at SigCSE 2005

To CSU programs: Go to chairs meeting, present results

It is our intention to use the results of this workshop to seek funding from outside sources to continue our research in future years. The Computing Research Association, the Sloan Foundation, and the National Science Foundation’s directorate of Education and Human Resources all have funding programs with guidelines our research would meet.

C. Existing work

Working together, we have identified key issues in recruitment and retention to be addressed at the initial workshop.

Figure 1: Workshop Agenda: All speakers are tentative

At lunch, the participants will be provided with materials to discuss and record experiences with R&R techniques in their departments. Then, a facilitated discussion will be held of anecdotes, successful and otherwise.  This technique has been used at SigCSE, the Association for Computing Machinery’s Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (ACM SIGCSE), quite effectively in recent years.

After the workshop, the organizers intend to analyze the results of the breakout sessions in combination with demographic data on each participating campus and publish the results. We realize that the visibility of computer science education research is poor at best. Therefore, we have dissemination plans for CS faculty, for CSU CS chairs, and for CS education researchers.

Agenda

Breakfast (Coffee, pastries, etc…) 8:30 – 9:00

Introduction: Motivation & Focus 9:00 – 9:30

9:40 – 10:50CatherineProfessorTeacher EducationRefining most popular ideas for collaborative endeavors

Takehome product: Collaboration list

Long term product: Developed designs for researching R&RSession XX: What is known to workT 11:00 – 12:10

Tutorial: surveys lit and discusses Research Experiences Mentoring

Speaker: Sheila Humphries, Assoc. Dean of Engineering, UC Berkeley

Breakout: what are the barriers to implementing the above at your institution?

Reconvene: any success stories on overcoming those barriers?

takehome products: list of barriers encountered, success stories

long term product: barriers by demographics

Session XX: Crash course on modern education research (Kelly & Lesh)

Tutorial: New methods for education research in Math & Science (Kelly & Lesh)

Speaker: Kate Reed, Assist Prof of Math Ed, CSU Hayward

Breakout: what could you do in this coming year to lea

Lunch (Table Topic: What have you found to work and why?) 12:30 – 1:45

Takehome product: compiled anecdotes

Long term product: breakdown of successful techniques by demographics

Session 3: Special Focus: Women & Minorities 2:00 – 3:10

Tutorial: Retention and recruitment of women and minorities in CS

Speaker: Director of MSEIP program at SFSU

Breakout: Did you hear any ideas you could implement for little or no cost?

Reconvene: Do you think there might be cultural barriers to implementing the ideas from the breakout session?

Takehome product: List of low or no-cost ways to improve R&R of women and minorities

Long term product: Results of Sessions 2, 3, and the lunch conversations compiled and analyzed by demographics – are there particular concerns that seem to track with student demographics?

Session 4: Collecting Finely Structured Data 3:20 – 4:30

Tutorial: Finely Structured Data and Collection Techniques

Speaker: Ilene Rockman, CSU Chancellor’s Office

Breakout: What are your students’ decision points?

Reconvene: CSU-specific issues and opportunities

Takehome product: student tracking ideas and techniques

Long term product: technical framework for collaborative student tracking

Wrap-up (Chocolate, coffee, and critique) 4:40 – 5:00

assessment of effectiveness of workshop (survey)

Picking a focus for next year: what are our priorities?

suggestions for individual sessions for next year

o      We are constructing a website for the workshop which will serve as an archive and as an ongoing information and collaboration center for workshop participants and, potentially, for other interested parties.

o      We are proposing a Birds of a Feather session at SigCSE 2004 on our topic, with the intention of proposing a paper session at SigCSE 2005.

o      We will present the results of the workshop at the 2004 CSU CS chairs meeting.

o      We will submit our results as a journal article, e.g., to Computer Science Education.

Finally, it is our intention to use the results of this workshop to seek funding from outside sources to continue our research in future years. The Sloan Foundation and the National Science Foundation’s directorate of Education and Human Resources both have funding programs with guidelines for which our research is well matched.

1.C. Existing work

While R&R in CS programs is routinely discussed at the CS Chairs meeting each year, none of the published research has been done at a CSU. If CS R&R were a field with a substantial body of published results to rely on, this phenomenon would be of less concern. Both Drs. Henry and Holz have written grant proposals that have attracted the attention of grant funders and are in the process of developing suggested connections and skills.

1.D. Logistics

CSU Hayward’s College of Science is donating clerical support and the use of its facilities (see attached statement of support). The College of Science routinely hosts much larger and more complex events; e.g., the Alameda County Collaborative for Learning and Instruction in Mathematics (http://acclaim.csuhayward.edu/), which runs sessions with a similar breakout session/reconvene format on a regular basis.

The Oakland airport is less than ten miles from CSUH, and La Quinta Hotel will pick up guests at the airport and drive them to campus at no cost. Thus the only transportation costs necessary are airfare for faculty traveling from campuses more than 200 miles away and mileage for faculty traveling from campuses less than 200 miles away.

As the workshop runs a very full day, 8:30 am to 5 pm, we budgeted for one night’s stay at La Quinta for faculty from campuses more than 200 miles away.

Since it is possible that we might have greater interest than we have anticipated, we will ask faculty from campuses which have not given us a commitment at the time of our proposal application to complete a brief application to attend the workshop. Preference will be given to faculty from CS programs over CIS programs, and to one faculty member per campus before a second faculty member would be allowed to attend from a campus.

1.E. Objectives

Our objectives are to:

1.     Facilitate the involvement of CS faculty in research on CS R&R:

a.     Review CS Educational Research Design, as many CS faculty are not experienced in educational research design.

b.     Review the current research on R&R

2.     Collect campus-specific data

a.     We intend to collect two types of campus-specific success stories: techniques that particular departments felt were helpful, and stories about ways in which departments overcame barriers to implementing those techniques.

b.     Barriers to implementation

c.     Program decision points. CS programs vary quite a lot, and thus students must make decisions at different times in the program.

3.     Facilitate collaborative research projects on CS R&R

a.     Discover similar needs and interests

b.     Enable collaboration between campuses with similar needs and interests

4.     Facilitate the start of a system-wide dialog on CS R&R

5.     Address the specific problem of under represented student groups

1.F. Evaluation

At the end of our workshop, we will conduct a wrap-up session to provide a less structured evaluation tool, and a vehicle for the participants to identify the principle issues they would like to see addressed in next year’s workshop.

We will pass out a survey covering our objectives at the beginning of the wrap-up session to give the participants time to fill out the survey during the session. On the workshop website, we plan to provide a feedback form for comments, suggestions, and criticisms of the workshop.

Feedback from participants will be used to develop a follow-up survey that we will send out to the workshop participants. The follow-up survey is important as it will address whether workshop participants have implemented ideas from the workshop and pursued collaboration opportunities. As the final report on the project is due by June 30, 2004, we will not be able to include information on whether the workshop has had an effect on student retention or recruitment in CSU CS programs. If we are successful in getting funding in subsequent years, the research pursued by workshop participants and CAPR data can be used to measure the effect of the workshop.

1.G. References

1.     Goodman, Irene, et. al. (2002). “Final Report of the Women’s Experiences in College Engineering (WECE) Project.” NSF REC 9725521, Sloan Foundation 96-10-16, Goodman Research Group, Inc., Cambridge, MA.

2.     NSF Division of Science Resources Statistics (2000b). “Women, Minorities, and Persons with Disabilities in Science and Engineering: 2000.” NSF 00-327.  National Science Foundation, Arlington, Virginia. http://www.nsf.gov/sbe/srs/nsf00327/start.htm

2. TIMELINE

Figure 2: Proposed Timeline

3. BUDGET

We are requesting $5531.  Figure 3 shows the total requested funds.  We have requested travel for the 12 participants who have indicated interest.  We are also requesting for money to cover the travel expenses of XXXXX WHAT NUMBER DO WE WANT HERE five XXXXXXX additional5 additional participants.  Figure 4 shows  the estimated travel costs based on the participant’s home campus.  For the additional participants, we used $270, the average of the travel costs from all campuses.  Participants whose home campus is within 200 miles will be expected to drive.  Participants whose home campus is in the Bay Area will not be reimbursed for hotel or meals. Parking at the hotel and the University is free.  The hotel offers a free shuttle service to the Oakland Airport.

Airfares are calculated from the major airport closest to the participant’s home campus.  In most cases, they are based on Southwest Airline’s most available fares.  Fares for cities not serviced by Southwest Airlines were found using expedia.com. 

Breakfast, lunch, and snack will be provided during the workshop.

Planned Participants Travel (12)

Figure 3: Proposal Budget

Figure 4: Estimated Travel Cost by Participant’s Campus

4. QUALIFICATIONS OF PROJECT COORDINATORS

Dr. Holz’s research area is CS education, with a particular focus on increasing the representation of non-traditional students in the computer science research community. She runs an active research lab at CSU Hayward, and regularly published with her students.  She also has significant experience teaching teachers to teach.  Recently she developed a new course on Teaching University Computer Science at CSU Hayward.

Dr. Steinback has a strong understanding of the issues of student retention in computer science programs having taught introductory courses and serving as the undergraduate advisor at CSU, Chico.  He has considerable experience organizing events.  For three years he was the site directory for the ACM International Collegiate Programming Contest, which brought over 100 participants to the CSU ChicoCSU, Chico campus.  He has also been a major contributor to the organization and running of his department’s annual community college articulation meeting.

Dr. Henry has taught the second programming course (often called CS2) many times over the past 10 years.  He has worked with his University’s Mathematics, Engineering, and Science Achievement (MESA) Program to secure external funding to address retention problems of underrepresented Computer Science majors.  This November he is invited to attend Hewlett Packard’s Symposium on Student Retention.

5. ADHERENCE TO CAMPUS EXTERNAL FUNDING REQUIREMENTS

CSU, Chico will serve as the primary campus.  This proposal has been reviewed by the CSU, Chico Office of Sponsored Programs, and has been approved by the appropriate campus authorities.

One of the project coordinators is from CSU, Hayward.  We have spoken with Vicky Jensen in the CSU, Hayward’s Office of Research and Sponsored Projects. Since CSU, Chico is the primary campus, she said that CSU, Hayward would not have to review the proposal.

6. INDICATION OF COMMITMENT TO PARTICIPATE

On October 9, 2003, three Computer Science Department Chairs responded to an e-mail soliciting interest in a retention workshop.  Each responded via e-mail:

I am interested in attending the retention symposium, but not hosting it.

Huaqing Wang, Professor & Chair

Department of Computer Science

California State University, Bakersfield

Since our department has student retention problem, I am very interested in participating and contributing time and efforts.

Mohsen Beheshti, Chair

Computer Science Department

Cal. State Univ. Dominquez Hills

I'd be interested in attending a retention symposium, because we are now actively reaching out to populations for whom retention might be a problem.

Ann Burrough, Chair

Computing Science Department

Humboldt State

As luck would have it, the CSU Computer Science Department Chairs meeting was on Friday October 24.  We created a flyer about our workshop and sent it with our Department Chairs to the meeting.  They announce the workshop and asked for interested participants.  The following Chairs indicated they or someone in their department would most likely be interested.

George Ledin Jr., Chair

Department of Computer Science

Sonoma State University

Don Warner, Chair

Department of Computer Science

Cal. State Univ. Sacramento

Demitrios Michalopoulos, Chair

Department of Computer Science

Cal. State Univ. Fullerton

Ivona Grzegorczyk, Chair

William Wolf

Department of Computer Science

Cal. State Univ. Channel Islands

7.  LETTERS OF SUPPORT FROM COLLEGE DEANS

October 24, 2003

CSU Institute for Teaching and Learning

Dear Sir or Madam,

The Department of Mathematics and Computer Science, the College of Science, and California State University, Hayward, wish to express their support for the proposal of Drs Henry, Holz and Steinback entitled, "Grounding Student Retention and Recruitment in Computer Science Programs in Sound Research Methodology and Data: a CSU System-wide Workshop."

CSU Hayward has a large and diverse Computer Science program for over a decade, with a thousand majors in the undergraduate and graduate programs in the 2002-2003 academic year. Our Computer Science Program is two-thirds female, and we retain and graduate our female students at a slightly higher rate than that of male. We have seen a drop of twenty-five percent in our enrollment this year, the first drop in a decade. It is my understanding what we are experiencing is not unique to Hayward. There are reports of drop of as high as fifty percent at some CSU campuses making the proposed workshop a very timely effort in seeking a collective solution to a common problem.

In this time of shrinking budgets and a faltering economy, the efficient use of our retention and recruitment resources is paramount. As the mission of the CSU is education, taking the forefront on computer science education research is only a natural step, and funding a pilot project that seems likely to lead to outside funding a wise step.

The College of Science is happy to facilitate the event with logistical, clerical and general support.

Yours Sincerely,

Michael Leung, 

Dean, College of Science

CSU Hayward

                                                                                                October 24, 2003

To:                  California State University Institute for

                        Teaching and Learning

From:             Kenneth N. Derucher, Dean

                        College of Engineering, Computer

                             Science, and Technology

Subject:         Proposal

I am in support of the proposal entitled “Grounding Student Retention and Recruitment in Computer Science Programs in South Research Methodology and Data:  A CSU Systemwide Workshop” authored by CSU, Chico and CSU, Hayward.

The proposal deals with a very serious problem of retention in the field of Computer Science for approximately half of the students fail their first course and another half fails their second course.  This major problem needs to be addressed and this proposal does just that and does it with the help and assistance of the Universities within the system.  Thereby, we all gain as we attempt to resolve this issue.

The proposal is well written, well thought out, and will lead to real solutions for the success of our students (traditional and non-traditional).

Retention is a key issue for our College as it is for others.  Many retention methods work and many do not.  We need to share a common goal to identify what does work and what does not.  Together we can solve this issue and do so in a cost effective manner.

I highly recommend this study.