Recently several changes have occurred in accreditation. This panel will address four major changes: the new guidelines for accreditation on Computer Science programs, the integration of the Computing Sciences Accreditation Board (CSAB) and the Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET), the developments in software engineering accreditation, and the developments in accreditation of programs in computer information sciences/information systems science.This panel will discuss these recent and their potential impacts. These areas may see considerable change from the submission of the proposal for a panel and the time that panel convenes in San Antonio.

No abstract available.

For many years there have been complaints from enterprises such as business, industry and government that academia is unable to produce graduates that can function well in the design and implementation of large and complex information and engineering systems. These complaints have been voiced and confirmed once again in recent reports and conference addresses [5],[3]. As a result of discussions on the results of the Mulder NSF report following the report's completion it was suggested that recent advancements in information, communication and computer technologies could enable a new and innovative approach to improving the graduates from our university information specialists programs. This new learning/teaching paradigm involves both the universities and the concerned enterprises. The paper that follows presents some of the reasoning and organizational structure for the suggested cooperative approach enabled by information technology, and information regarding some test sites of cooperative programs involving universities and industry.

No abstract available.

No abstract available.

No abstract available.

The development and validation of a sensor-driven control model for multijointed cooperating robotic arms is explored. The approach is used to explore an anthropomorphic model, and to then reason by analogy to discover a robust control model for robotic arm motion. This approach uses human-like joint motion profiles and sensory information of all joints, evaluates the weighted work done by each joint in cooperative motion, and then synthesizes a minimal effort motion trajectory to precisely and efficiently position the robotic arm end effector. This sensor-based approach significantly reduces the computational requirements for such cooperative motion. The result is a less complex, faster, and adaptive control process. A pressure-servoed hydraulic motion system has been developed to implement the movement strategy. This is a major step toward a long-term research goal of conceptualizing in an intelligent way to implement a manufacturing task.>

The interaction of a biped and the external force of gravity is predicted by applying Newton's equation to a point-mass model. Numerical integration predicts angles and angular velocities over time. Two modes of calculation are necessary, depending on whether both feet are in contact with the ground or only one. Transition equations to transfer between these two modes are based on assuming an inelastic collision at the moment of foot contact.>

The characteristics of a knowledge-based control strategy that support dynamic stability in a walking machine are discussed. A generalized set of solutions is optimized through simulation, and tabulated in an organized way for real-time use. Once properly evoked, the generalized solutions are modified on the basis of, sensory input. The result is a faster, less complex and adaptive control process. This work is part of a larger research effort centered on autonomous motion of bipeds.>

It is ACM's 40th year and an old debate continues. Is computer science a science? An engineering discipline? Or merely a technology, an inventor and purveyor of computing commodities? What is the intellectual substance of the discipline? Is it lasting, or will it fade within a generation? Do core curricula in computer science and engineering accurately reflect the field? How can theory and lab work be integrated in a computing curriculum?We project an image of a technology-oriented discipline whose fundamentals are in mathematics and engineering — for example, we represent algorithms as the most basic objects of concern and programming and hardware design as the primary activities. The view that “computer science equals programming” is especially strong in our curricula: the introductory course is programming, the technology is in our core courses, and the science is in our electives. This view blocks progress in reorganizing the curriculum and turns away the best students, who want a greater challenge. It denies a coherent approach to making experimental and theoretical computer science integral and harmonious parts of a curriculum.Those in the discipline know that computer science encompasses far more than programming. The emphasis on programming arises from our long-standing belief that programming languages are excellent vehicles for gaining access to the rest of the field — but this belief limits out ability to speak about the discipline in terms that reveal its full breadth and richness.The field has matured enough that it is now possible to describe its intellectual substance in a new and compelling way. In the spring of 1986, ACM President Adele Goldberg and ACM Education Board Chairman Robert Aiken appointed this task force with the enthusiastic cooperation of the IEEE Computer Society. At the same time, the Computer Society formed a task force on computing laboratories with the enthusiastic cooperation of the ACM.The charter of the task force has three components: Present a description of computer science that emphasizes fundamental questions and significant accomplishments.Propose a new teaching paradigm for computer science that conforms to traditional scientific standards and harmoniously integrates theory and experimentation.Give at least one detailed example of a three-semester introductory course sequence in computer science based on the curriculum model and the disciplinary description.We immediately extended our task to encompass computer science and computer engineering, for we came to the conclusion that in the core material there is no fundamental difference between the two fields. We use the phrase “discipline of computing” to embrace all of computer science and engineering. The rest of this paper is a summary of the recommendation.The description of the discipline is presented in a series of passes, starting from a short definition and culminating with a matrix as shown in the figure. The short definition:Computer science and engineering is the systematic study of algorithmic processes that describe and transform information: their theory, analysis, design, efficiency, implementation, and application. The fundamental question underlying all of computing is, “What can be (efficiently) automated?”The detailed description of the field fills in each of the 27 cells in the matrix with significant issues and accomplishments. (That description occupies about 16 pages of the report.)For the curriculum model, we recommend that the introductory course consist of regular lectures and a closely coordinated weekly laboratory. The lectures emphasize fundamentals; the laboratories emphasize technology and know-how. The pattern of closely coordinated lectures and labs can be repeated where appropriate in other courses. The recommended model is traditional in the physical sciences and in engineering: lectures emphasize enduring principles and concepts while laboratories emphasize the transient material and skills relating to the current technology.

No abstract available.

No abstract available.

A joint task force of the ACM and the IEEE Computer Society is meeting regularly to discuss issues relating to accreditation or approval in the computing sciences. In addition to considering various mechanisms to implement the important qualitative review and certification, the Joint Committee is developing a preliminary set of Computer Science Program requirements.Increasing requests are being made to the professional societies to provide guidance in computer science programs. While certain guidance and evaluation mechanisms exists, and agencies to administer them, these tend to be directed to specialized programs and the field is so broad that a wider view must be taken. It is estimated that as many as 500 programs not presently served by existing mechanisms and agencies would benefit from such guidance.This panel will discuss some of the issues relating to implementation of accreditation/approval as well as quantitative criteria for computer science programs that provide competency in the profession. Audience participation and discussion will be encouraged.

The advent of microcomputer systems with their inherent cost/performance advantages had precipitated a reassessment of known application areas that heretofore were not considered candidates for digital systems solution.