Computer Science & Software Engineering

Review of the School of Computer Science and Software Engineering, and the Bachelor of Computer Science

16-18 October 2006

MEMBERSHIP OF REVIEW PANEL

Professor William Ford, Dean, Faculty of Law, UWA (Chair)

Professor Muffy Calder, Head, Department of Computing Science, University of Glasgow (External Member)

Professor Leon Sterling, Chair, Software Innovation & Engineering, Department of Computer Science and Software Engineering, University of Melbourne (External Member)

Professor Paul Roe, Deputy Head, School of Software Engineering and Data Communications, Queensland University of Technology (External Member)

Professor Mark Bush, Dean, Faculty of Engineering, Computing & Mathematics, UWA

Mr Paul Higgs, Faculty Manager, Faculty of Engineering, Computing & Mathematics, UWA (Executive Officer)

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

As the result of a most unfortunate combination of adverse circumstances and developments the School of Computer Science and Software Engineering (“CSSE”) is now faced with a number of very serious problems that need to be addressed urgently. Broadly speaking, and as a matter of convenience, the problems that presently confront the School can be classified as financial, organizational, strategic and cultural in nature. Without wishing to give undue prominence to any one of these it is abundantly clear that unless the School’s immediate financial issues are quickly and satisfactorily resolved there is little realistic prospect of rapid progress being able to be made in relation to the other pressing problems which require attention.

The financial problems facing the School are primarily the product of falling student enrolments and (consequential) over-staffing. A significant reduction in the number of students electing to study computer science is by no means a phenomenon unique to CSSE at the University of Western Australia. By all accounts, it is a feature of schools of computer science both nationally and internationally.  At the University of Western Australia, however, declining income from undergraduate student enrolments has been exacerbated by the School’s comparative lack of success in winning large research grants. Regrettably the salary supplementation component of the existing FFM has to some extent masked the impact and longer term implications and importance of the downward trend in enrolments that began in about 2003 and ought to have been a matter of genuine concern by 2004. The cost structure of CSSE is now seriously out of alignment with its income stream and the conclusion seems inescapable that, short of a major restructure of the School’s staffing profile (which presently accounts for in excess of 115% of its budget), there is no convincing reason to believe that its budgetary position is likely to improve markedly in the foreseeable future. Indeed on present indications the School can expect to suffer a further drop in student demand in the 2007 academic year. The pipeline effect of these continued reductions in enrolment is obvious and so well understood that it needs no elaboration.

Second, the School’s current administrative structure and arrangements have not proved to be adequate to the challenges CSSE has had to confront. With the very considerable benefit of hindsight, it must now be said that that structure and those arrangements failed to ensure that the nature and significance of the School’s emerging problems were properly identified or clearly communicated to the staff of the School in an appropriate and timely manner. The heavy responsibilities associated with diagnosing and dealing with these various problems have fallen on the shoulders of too few senior personnel, and the opportunity to involve a much wider range of staff in considerations as to how they might be addressed before reaching crisis point was missed.

Third, the capacity to respond to changing circumstances and emerging difficulties (financial and otherwise) is not just a matter of having in place appropriate administrative arrangements: it is also a function of ongoing strategic planning. Of course, effective administrative structures and the ability to plan for an uncertain future are inextricably linked. It is not enough that the management of a School focus exclusively on the here and now, on day-to-day operations. The details of those operations and of the external environment must be closely and continuously monitored with a view to responding to issues before they develop into serious problems. It also involves recognizing and endeavoring to explore and exploit opportunities that may benefit the discipline and the business unit as they arise. In the opinion of the Review Panel, in the past insufficient attention has been given by the School to medium and long term strategic planning. This should now be a matter of the highest priority.

Fourth, there seems to have been a notable absence of any culture of collegiality and cooperation within the School. Although such a culture is partly a function of successful and effective leadership, in the final analysis all staff must accept some responsibility for this. Factionalism, isolationism and personal disengagement undermines the operational effectiveness and functionality of any organization. It is patent that the senior staff of a School and/or Faculty have a special obligation to show leadership and commitment in this regard. In the Panel’s view some of the most serious problems of CSSE seem to have been at the very least aggravated by personal antagonisms and an apparent reluctance or inability of the staff as a whole to work together “for the common good”. This is unacceptable and should no longer be tolerated. It is clear beyond argument that all staff of the School will have to commit to developing and pursuing strategies aimed at agreed outcomes if the School is to succeed in rectifying the present situation.

Finally, it is a disconcerting fact that a number of the comments and recommendations contained in the report of the 1999 Review Panel seem to be as apposite today as they were when originally written. This suggests that there has been a failure to address in a sustained and effective way some long-standing systemic issues which continue to compromise the success of the School as an integral and important part of the Faculty of Engineering, Computing & Mathematics.

LIST OF RECOMMENDATIONS

In view of the continuing decline in undergraduate student numbers, for operational reasons the School  has no realistic option (absent very substantial cross subsidies within the Faculty for an indefinite period of time) but to take immediate steps to adjust its staffing profile to reflect its current (and projected future) financial position. Further, the magnitude of this adjustment should be such as to enable the School, with the assistance of the Faculty and the Vice Chancellor, to make at least one new appointment at professorial level to strengthen its research capacity.  The Panel notes that the Dean  and the Head of School have already commenced the difficult process of  reducing staffing levels, and recommends that the University provide  as much support as possible in order to ensure the timely completion of this process.  The Panel acknowledges the great value to the institution of a vibrant, innovative and research-intensive School of Computer Science and Software Engineering and is convinced that the School has the potential to significantly improve its overall performance.

Given the challenges that it now faces, the School is in need of decisive leadership, clearer vision and more effective and inclusive administrative arrangements.  The Panel therefore recommends that the Dean (in consultation with the current Head of School, the Head-elect and senior staff) determine, establish and provide support for an appropriate management structure for the School.  The new decision-making arrangements must include according a central role to the (strategic) standing committees which have responsibility for the coordination and oversight of, inter alia, Research, Postgraduate Studies, Teaching and Learning and Operational Priorities Planning. The Chairpersons of those standing committees should constitute an advisory team to advise and support the new Head of School.  The new administrative and policy making structure must as soon as possible develop or be provided by the Dean with clear terms of reference and explicit statements of role responsibilities.

The membership of the reconstituted teaching and learning committee and research committee should include, ex officio, the Faculty’s Associate Dean (Teaching and Learning) and Associate Dean (Research) respectively in order to ensure that the operations of CSSE are consistent with the strategic plan and priorities of the Faculty. Those two committees should be responsible, together with the Dean and the Head of School, for formulating and overseeing the implementation of the School’s strategic plans in relation to its teaching program (including ongoing curriculum review and development) and its research program.

The newly defined executive team should immediately undertake a comprehensive preliminary strategic review and SWOT analysis of the School and its activities in order to develop as a matter of urgency a draft strategic and operational priorities plan for the School.

As part of his induction and leadership development, the incoming Head of School should be encouraged and assisted to undertake an appropriately structured study tour of comparable schools and departments of computer science in other institutions with a view to examining the comparative strengths and weaknesses of their curricula, research programs and administrative structures.

The School must take collective responsibility for promoting and fostering a more collegial and cooperative culture in support of its strategic objectives concerning both teaching and research. Whilst the Dean, the School Head and the strategic committees must set the strategic directions and priorities of the CSSE, the achievement of these goals will only be possible if all staff work cooperatively together in the pursuit of those objectives.

The Panel commends the School (and in particular the School Manager) on the organization of its community outreach activities and recommends that similar attention now be given to improving the School’s lines of internal communication. To this end the School Manager should be responsible for developing a comprehensive draft communication policy for the Head of School so that all administrative and policy decisions taken by the School Head and the School’s standing committees are efficiently and effectively communicated to all staff.

The School should ensure that the proceedings of all committees are properly minuted and made available to all academic and administrative staff in a timely manner.  Staff should be actively encouraged to submit agenda items for consideration by the strategic committees.  Further, all members of CSSE should be expected to participate in committee work and other associated administrative activities as part of their duties and continuing professional development.

The School needs to develop a clear and transparent workload policy (rather than simply a teaching load model) which recognizes the different strengths of, and contributions made by, members of academic staff and is directed towards the achievement of its strategic objectives concerning both research and teaching. 

The Panel is of the view that the current workloads of academic staff afford the School the opportunity to develop and implement new undergraduate and postgraduate offerings (such as the Masters Conversion Course). The implementation of this recommendation must necessarily be linked to the adoption of a new workloads policy as set out in Recommendation 9.

The Panel commends CSSE on the establishment of the Centre for Software Practice and recommends that this particular initiative be further promoted and supported by the School.

The School should make an internal appointment to the position of Coordinator for the Software Engineering program.   The appointee should have responsibility for championing the rejuvenation of that program and developing proposals aimed at significantly increasing its student enrolments. The Panel recommends that the Coordinator (in conjunction with the School’s Teaching and Learning Committee and its Industry Advisory Panel) undertake an immediate review of the industry relevance of the content of the existing program and explore opportunities for increased industry participation and engagement. This review should include a consideration of the feasibility of student placements with appropriate industry partners.

The School of CSSE should explore how it might engage more closely with other Schools in the Faculty (and with other faculties of the University) with a view to revising (and where appropriate expanding) both its teaching and research programs.

Given the relatively modest size of the School, and the legitimate expectation that the School should significantly improve its present research profile and performance, the Panel recommends that the School concentrate its research activity into three or four key areas of identified research strength. Staff should be encouraged to align their research plans with one or more of those priority areas. Because of the rapidly evolving nature of the discipline the School should, on a regular basis, review the continued strategic value and relevance of each of these particular research priorities.  The Panel observes, from personal experience, that from time to time opportunities will arise from unexpected quarters: academic staff should be encouraged to explore and embrace those opportunities.

The Panel recommends that the School arrange for the Industry Advisory Panel to meet more regularly and to conduct its business in a more structured and systematic manner. Further, the composition of the Industry Advisory Panel should include, in addition to the Head of School, the Chairs of the School’s standing committees.

The Panel recommends that student recruitment explicitly be regarded as a shared responsibility and be accorded a high priority by the School.  Consideration should be given, for example, to the Teaching and Learning Committee establishing formal links with vocational guidance officers and secondary school teachers to promote awareness of career opportunities in Computer Science and Software Engineering and to explore the drivers behind student preferences.

Given the nature of the problems identified and changes recommended by the Review Panel, the panel further recommends that a brief follow up report on progress made on the implementation of the panel’s recommendations be undertaken within 2 years by an appropriate  reference group appointed by the Dean and Deputy Vice Chancellor.  Consideration should be given to the inclusion of at least one expert member of the present Review Panel on that reference group.