#GradingJail

Teaching and student learning can become hefty part of the college professor life. Instructors must consider what are the students’ prior knowledge, students’ expectations, reasonable course topic presentation order, course assessment mechanisms and degree program’s learning outcomes. 

End of term grading (EOT #GradingJail) includes, but not limited to: the duration between end of classes and when term grades are due. It's one of the academic stressors. First, there is a short amount of time to score the last assignment, final project deliverable and/or final-term exam. Second, students seem to all of a sudden know my name, email and office location by end of the term in an effort to meet with me about their performance, or lack thereof, in the course. Third, the non-teaching responsibilities mound as internal and external reports are due to various levels of the institution's administration. But the #GradingJail stressor can be managed. The one and only rule I have to share is protect yourself from the potential disgruntled students and grade appeals. 

Course Syllabus
EOT #GradingJail starts at the beginning of the semester. Here's a highlight reel of my course policies:

• Assignments are due on a <date> at <time>. Any assignment will be penalized 25% of the original possible score if it is turned in within 24 hours of the due date and time.  It will be graded based upon 50% of the original possible score if it is turned within 24 to 48 hours of the original due date/time.  No assignment will be accepted later than that.
• Graded exams and quizzes will not be returned. To review a graded exam or quiz, the student must make an appointment with the instructor. 
• To discuss a grade-related matter, the student must make an appointment with the instructor. The instructor will not discuss any grade-related matter over email or in the presence of other students, unless it’s concerning a team project. 
• A student has one week to inquire and submit an appeal about his/her score after it is posted to Blackboard. After one week, the score will be final. The GTA (graduate teaching assistant) or I will send an announcement via Blackboard when scores are posted. Note: The one week appeal period helps circumvent student EOT point haggling. 
• Life is not True/False or Multiple Choice so neither are any assignments in this course.  In other words, no T/F or MC questions.

Instructor Feedback 
Providing feedback, especially in a timely fashion, is important for student learning. However, students attempt to garner favor at every turn so being savvy to their tactics is must. Hold them accountable and be accountable. Be consistent and tough but fair in your grading. Be prepared to easily (and frequently) answer 5 of 6 information gathering questions concerning your coursework feedback policies.  

• Q1: Who provides the feedback? 
• A1. Instructor and/or GTA
• Q2: What are the feedback avenues? 
• A2. Assessment mechanisms can include homework assignments, labs, exams, in-class exercises, course project deliverables and peer reviews. 
• Q3: When will the student receive feedback?  
• A3. Digitally through comments on graded homework and lab assignments. Face-to-face conversations during lecture, office hours and scheduled appointments 
• Q4: Where will the student receive feedback? 
• A4. For the online submitted assignments, Blackboard or another course management system. For written submitted coursework, comments are hand-written on the coursework so the student must see the instructor to view these comments. 
• Q5: How will the feedback be given to the student? 
• A5. Typed, written and orally. I strongly suggest that instructors devise an evaluation/grading rubric for each assignment. When students argue for points, and they will, you reference your grading rubric. I am in favor of using a matrix-style rubric. The rows are the instructor-defined evaluation criteria and the columns are labelled no evidence, does not meet expectations, meets expectations and exceeds expectations. Then, the instructor can assign the point structure as appropriate. The release of the grading rubric to the students is at the instructor's discretion. 

Academic Integrity and Dishonesty 
As required by every institution, instructors are to include the student plagiarism policy to their course syllabus. My years as a GTA and instructor has taught me the following. Those who plagiarize know exactly what they chose to do. Most of those who plagiarize then expect grace and mercy. I give them none. I suggest you do the same. 

We mark the end of another term. Spring 2014 is put to bed. Congratulations, you survived it. 


------------------------------------------------
More On Brandeis Marshall's Teaching Credentials

I have integrated my business intelligence expertise into Purdue's CIT undergraduate and graduate curriculum. With over 250 student enrollments, I have incorporated problem-based learning as a central theme into CNIT 39200 (Enterprise Data Management), CNIT 31500 (Systems Engineering) and designed CNIT 49900 (Data Integration on the Web) an elective undergraduate course, CNIT 58100 (Data Integration on the Web) for graduate students interested in information retrieval and CNIT 62300 (Research Methods in Computing) for MS Thesis graduate students. To expand my teaching strategies, I was awarded Purdue's Teaching for Tomorrow Fellowship for the 2013-2014 academic year. In addition, I have participated in graduate research mentorship as a member of 20 committees, 1 of which is a PhD Dissertation committee, chairing 6 MS Theses and co-authored 8 refereed publications with graduate students. I have graduated 5 MS Thesis students to date. 

Email: A Communication Archive Engine

Email is slow according to today's high expectations of immediate response and feedback. However, it is considered the more formal mode of communication, especially for employers. Email etiquette is synonymous with writing a hand-written note and sending it via USPS. To understand and perform the sweet science of emailing, you can purchase any number of books or for free via articles/blogs on the subject, e.g., "The Art of Email Writing" by P. Vassallo. Nevertheless, email writing rules mimic those of letter writing: greeting, body introduction, body content, closing, signature. 

Email writing and responding, circa 2014, is a necessary evil. Admittedly, I have a love-hate relationship with email. I have two big pet peeves. The first irritation is receiving an email indicating that another email is en route in the near-future. I mean, why even bother sending the email in the first place? I just don't get it. I wish the sender would just wait and send me all the information in one email. Or better yet, call me or tell me in a face-to-face conversation. Woah, crazy talk. It sounds too much like right. Let me just move on. The second irritation is the inappropriate use of the "reply all" feature. The situation is all too common: an email with a list of recipients is sent and the recipients respond to all on the original email rather than just the proper individual, e.g. congratulatory notes, e-introductions, etc.

Quick "Reply All" usage tip: do not "reply all" UNLESS one of these conditions holds true: you are sharing common information to a group e.g., reporting up your chain of command (cya/cyoa), you are eliciting a group-email discussion, e.g., when/where to meet, or you are attempting to resolve some sort of small miscommunication. 

Email has unfortunately been used as a replacement for, rather than to augment, face-to-face conversations. Misinterpretation, miscommunication and downright rudeness are the bad effects. Hence, my love-hate relationship with this technological advance. In recent months, many strive to obtain the inbox zero status - an email management effort to have as few (optimally zero) messages in your email inbox. Effective organization of folders and email deletion rules can help achieve the zero inbox. The benefits purported as less clutter, less stress and focusing your attention on important things. I'm marching toward the zero inbox, but I ran into a hiccup on my Apple devices. The Apple folder structure doesn't exist (essentially you must create another mailbox), which is not viewable to the root mailbox. I rely on email deletion rules, Evernote and leveraging my laptop's folder structure. I've reduced my professional email box count from ~2000 to ~1000 messages.

The introduction of other digital communication mediums (messaging, texting, FB inbox, tweeting and all other social media) has rendered email archaic. But I've discovered a revived appreciation for email during this zero inbox experience. Email has one last stand, one significant advantage that those other digital communication mediums. Conversation archiving. I have found myself in situations over the past few months where being able to quickly access (and then forward) the original email or email exchange has circumvented additional emails and stress. I no longer desire the zero inbox instead I strive for periodically identifying and archiving relevant email conversations.

Quick email tip: some individuals are more comfortable using email, rather than face-to-face or phone conversations. When I encounter this situation, I sculpt my email to elicit a response from them, usually by ending my email with a question.   

Here's a few of my email inbox management tricks. To better understand my tricks, I receive email from the following groups as a college professor: my institution's administration, colleagues/peers, graduate students, undergraduate students and prospective graduate students. 

I classify email messages into three bins:

• Informational: These messages are meant to keep you in the loop. You must decide if being in the loop is what you want. If so, you can note the information. Regardless, simply delete the email. Disclaimer: Email responses are not warranted. Depending on the email culture, a corresponding acknowledgement message may be considered the proper rules of engagement.
• Discussion: These messages are meant to help minimize miscommunication and misinterpretation of the email recipients. The sharing of ideas and solutions tends to ensue as the different perspectives reveal themselves. In my discipline of computing, we call this sentiment analysis or opinion mining. It's very hard to accomplish through email exchanges. I prefer to handle these situations either face-to-face or over the phone. If a resolution has not been reached, then keep the most recent email, which should include the entire email chain. You avoid information loss and you can delete the other intermediary emails. Disclaimer: email responses are expected but not required.
• Decision: These messages are an attempt to reach a consensus of a group. Most recipients elect to use the Reply All feature in an effort to come to a consensus quicker. In the professional environment, a decision maker is met with either joy or dislike. Joy to those who are indecisive or prefer not to make a decision. Disliked by those who don't agree with the decision rendered. In most cases, it's email polite to state your decision clearly. As with the discussion emails, keep the most recent email, which should include the entire email chain, and delete the rest. Disclaimer: You may not actually care about the topic in which your decision is required. But the decisive trait and making good decisions reveals your potential for future promotions.

Now, go forward and conversation archive! 

Move Over #BigData, Make Room for #DataSecurity

According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, computer and mathematical occupations is expected to have a job growth of 18% over the next 10 years. At the core of many businesses is data, that requires organization, security, mining and analysis. As such, computing disciplines (information technology, computer science and business) include as part of their core curriculum at least one database management systems course. Every spring semester, I teach an advanced database design techniques and physical issues relating to enterprise-wide data management using the “Modern Database Management” by Hoffer et al. as the required course textbook. The course has 3 main foci: 

• Modeling, e.g., entity-relationship diagram, enhanced entity-relationship diagram
• Implementation, e.g., logical and physical database design, database querying 
• Operating logistics e.g., data stewardship, data and database administration

With the onslaught of #BigData, #DataAnalytics, #DataMining and #DataScience mentioned in nearly every computing-related article and conversation, the students (and everyone else) want to know what it is and how it impacts businesses. The Computing Research Association (CRA) Big Data Whitepaper provides a great showcase of the #BigData challenges and opportunities.  The figure below displays the data processing stages (top row) and the interjecting wildcard features (bottom row).

CRA's Big Data Pipeline (http://www.cra.org/ccc/files/docs/init/bigdatawhitepaper.pdf)

#BigData discussions concentrate on the 3Vs (Volume+Variety+Velocity, circa 2001, Gartner Inc.), 4Vs (3Vs+Viability/Veracity, circa 2012) or, now 5Vs (4Vs+Value, circa late 2012/early 2013). So, the heterogeneity, scale, timeliness and human collaboration features from the above figure are covered, but where does that leave privacy? The data conversation must do a better integration of data security/privacy needs and challenges. The emergence of data-centric specializations and degree programs in data analytics, data mining and data science is fueled by the increasing need to train undergraduates and graduate students to be prepared to handle actual businesses data needs. To expose undergraduates to data and database security, an advanced database design course should augment the operating logistics course topic and inject database security overview, granular access control, securing database-to-database communications, and multi-level security in database systems.

Graduate student awareness and training in data and database security/privacy must be tightly coupled education with applied research. Toward this effort, NSF has sponsored the Information Security Research and Education (INSuRE) Collaborative project. INSuRE is to establish a long-lasting Centers of Academic Excellence in Information Assurance Research (CAE-R) and government coalition in cybersecurity research. This initial partnership includes four successful and mature CAE-Rs and the National Security Agency (NSA) in order to design, develop and test the research network. INSuRE will be a self-organizing, cooperative, multi-disciplinary, multi-institutional, and multi-level research collaborative that can work on both unclassified and classified research problems in the information security domain.

Other domains have data and database security/privacy considerations. Here's just a few:

• Data Security in Transportation: digital cities & smart(@pietromax, @UCLALewisCenter), ride sharing (@uber, @lyft)
• Data Security in Aviation: Timely Data Acquisition for the Aviation Industry
• Data Security in Health: #HCLDR twitter discussions Tues @ 8:30PM, #BlerdChat & #HCHLITSS twitter discussions Thurs. @ 7PM & 8PM, respectively

Combating the Academic NO

originally posted on April 10, 2014 on csdoctorsister.blog.com

The language of the academic ‘no’  has its own dialect. In short, there are MANY ways to receive a NO. Let’s see there is “we regret to inform you…”, “the submission is not selected”, “your submission is not appropriate for…”, “your submission is not competitive…”. Do I need to go on? You get the point. Any externally reviewed document is fair game.

Scholarly/Research Work

• 2-page extended abstract/poster submission
• 4-6 page work-in-progress paper submission
• 6-12 page conference paper submission
• 20+ page journal article submission

Corporate  Partnership/Sponsorship

• 1-2 page course development/augmentation proposal
• 2-3 page research project proposal
• 2-3 page non-research project with deliverables and timeline

U. S. Federal Funding Streams

• NSF solicited and unsolicited grant proposals
• NIH grant proposals
• DoD/DHS/DoJ/DoE Broad Agency Announcement grant proposals

You will undoubtedly receive rejection/declined notifications. So what’s next?
First, take a couple of days to digest the NO. You have to let the NO bounce off. However, if you are unaccustomed to receiving a non-favorable response, then you may need more time and experience of how to cope. It’s easy to take the NO as a personal attack. Any faculty in academia has been there. You have poured your heart and soul into that submitted manuscript. It was a lot of thinking, meeting with colleagues, writing and editing. You worked real hard on the content and presentation. You thought you did a great job, but you received that NO. The goal in digesting the NO is to detangle you as a researcher from the manuscript.

Second, parse through the reviewers’ feedback (objectively). You could easy just dismiss the NO and then, simply ignore the feedback. But then you miss your learning opportunity. Few people fully understand the details of your work. It is your charge to share your expertise, ask questions and present a reasonable solution where others have not.  You are learning how to fill in the technical gaps of  your intended audience through perfecting your presentation style. I consider reviewers’ feedback to come in 4 main categories.

• Editorial. If checking for proper grammar is not be your forte and you struggle with grammatical issues, get a copy editor.
• Pitch Problem. The “pitch” is two-fold: the problem and the solution. The act of convincing your technical community, i.e., the 3-4 reviewers, of the problem and/or proposed solution significance can be a daunting task. You must motivate the problem and justify your proposed solution. You may not have sufficiently conveyed the problem scope and thus the proposed solution contributions. Your task is to think through your ideas and arguments as though you are the reviewer. I suggest reading “Made To Stick” by Chip and Dan Heath (http://www.amazon.com/Made-Stick-Ideas-Survive-Others/dp/1400064287).
• Technical Issues. Your subject-matter expertise may not be at the level required by the reviewers. (Yes, subject-matter expertise is a moving target for each reviewer.) For instance, the literature review does not include certain references or the proposed solution has been previously published. You can avoid technical issues by remaining current in your field. To be a researcher is to always be learning. Remember: a good reputation within your research field mainly entails high quality research product.
• Stylistic differences. Some reviewers will like the way you write. Others will not. I don’t tend to focus on stylistic differences. I consider them to be “low blows”, e.g.,  a reviewer just doesn’t like the manuscript and can not justify it into one of the other above mentioned categories. Chalk it up to human-error. Keep in mind that your goal is to make the majority of reviewers satisfied with your research product.

Third, MAKE and then EXECUTE the revision plan. Most people can seamlessly make the revision plan. The execution of said-plan — not so much. Timelines are helpful to a point. Accountability partners, such as project colleagues, mentors or advisors, are much more effective. You can deem excuses rational if you are only accountable for yourself. When you have to say those excuses out loud, then you realize that they are part of your procrastination infrastructure. You have to see your path to a YES notification, then the NO notification becomes a distant memory.

So what happens if you don’t receive a notification at all? Well, that’s another post for another time…

Grant Submission: A Funny Story

originally posted on April 10, 2014 on csdoctorsister.blog.com

One of the continuous activities of a faculty member, aside from teaching, research and service, is that of writing grant proposals. The grant proposers hope the project will be funded and it will lead to other funded grants. It’s a deep-thinking, intellectually stimulating, yet time-consuming process. I’ll save the grant writing process for another post. Anywho, here’s the story:

The set-up: It’s March 2013.
The Transportation Research Board (TRB) posts the grant solicitation: Freight Transportation Data Architecture: Data Element Dictionary.

• Grant Max Funding Amount: $500,000
• Grant Duration: 18 months
• Estimated Grant Start Date: 7/31/2013
• Proposal Due: April 19, 2013 at 4:30PM, 20 single-bound copies delivered to the TRB office

The grant project has a deliverable of a “searchable and sustainable web-based freight transportation analysis to be hosted at the U.S. Department of Transportation”. The TRB’s solicitation format include the project tasks and phases.

The story details: Fast forward a few weeks. I’m asked to scope the data management and data search tasks with collaborators: Transportation SMEs (subject-matter experts) Bruce C Hartman and Christopher Clott and Supply Chain SMEs Edie Schmidt and Regena Scott. I winded up serving as the project’s Principal Investigator.

A few weeks passed and over 10K words later, we had a complete grant proposal about improving the data model for the U.S. government transportation industry.

It’s April 18, 2013 at 12:00PM.

The Purdue pre-award sponsored programs office created the 20 bound copies.  A complete grant proposal has a number of elements, including project plan, references, research biographies and letters of support, and makes it quite lengthy. So 20 bound copies were divided and placed in two boxes. These boxes were sent from the Purdue pre-award sponsored office to the TRB.

The punch-line: The boxes left the office together, arrived at the Washington D.C. shipping facility at the same time, yet were separated, to then be delivered to the same final destination on the same day. One box arrived at TRB on 4/19/2013 at 10:30AM. The other box arrived at TRB on 4/19/2013 at 4:43PM. The second box was 13 minutes late. The grant proposal was not even reviewed. The shipping and delivery company failed my colleagues and me. So hilarious that it is not. I mean, why did the TRB even want paper copies anyways? Digital versions would have been so much cheaper!

Here is an excerpt from our introduction. (Hopefully, at least someone will read our work.)

Effective decision making in the freight transportation industry is severely limited by the disparate definitions used by the wide range of data sources – federal, state, regional sources as well as private and public. The objective of this research is to remedy this problem by producing a searchable and sustainable web-based freight data element dictionary for transportation analysis. A standardized approach that is used throughout the nation will significantly improve the transferability of freight information at any scale – ranging from a single cargo box to an entire train bed.

Our multidisciplinary team of researchers from Purdue University and the University of St. Francis (USF) is proposing to develop a searchable, web-based data dictionary of elements suitable for the National Freight Database Architecture.  This feature will allow users to find data elements relevant to taxonomy elements and see details about them. Other search criteria will also be developed and use cases will also be presented. An additional outcome of our work will be a comprehensive report detailing the data sources studied and recommended, the taxonomy defined, the entities documented, and the hierarchical layout of the data elements, and functional relationships between data from different sources. Finally, our research team will produce a technical paper and conference presentation, with the goal of explaining the scope of the project and providing an overview of the data dictionary.

Tenured BWiC

originally posted on April 6, 2014 on csdoctorsister.blog.com

Motivational and inspiring statements by unknown

The tenure-track Assistant Professor position is a finite probationary term, which typically spans from 4-6 years for most colleges. These Assistant Professors take this time to learn academia, grow research (if college is research-focused), teach courses and serve her/his technical community through professional societies. At the end of the probationary term, the Assistant Professor generates a document describing the contributions and impact she or he has made to the institution in the categories of scholarship, teaching and service. The document is evaluated and voted upon by her/his colleagues in multiple rounds – proceeding to subsequent round is typically contingent on receiving at least a favorable in the previous round. This evaluation process takes about an academic year. A positive outcome of promotion and tenure expands a faculty’s opportunities and more academic freedom. My tenure-track position began in August 2008. My evaluation process has began August 2013.

On 4/4/2014, the Purdue Board of Trustees approved my faculty promotion to Associate Professor with tenure in Computer and Information Technology, effective August 18, 2014 (http://www.purdue.edu/newsroom/releases/2014/Q2/purdue-trustees-approve-faculty-promotions.html). #ThisIsEpic #TenuredBWiC

With this announcement, history has been made. I became the first Black woman to earn tenure in Purdue’s College of Technology. This history-making act goes far beyond Purdue. According to the Institution for Women’s Policy Research “Accelerating Change for Women Faculty of Color in STEM: Policy, Action, and Collaboration” report, only 6% of STEM faculty are women of color. That’s 6,400 of 111,800. The challenges facing STEM women of color faculty are enumerated in the report; however, I have experienced each one to a certain degree throughout my academic career. I wish there was less enumeration of the challenges and more advocating of other STEM WOC in academia, industry and government. What actions are you taking to champion a STEM WOC?

So what’s next for this tenured BWiC?

First, celebrate. Honestly, this may last a while.

Second, decide on which fork to take in this road: step up, lean in, lean back, or opt-out

Timely Data Acquisition for the Aviation Industry

originally posted on March 30, 2014 on csdoctorsister.blog.com

In the wake of #MH370 (classified as missing since March 8th), I posted to FB on March 13th: How do you LOSE A PLANE with all these technological mediums?!? Where the freak’n frack is Malaysian Airlines Flight 370?!? #hearthurts #disappointed

The fact that a plane carrying 227 passengers and 12 crew goes missing is unimaginable and unacceptable. As a #datahead, I immediately think about what data was available and not captured that could be useful in finding this plane. Unfortunately, #MH370 is a recent example of aviation’s need for better data understanding.

Here’s another recent example: in April 2011, an EF4 tornado ripped through St. Louis, right passed the Lambert-St. Louis International Airport, with at least one airplane reported as  landing due to the Air Traffic Control (ATC) being unaware that the tornado was on the ground. In light of the April 2011 EF4 tornado, my colleague, Mary Johnson, and I are working on ways to assist the aviation industry in handling their data.

Our efforts, approach and prior works are given below.

Unknown to most commercial airline passengers, extensive information is reviewed by the pilot and the dispatcher who must both sign off and agree that the flight is ready for take-off. Both the pilot and the dispatcher must be FAA certificate holders to perform their jobs. Information is aggregated by ATC from sources such as the National Weather Service (NWS), flight tracking websites, airport changes, official notices, pilots, FAA or similar agencies, in an effort to inform air transport personnel about flight scheduling viability. These data may not arrive in a timely manner to make decisions regarding flight dispatch which has a role at take-off, in-flight, and landing to ensure safety and operational control. Twitter may provide a mechanism to improve the timeliness of accessing accurate data, and data not normally available to ATC, dispatch services and/or pilots. Since twitter is publicly accessible and contains user-generated content, the vulnerability, reliability and trustworthiness of its data must be assessed before introducing this information stream into the aviation industry that requires accurate and timely information. This project investigates the use of twitter to improve the data timeliness and possibly increase the data coverage to ATC for air transport personnel, pilots, aircraft dispatchers, airline managers, and airport managers.  As part of the investigations, this project seeks to assess twitter’s vulnerability, reliability and trustworthiness for use in Federal Aviation Administration controlled airspace to augment the data currently available and used by aircraft dispatchers.

We have begun our inquiry by implementing a twitter-based prototype (Marshall, Johnson et al., 2012) that considers 4 major commercial airline carriers and 30 US airports during Hurricane Sandy in October 2012 that captured up-to-the-minute aviation conditions via airport ICAO and IATA codes and keyword analysis (Marshall, Johnson et al., 2013). We implemented K-means clustering and computed the 2 mutual information evaluations. Of the collected tweets’ containing airport codes during Hurricane Sandy, we observe in the largest cluster of the airport codes are not directly located in Hurricane Sandy’s path, indicating that intermediate airports that were affected due to lack of aircrafts and air transport system personnel. The second experiment dealt with keywords. Sample keywords and phrases include jet blue, delta, united, southwest, flight, cancel, flood, storm, weather, sandy, nor’easter, new york, new jersey, philadelphia, washington, west virginia, maryland, food shortage and electricity. Of the collected tweets’ containing these types of keywords, we noticed 2 relatively large groupings including the airline keywords. As expected, the keywords related to Delta Airlines and aviation/flight appear in nearly all the clusters. Surprisingly, the keywords related to Hurricane Sandy only appeared in one cluster implying the tweets centered on the consequences of the storm — not the progression or status of the storm itself.

The current prototype system is written on Chrome’s JavaScript runtime node.js platform for easily building fast, scalable network applications. Between the end of October 2012 to the beginning of November 2012, about 13,000 tweets were collected using the twitter REST API. Our database contains three types of clusters namely Airport, Airlines and, Path.Airport. For our selected airlines, they generally provide flight schedules in one month increments in the form of downloadable PDF and require data format conversion to JSON.

References

1. Marshall, B., Johnson, M., Magikar A., Ghanekar A., Mathew I., Delaveau L., Budhiraju R., Chapparala R. (2012). Flight Data Analyzer using Twitter.  Journal of Emerging Trends in Computing and Information Sciences, 3(8):1226-1234.
2. Marshall, B., Johnson, M. and Chunduru, N. (in press). Towards general aviation using Twitter as a virtual aircraft dispatcher. Proceedings of the Conference on Telecommunications and Information Technology. Murray, Kentucky: Information and Telecommunications Education and Research Association.