CS 280 in Winter 2022

Meetings

Office Hours and Semester Schedule

Schedule

Times Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri
00:00-08:30
08:30-09:00
09:00-09:30
09:30-10:00
10:00-10:30 CS-733
DHH URC
Office CS-733
DHH URC
Office
10:30-11:00
11:00-11:30
11:30-12:00
12:00-12:30
12:30-13:00
13:00-13:30
13:30-14:00
14:00-14:30
14:30-15:00
15:00-15:30
15:30-16:00
16:00-16:30
16:30-17:00
17:00-17:30
17:30-23:59

Topics

Topics and Learning Outcomes for the Knowledge Units, within the Knowledge Areas, explored in this course are based on the ACM/IEEE Curriculum Guidelines for Undergraduate Degree Programs in Computer Science (2013) report, a version of which is available in HTML on this website . That report associates one of three levels of mastery with each Learning Outcome. The mastery levels are defined as:

  • Familiarity: The student understands what a concept is or what it means. This level of mastery concerns a basic awareness of a concept as opposed to expecting real facility with its application. It provides an answer to the question “What do you know about this?”
  • Usage: The student is able to use or apply a concept in a concrete way. Using a concept may include, for example, appropriately using a specific concept in a program, using a particular proof technique, or performing a particular analysis. It provides an answer to the question “What do you know how to do?”
  • Assessment: The student is able to consider a concept from multiple viewpoints and/or justify the selection of a particular approach to solve a problem. This level of mastery implies more than using a concept; it involves the ability to select an appropriate approach from understood alternatives. It provides an answer to the question “Why would you do that?”

Topics and Learning Outcomes with:

  • 2 stars ( ★ ★ ) appear in the CS2013 report as Core-Tier1
  • 1 star ( ★ ) appear in the CS2013 report as Core-Tier2
  • 0 stars appear in the CS2013 report as Elective
  • grey text are not covered in this course offering

SP / Social Context

Topics
    Learning Outcomes

      SP / Analytical Tools

      Topics
        Learning Outcomes

          SP / Professional Ethics

          Topics
            Learning Outcomes

              SP / Intellectual Property

              Topics
                Learning Outcomes

                  SP / Privacy and Civil Liberties

                  Topics
                    Learning Outcomes

                      SP / Professional Communication

                      Topics
                        Learning Outcomes

                          HCI / Foundations

                          Topics
                            Learning Outcomes

                              HCI / Designing Interaction

                              Topics
                                Learning Outcomes

                                  SP / Sustainability

                                  Topics
                                    Learning Outcomes

                                      Assignments

                                      Project Proposal ()

                                      Description

                                      The project can be done individually or in a small group (of up to 4). If you choose to work in a group, list all the group members on the proposal near the top (so that you can be put into a project group together) – only 1 copy of the proposal needs to be submitted. If your project changes after the proposal is submitted, please keep me informed (the goal of the proposal is for you to plan so that changes won’t be necessary).

                                      You may choose what you will do for the project and that will depend on whether you are working individually or in a group. It must deal with class themes in some way, and I am open to your ideas about how you will do it. Some possibilities include:

                                      • Research Paper
                                      • Book Review

                                      Start with a careful and critical reading of your chosen book. Describe, analyze, and evaluate your book as well as provide evidence to support your conclusions. Identify the key arguments of the book and how well the author supports them. Some questions to consider:

                                      • How and what does this work help us to understand about an issue?
                                      • What types of evidence does the author draw on to support their argument?
                                      • Does the book do what the author claims that it will do?
                                      • Are there other types of evidence that the author fails to acknowledge or ignores?
                                      • Is there a theoretical perspective from which the author writes?
                                      • How is this book similar to or different from other books on the topic? Why are they similar or different?
                                      • Are you convinced by the book? Why or why not?

                                      An appropriate structure will include an introduction that provides: identification of the book, author, and any essential historical background needed for context; and a clear and concise evaluation of the book that includes its main argument and its strengths and weaknesses. After the introduction, provide a brief summary or overview of the book. Identify the essential arguments of the book and briefly summarize them. Next will come the evaluation and analysis that contains the bulk of your review where you explain and develop the evaluation made in the introduction. Provide evidence. Finally, conclude with a concise summation of your review.

                                      • Wikipedia article (create new or add to existing)
                                      • Create and promote some online content (video [which could be a recording of a presentation with narration], podcast, blog)
                                      • Picture Yourself as a Computing Professional

                                      Identify and discuss role models for your life as a computing professional. Choose 3 computing professional role models (from the present or past) and write about each one. Include a picture of each, if possible. Reflect on how they inspire you with respect to the Codes of Ethics (including https://ethics.acm.org/) that we are examining in class.

                                      • Discuss your contributions to an open source project (on github, for example)
                                      • Write some code to test an idea
                                      Contents and Format of the Proposal

                                      To match the rubric below, use the following headings.

                                      Topic

                                      Describe your topic and how it relates to class. The list of topics and learning outcomes for this semester may be of help. Choose a topic that is new to you (that you haven’t done in your blog entry). If the general topic is similar, please indicate how you will treat it differently, such as from a different perspective.

                                      Deliverable and Rationale

                                      Choose the form in which you will deliver your project. Explain why you are choosing that particular deliverable and explain why it is appropriate for a group or an individual to realize it.

                                      Tentative Plan

                                      Provide a plan, with some milestones, for realizing your chosen deliverable. This plan may look like an outline of what you expect to include. If you are doing this with a group, make clear how each group member will participate in the final deliverable.

                                      Submission
                                      • submit a well-formatted pdf document on UR Courses
                                      • target length: 1-2 pages
                                      Grading
                                      Grade penalties will be applied in the following situations for assignment submissions:
                                      • on time but the written instructions for the submission were not followed: deduct 10% of the earned grade
                                      • late (but within 48 hours of the due date and time): deduct 10% of the earned grade
                                      • late by more than 48 hours: deduct 20% of the earned grade
                                      • academic dishonesty: deduct 40% of the earned grade

                                      This assignment is worth 5 marks, according to the following rubric:

                                      Rubric

                                      DePaul Univerity’s Center for Teaching and Learning has a useful resource describing the process of creating rubrics. Your comments about the following rubric are welcome via email

                                      Criterion and Weight Exemplary Sufficient Developing Needs Improvement
                                      Topic (1) Topic actively engages an important issue related to class Topic engages an important issue related to class Topic somewhat engages an important issue related to class Topic does not engage an important issue related to class
                                      Deliverable and Rationale (2) Intended deliverable is appropriate and imaginative. Rationale for approach is clear and well-formed Intended deliverable is appropriate. Rationale for approach is reasonable Intended deliverable is somewhat appropriate. Rationale for approach is mostly unclear and not well-formed Intended deliverable is not appropriate. Rationale for approach is not clear
                                      Tentative Plan (2) Ambitious and thorough Reasonably thorough Somewhat thorough Not thorough
                                      Calculator
                                      Rubric Criteria
                                      Penalties
                                      Copy Output to Clipboard

                                      Blog Entry ()

                                      Description

                                      Blogs (short for weblogs) have become an important means of expression in the information society. Personal blog posts are discrete, often informal, diary-style commentaries written by an individual.

                                      Prepare and submit a blog post that deals with a course-related topic that is currently, or was recently, in the news.

                                      The list of knowledge units also includes learning outcomes associated with the topics. If it is helpful, you may consider those learning outcomes as suggestions about how to approach your topic.

                                      Find a personal connection to the topic. You may, for example, evaluate the (consideration of) ethical and social tradeoffs in a technical decision or analyse the role of computer professionals in a global computing issue.

                                      Identify multiple (4-8) reputable online sources to reference in support of your topic. References are to be included as hyperlinks within the post, close to the text that makes the reference. They should also be clearly included in plain text at the end of your work. Also at the end of your work, answer the following questions about each source:

                                      1. Who is the author?
                                      2. Who is the publisher?
                                      3. What is the purpose or prespective of the content?
                                      4. Is the information provided by the source timely and relevant?
                                      5. How does this source compare to others?

                                      From Nielsen and Morkes, here are some ways to write for the web:

                                      Conventional Guidelines for Good Writing are Good

                                      Conventional guidelines include carefully organizing the information, using words and categories that make sense to the audience, using topic sentences, limiting each paragraph to one main idea, and providing the right amount of information.

                                      Text Should be Scannable

                                      Scanning can save users time. Most people are likely to approach unfamiliar Web text by trying to scan it before reading it. Elements that enhance scanning include headings, large type, bold text, highlighted text, bulleted lists, graphics, captions, and topic sentences.

                                      Text Should be Concise

                                      Consistent with users’ desire to get information quickly is their preference for short text.

                                      Users Like Summaries and the Inverted Pyramid Style

                                      Web writing that presents news, summaries, and conclusions up front is useful and saves time. A news story written in the inverted pyramid style (in which news and conclusions are presented first, followed by details and background information), are well-received.

                                      Hypertext is Well-Liked

                                      “The incredible thing that’s available on the Web is the ability to go deeper for more information.” However, hypertext may be distracting if a site contains “too many” links.

                                      Nielsen also provides a list of mistakes to avoid, which include the following 3 that are most relevant to us:

                                      • Nondescript Posting Titles: Users must be able to grasp the gist of an article by reading its headline. Avoid cute or humorous headlines that make no sense out of context.
                                      • Links Don’t Say Where They Go: Many weblog authors seem to think it’s cool to write link anchors like: “ some people think” or “there’s more here and here .” Remember one of the basics of the Web: Life is too short to click on an unknown. Tell people where they’re going and what they’ll find at the other end of the link. Generally, you should provide predictive information in either the anchor text itself or the immediately surrounding words.
                                      • Forgetting That You Write for Your Future Boss: Whenever you post anything to the Internet — whether on a weblog, in a discussion group, or even in an email — think about how it will look to a hiring manager in ten years. Once stuff’s out, it’s archived, cached, and indexed in many services that you might never be aware of.

                                      Sample

                                      A sample blog entry, that I wrote a few years ago, can be found at: https://www.itworldcanada.com/blog/wanted-defenders-of-the-public-interest/86095

                                      Submission

                                      Submit your blog entry as HTML, either uploaded as a file or pasted as online text. You may edit your blog entry in your “Individual Student Blog” and copy the HTML from there.

                                      You may optionally choose to post your entry to the “Class Blog”, as evidence of participation.

                                      The target length is 900-1000 words.

                                      Grading
                                      Grade penalties will be applied in the following situations for assignment submissions:
                                      • on time but the written instructions for the submission were not followed: deduct 10% of the earned grade
                                      • late (but within 48 hours of the due date and time): deduct 10% of the earned grade
                                      • late by more than 48 hours: deduct 20% of the earned grade
                                      • academic dishonesty: deduct 40% of the earned grade

                                      This assignment is worth 16 marks, according to the following rubric:

                                      Rubric

                                      DePaul Univerity’s Center for Teaching and Learning has a useful resource describing the process of creating rubrics. Your comments about the following rubric are welcome via email

                                      Criterion and Weight Exemplary Sufficient Developing Needs Improvement
                                      Intellectual Engagement with Key Theme-Related Concepts (4) Demonstrates engagement with the important issues raised through readings and/or class activities Makes some reference to issues raised through readings and/or class activities Makes little reference to issues raised through readings and/or class activities Makes no reference to issues raised through readings and/or class activities
                                      Personal Response to Key Theme-Related Concepts (4) Extensive evidence of a personal response to the issues raised in the readings/activities, and demonstrates your growth Some evidence of a personal response to the issues/concepts raised in the readings/activities Little evidence of a personal response to the issues/concepts raised in the readings/activities No personal response is made to the issues/concepts raised in the readings/activities
                                      Critical Evaluation of Online Sources (4) All questions answered thoroughly All questions answered Questions answered somewhat thoroughly Few questions answered
                                      Engaged Writing for the Web (4) Shows a good command of Standard English. No problems for your audience. Blog entry uses recommended style Demonstrates evidence of correct spelling, grammar, and punctuation. Audience will have little trouble reading your blog. Recommended style is mostly used Shows some evidence of correct spelling, grammar, and punctuation. Audience will have some trouble reading your blog. Recommended style used occasionally Incorrect grammar and spelling are apparent throughout, making it difficult for others to follow. Recommended style not followed
                                      Calculator
                                      Rubric Criteria
                                      Penalties
                                      Copy Output to Clipboard

                                      Critique of a Blog Entry ()

                                      Description

                                      Critique the blog entry that immediately follows your own blog entry. If yours is the last blog entry 48 hours after submissions are due, you will critique the first entry in the blog. Use the rubric from the Blog Entry assignment when writing your critique.

                                      Submission
                                      • submit a well-formatted pdf document on URcourses
                                      • target length: 1-2 pages
                                      Grading
                                      Grade penalties will be applied in the following situations for assignment submissions:
                                      • on time but the written instructions for the submission were not followed: deduct 10% of the earned grade
                                      • late (but within 48 hours of the due date and time): deduct 10% of the earned grade
                                      • late by more than 48 hours: deduct 20% of the earned grade
                                      • academic dishonesty: deduct 40% of the earned grade

                                      This assignment is worth 4 marks, according to the following rubric:

                                      Rubric

                                      DePaul Univerity’s Center for Teaching and Learning has a useful resource describing the process of creating rubrics. Your comments about the following rubric are welcome via email

                                      Criterion and Weight Exemplary Sufficient Developing Needs Improvement
                                      Evaluation according to rubric (1) Thorough, honest, and constructive evaluation Honest and constructive evaluation Insufficient effort put into evaluation Evaluation not evident
                                      Critique (3) Provides a substantial assessment of the entry, including the strength of the position taken by the author and the quality of the references used Assessment is reasonably thorough and well-presented Assessment is uneven. Although it may add something new, there are parts needing further development Lacking substance
                                      Calculator
                                      Rubric Criteria
                                      Penalties
                                      Copy Output to Clipboard

                                      Assess Humaneness of Website ()

                                      Description

                                      This is a group assignment and you have been assigned to a group, somewhat randomly, with either 4 or 5 members. You may communicate with your group using the Web Within-Group Discussion Forum. You are not required to use this forum for the whole assignment, but it may help to get you in touch with your fellow group members.

                                      “An interface is humane if it is responsive to human needs and considerate of human frailties.”

                                      As a group, you will assess the humaneness of the Department of Computer Science website in the context of the newly updated University of Regina website. Do this by testing the website content as described in this NN/group article by Hoa Loranger and this NN/group article by Kara Pernice (more focused on intranets)

                                      Look everywhere on the site, as organized by the main links on the CS Home page. Each of the main links has additional content organized in the left-hand navigation menu. The main links are:

                                      1. Home
                                      2. People
                                      3. Undergraduate
                                      4. Graduate
                                      5. Classes & Labs
                                      6. Research
                                      7. Resources
                                      8. Contact Us

                                      Consider these questions:

                                      • is the content valuable to you?
                                      • is the content accurate, up-to-date, unique, and important?
                                      • is the valuable content accessible to you?
                                      • is there some way that you would like to use the content, but it is not clear how to do it?
                                      • should the content be put elsewhere (UR Courses, Faculty of Science, and so on)?

                                      After your group members have explored the content on the website, create a summary report organized according to the main navigation structure of the site detailed above. You may use the headings below to organize your report either by each main link or as a whole .

                                      Exploration

                                      In-depth exploration of pages on the website.

                                      Content Testing

                                      Meaningful questions considered thoroughly.

                                      Observations

                                      Summary of what your group found.

                                      Recommendations

                                      Your ideas about how the website could be redesigned to make it more attractive and relevant and more humane to students and other visitors.

                                      Submission

                                      • 1 document (pdf) – only 1 group member needs to submit
                                      • Target length: 1 or more pages per main navigation link
                                      Grading
                                      Grade penalties will be applied in the following situations for assignment submissions:
                                      • on time but the written instructions for the submission were not followed: deduct 10% of the earned grade
                                      • late (but within 48 hours of the due date and time): deduct 10% of the earned grade
                                      • late by more than 48 hours: deduct 20% of the earned grade
                                      • academic dishonesty: deduct 40% of the earned grade

                                      This assignment is worth 10 marks, according to the following rubric:

                                      Rubric

                                      DePaul Univerity’s Center for Teaching and Learning has a useful resource describing the process of creating rubrics. Your comments about the following rubric are welcome via email

                                      Criterion and Weight Exemplary Sufficient Developing Needs Improvement
                                      Exploration (3) Thorough Somewhat thorough Somewhat superficial Not at all thorough
                                      Content Testing (3) Questions are answered thoroughly and with specificity Questions are answered somewhat thoroughly and with specificity Answers are not thorough and somewhat vague Answers are not thorough nor specific
                                      Observations (2) Report clearly consolidates observations from all group members Report consolidates observations from all group members Report consolidates observations from some group members Observations not consolidated
                                      Recommendations (2) Clear recommendations about content Clear recommendations about most of the content Recommendations about some of the content Recommendations not clear
                                      Calculator
                                      Rubric Criteria
                                      Penalties
                                      Copy Output to Clipboard

                                      Project Deliverable ()

                                      Project Deliverable

                                      This is either an INDIVIDUAL or a GROUP assignment. It can be done individually or with others.

                                      Your project can involve (for example): a book review, a wikipedia entry, researching smaller assessment/why questions, discussion of contributing to an open source project (on github, for example), writing some code to test an idea, and so forth.

                                      As a reminder, your project must deal with class themes in some way. It is important to realize the project that you proposed (changes from the proposal, if necessary, are permitted) and connect it our discussions this semester. Your ideas about those connections are important.

                                      Submission

                                      Upload your finished product (as a pdf or as a link) to UR Courses.

                                      Grading
                                      Grade penalties will be applied in the following situations for assignment submissions:
                                      • on time but the written instructions for the submission were not followed: deduct 10% of the earned grade
                                      • late (but within 48 hours of the due date and time): deduct 10% of the earned grade
                                      • late by more than 48 hours: deduct 20% of the earned grade
                                      • academic dishonesty: deduct 40% of the earned grade

                                      This assignment is worth 20 marks, according to the following rubric:

                                      Rubric

                                      DePaul Univerity’s Center for Teaching and Learning has a useful resource describing the process of creating rubrics. Your comments about the following rubric are welcome via email

                                      Criterion and Weight Exemplary Sufficient Developing Needs Improvement
                                      Topic (4) Actively engages an important issue related to class Engages an important issue related to class Somewhat engages an important issue related to class Does not engage an important issue related to class
                                      Deliverable (4) Deliverable is used appropriately and imaginatively Deliverable is used appropriately Deliverable is used somewhat appropriately Deliverable is not used appropriately
                                      Realization (4) Realization of approach is clear and well-formed Realization of approach is reasonable Realization of approach is mostly unclear and not well-formed Realization of approach is not clear
                                      Connections to Class Discussions (4) Thoroughly connected Reasonably thoroughly connected Somewhat connected Not connected
                                      Completed Plan (4) Ambitious and thorough Reasonably thorough Somewhat thorough Not thorough
                                      Calculator
                                      Rubric Criteria
                                      Penalties
                                      Copy Output to Clipboard

                                      Exams

                                      From previous offerings: