262

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON EDUCATION, VOL. 51, NO. 2, MAY 2008

An Embedded Systems Curriculum Based on the IEEE/ACM Model Curriculum

Kenneth G. Ricks, Senior Member, IEEE, David Jeff Jackson, Senior Member, IEEE, and William A. Stapleton, Member, IEEE
AbstractThe Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering at The University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, has recently completed a major restructuring of its computer engineering curriculum. The main goal of this reform is to integrate a broad set of embedded systems concepts into the course sequence thereby creating an embedded systems focus throughout the curriculum. Breadth of embedded systems concepts is addressed by using the embedded systems component of the 2004 IEEE/ACM computer engineering model curriculum as the basis for the new curriculum content. Depth is attained by overlapping coverage of most topics using multiple courses and integrating forward and reverse references to these concepts among the courses. This paper presents the rationale behind the curriculum reform, the revised curriculum, lessons learned, and the results of a comprehensive assessment of its effectiveness. Index TermsCE2004 IEEE/ACM computer engineering model curriculum, computer engineering education, embedded systems.

I. INTRODUCTION HE faculty of the computer engineering program at The University of Alabama (UA), Tuscaloosa, has undertaken a project of pedagogical improvement by incorporating a focus on embedded systems that is pervasive throughout the computer engineering curriculum. The reform activities specically integrate a broad range of concepts from the embedded systems component of the 2004 IEEE/ACM computer engineering model curriculum [1]. The goal of the UA program is to produce highly-qualied graduates capable of engineering embedded systems, including their software and hardware components, for a variety of applications. Embedded systems are often dened as having a computing core and are intended for applications other than general-purpose computing. Embedded systems were chosen as the focus of the curriculum for several reasons. First, embedded systems represent a major fraction of the digital systems market, representing a key technology in the automotive, consumer electronics, industrial automation, military and aerospace applications, ofce automation, telecommunication and data-communication industries [2][4]. Second, there is signicant regional interest in embedded systems in the state of Alabama and surrounding areas. Therefore, this change in the UA curriculum will help to meet emerging workforce and education needs of

local industry. Finally, embedded systems represent a common area of research shared by all the UA computer engineering faculty. After a self-assessment of the UA program indicated that departmental resources could be better utilized if the curriculum were more focused and aligned with research interests, the decision to adopt an embedded systems focus was made. There is no shortage of efforts to integrate embedded systems topics into engineering curricula [5][10]. However, many of these described efforts focus on only a subset of embedded systems concepts, and there currently exists little literature describing curricular reform based upon the complete embedded systems component of the 2004 IEEE/ACM computer engineering model curriculum [1]. The distributed integration of a broad set of concepts from the model curriculum and the assessment of all of the specied learning outcomes to judge the efcacy of the reformed curriculum is one contribution of the described UA effort. Additionally, the results of the UA effort demonstrate that, despite the challenges associated with embedded systems education, establishing a curriculum based upon the knowledge units, topics, and learning outcomes in the IEEE/ACM model is feasible with minimal structural changes to the curriculum or required additional courses. This result is useful for programs working to integrate embedded systems into their curricula while needing to meet tight program constraints on the number of program credit hours and structure. The rest of this paper is organized as follows. Section II introduces the IEEE/ACM model curriculum. Section III describes the challenges associated with curriculum development for embedded systems. Section IV describes the UA computer engineering curriculum in detail including specic course descriptions. Section V presents the assessment of the UA curriculum. The Conclusion is presented in Section VI. II. THE 2004 IEEE/ACM COMPUTER ENGINEERING MODEL CURRICULUM The 2004 IEEE/ACM computer engineering model curriculum, hereinafter referred to as the model curriculum or the model, was created to provide some direction and unity for education in this very broad and diverse eld. The embedded systems area is one of the broad knowledge areas included in the model. Within the embedded systems knowledge area, there are eleven knowledge units (ESY0-ESY10). Each knowledge unit has 38 topics (T1T8) and 25 learning outcomes (LO1LO5). The knowledge units for the embedded systems component of the model are shown in Table I. The topics and learning outcomes are described in [1]. In this paper, each knowledge unit (ESY) and its associated topics (T) and learning outcomes (LO) are referred to using their

Manuscript received February 9, 2007; revised August 29, 2007. This work was supported in part by the National Science Foundation under Grants DUE0310831 and EEC-0431792. The authors are with the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, The University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, AL 35487-0286 USA (e-mail: kricks@eng.ua.edu; jjackson@eng.ua.edu; wstapleton@eng.ua.edu). Digital Object Identier 10.1109/TE.2007.909359

0018-9359/$25.00 2008 IEEE

Authorized licensed use limited to: Don Biosco Inst of Technology. Downloaded on January 24, 2009 at 01:08 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

RICKS et al.: EMBEDDED SYSTEMS CURRICULUM

263

TABLE I KNOWLEDGE UNITS ASSOCIATED WITH THE EMBEDDED SYSTEMS COMPONENT OF THE 2004 IEEE/ACM MODEL CURRICULUM [1]

respective acronyms and a number corresponding to the order in which they are listed in the model. These abbreviated representations are consistent with those representations dened in the model.

III. CHALLENGES IN EMBEDDED SYSTEMS EDUCATION With advances in hardware technology enabling smaller, faster devices, embedded applications have exploded in number and complexity in the last ten years. For example, as much as 98% of all 32-bit microprocessors currently in use worldwide are used in embedded systems [11]. The increased sophistication of embedded systems requires engineers to have more detailed knowledge of computing devices and embedded applications than was previously thought necessary. To address this growing eld, many educators are incorporating embedded computing concepts into their curricula. However, the study of embedded systems incorporates topics from many areas and disciplines, as indicated by the number of knowledge units, topics, and learning outcomes in the model. Incorporating all these topics into a curriculum effectively to provide students with in-depth understanding across all the areas is commonly referred to as the breadth problem, and is an obstacle to embedded systems educational efforts [12]. It is nearly impossible to provide in-depth coverage of this broad range of concepts in an undergraduate course sequence of one to three courses dedicated to embedded systems. Instead, a shallow introduction to a broad range of concepts or an in-depth concentration on a small subset of topics is often the best that can be expected, especially for smaller electrical and computer engineering (ECE) programs where faculty resources are more constrained and course sequences dedicated to embedded systems are limited to fewer courses. To circumvent the breadth problem, institutions tend to concentrate on concepts that are important to them or their industrial partners. These concepts form only a subset of the topics and address only a subset of the learning outcomes identied in the model curriculum as necessary for a broad education in embedded systems. To address the complete set of learning outcomes specied in the model, UA chose to distribute a large set of embedded systems topics from the model across all the computer engineering

courses within the program. Each course was redesigned to address a specic set of knowledge units, topics, and learning outcomes from the model. Overlapping coverage areas and explicit forward and backward references among the courses help students to gain a deeper understanding of the concepts and can aid in knowledge retention. UA hopes to realize the benets of an integrated curriculum [13] as well as to address the breadth problem of embedded systems education with this approach. IV. THE UA EMBEDDED SYSTEMS CURRICULUM Fig. 1 shows the UA computer engineering curriculum. Beginning with rst- and second-year fundamental courses and progressing through a sequence of courses, students are exposed to embedded systems concepts that build upon one another to culminate in a senior-level capstone design experience. Relationships among affected courses are emphasized by utilizing previous designs as components in subsequent courses. Explicit forward and backward references among courses are important for establishing relationships among courses, design-for-reuse principles, and increased prociency in the use of development tools. Among the typical rst- and second-year courses within an ECE program, UA offers ECE 125Fundamentals of ECE, and two computer science (CS) courses, CS 114/116Introduction to Programming and CS 124Introduction to CS. Each of these courses presents fundamental topics included in the model curriculum for embedded systems and are discussed here for completeness. ECE 125 is designed as a freshman course where basic ECE concepts are introduced. In this course, descriptions of embedded systems are provided, differences between embedded systems and other computing devices are covered, and the role of embedded systems within computer engineering is introduced. One particular goal of this course is to provide forward references to courses in the curriculum that students will encounter, explaining exactly why these courses are important. This roadmap benets students who often wonder why particular topics within the curriculum are of concern. The CS 114/116 and CS 124 courses are usually taken during the rst two years. These courses are programming courses where data structures, algorithms, and problem solving using high-level languages (HLLs) (C and C++) are presented. Students are aware of the signicance of programming within

Authorized licensed use limited to: Don Biosco Inst of Technology. Downloaded on January 24, 2009 at 01:08 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

264

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON EDUCATION, VOL. 51, NO. 2, MAY 2008

Fig. 1. UA computer engineering core course sequence [14].

TABLE II SUMMARY OF COVERAGE AREAS FOR ECE 380DIGITAL LOGIC. L = Lecture Coverage; W

= Written Assignment; A = Laboratory Assignment

embedded systems due to the forward references to these courses provided in ECE 125. These references help students appreciate the need for good programming skills and tend to break down stereotypes associated with hardware versus software engineers. Beginning with ECE 380, embedded systems concepts from the model curriculum are introduced in each course in three possible ways: lecture materials (L), written assignments (W), and laboratory assignments (A). The following course descriptions summarize the topics (T) and the learning outcomes (LO) from each knowledge unit of the model curriculum that are incorporated into each course. Also, forward and backward references among the courses are described. Due to length constraints, these descriptions are generalized. Additional course-specic details are available in [14]. A. ECE 380Digital Logic ECE 380Digital Logic is a four-hour lecture/laboratory course incorporating traditional combinational and sequential logic design and digital design using VHSIC hardware description language (VHDL). The topics and learning outcomes from the model curriculum incorporated into ECE 380 are summarized in Table II. Specic knowledge units addressed include history and overview (ESY0), embedded microcontrollers (ESY1), reliable system design (ESY5), and design methodologies (ESY6). Many forward references are used in ECE 380 to bridge between courses. For example, the sequential logic circuit implementation of a counter is presented. The counter is then extended to a timer, specically a watchdog timer. This timer concept is then revisited in the subsequent course, ECE 383. Other

forward references include circuitry to generate pulse-widthmodulated signals, circuitry for bus arbitration, and digital design using VHDL. B. ECE 383Microcomputers ECE 383Microcomputers is a four semester-hour lecture/ laboratory course that emphasizes design using microprocessors as system components. As the rst course to address microprocessor architectures, ECE 383 is the key prerequisite for all remaining courses in the curricular sequence. Consequently, ECE 383 incorporates topics and learning outcomes from all of the knowledge units of the model curriculum except ESY3Realtime Operating Systems. A summary of the model curriculum concepts presented in ECE 383 is shown in Table III. ECE 383 utilizes several reverse references to previous courses. One of the more signicant of these references involves embedded software development concepts associated with the embedded programs knowledge unit, ESY2. Students are asked to program the same assignments using both assembly language and the C programming language. C is the language of choice because a majority of all embedded applications are written in C [15]. Extra efforts are made to introduce the C programming constructs applicable to embedded software and to compare these constructs with assembly language constructs performing the same functionality. Based upon research and assessment of embedded programming skills at various points in the UA curriculum, the authors feel that ECE 383 is the optimal place in the curriculum to introduce these concepts [9], [16]. Forward references are also used to link ECE 383 with subsequent courses. These references include interrupt concepts later addressed in ECE 484 and ECE 486/487, multiprocessor systems later addressed in ECE 484, A/D and D/A conversion,

Authorized licensed use limited to: Don Biosco Inst of Technology. Downloaded on January 24, 2009 at 01:08 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

RICKS et al.: EMBEDDED SYSTEMS CURRICULUM

265

TABLE III SUMMARY OF COVERAGE AREAS FOR ECE 383MICROCOMPUTERS. L = Lecture Coverage; W = Written Assignment; A = Laboratory Assignment

TABLE IV SUMMARY OF COVERAGE AREAS FOR ECE 480/481DIGITAL SYSTEMS DESIGN.

L = Lecture Coverage; W = Written Assignment; A = Laboratory Assignment

TABLE V SUMMARY OF COVERAGE AREAS FOR ECE 484COMPUTER ARCHITECTURE. L

= Lecture Coverage; W = Written Assignment

and power-constrained computing later studied in more detail in ECE 486/487. C. ECE 480/481Digital Systems Design ECE 480/481Digital Systems Design is a four-hour lecture/laboratory course that focuses on the design and testing of digital systems components. Special emphasis is placed on VHDL, testing, system-on-a-programmable-chip designs, and the use of sophisticated software and hardware tools. These topics specically address various components of ve different knowledge units from the model curriculum as summarized in Table IV. ECE 480/481 uses forward and backward references to other courses in the curriculum to help students tie concepts together. Specically, backward references include various digital components and VHDL previously discussed in ECE 380 and ECE 383. Forward references to possible ECE 494 Capstone Design projects help students to understand the signicance of the material.

D. ECE 484Computer Architecture ECE 484Computer Architecture is a three-hour course that incorporates embedded systems concepts in a computer architecture context. Specic topics of interest include basic system architectures, processor families, memory system design, assembly and HLL programming concepts, multiprocessor architectures, and performance evaluation. Topics and learning outcomes from seven different knowledge units of the model curriculum are incorporated into this course and are summarized in Table V. Since ECE 484 has no laboratory component, coverage is limited to lectures and written assignments. The C programming language is again used as the HLL to maintain consistency with previous courses. Backward references to ECE 383 programming concepts are included both in the HLL constructs used and in the assembly programming portion of the course. References to memory system design and digital components discussed in ECE 486/487 and ECE 480/481 are common as are references to processor capabilities and interrupt techniques introduced in ECE 383.

Authorized licensed use limited to: Don Biosco Inst of Technology. Downloaded on January 24, 2009 at 01:08 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

266

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON EDUCATION, VOL. 51, NO. 2, MAY 2008

TABLE VI SUMMARY OF COVERAGE AREAS FOR ECE 486/487EMBEDDED SYSTEMS.

L = Lecture Coverage; W = Written Assignment; A = Laboratory Assignment

TABLE VII SUMMARY OF COVERAGE AREAS FOR ECE 494CAPSTONE DESIGN. L = Lecture Coverage; W

= Written Assignment; A = Laboratory Assignment

E. ECE 486/487Embedded Systems ECE 486/487Embedded Systems is a four-hour lecture/ laboratory course that was specically added to the curriculum as part of this reform effort. Since this course is dedicated to embedded systems, concepts from every knowledge unit are discussed. Some of the specic concepts discussed in this course include basic embedded architectures, hardware/software codesign, processor and memory technologies, I/O devices, interrupts, cache memory performance, and real-time systems. A summary of concepts from the model curriculum discussed in ECE 486/487 is shown in Table VI. By design, students will have seen many of these concepts in other courses, making references to these courses very effective. For example, timer designs from ECE 380 and ECE 383 are used again to create periodic interrupts dening a quantum used in multitasking scheduling policies. Decoder designs from ECE 380 and ECE 383 are used to describe bus-based transactions between master and slave components. Processor designs from ECE 484 are used to count clock cycles for general-purpose processor timer applications. References related to HLL programming and assembly programming concepts are also discussed relating ECE 486/487 to CS 114/116, CS 124, ECE 383, and ECE 484. Although already seen in other courses, ECE 486/487 addresses these concepts at a higher system-level of abstraction. This system-level approach is enhanced in the laboratory assignments where high-level programming languages are used and overall system design, implementation, integration, and analysis are stressed. Laboratory hardware and software components include VMEbus components that map well to the concepts in the model curriculum and promote a system-level view [17], [18]. This system-level view of embedded systems complements the low-level view of many of the same concepts gained in other courses in the curriculum and matches

the higher level of abstraction that is being added to current development tools. F. ECE 494Capstone Design ECE 494Capstone Design culminates the undergraduate engineering design experience by providing a team-oriented design project building on the skills learned in a previous senior-level lecture/laboratory course. Candidate lecture/laboratory courses preceding the Capstone Design course include ECE 480/481 and ECE 486/487. Design projects such as programmable logic devices and system-on-chip solutions in robotic vehicles and projects following various IEEE design competition models are used. It is difcult to identify the exact embedded systems components from the model curriculum that are addressed in this course since it is heavily dependent upon the project undertaken. However, there are several concepts from the model curriculum that will always be included in this course. For example, all facets of the previously introduced software and hardware tools are exercised in this course (ESY7). Since the design is team oriented, this course also provides the opportunity to address various aspects of student teaming skills (ESY6). The concepts from the model curriculum that are universally included in ECE 494 are summarized in Table VII. G. ECE/CS Area Electives There are several ECE and CS electives that contribute to the embedded systems focus of the curriculum. CS 426Operating Systems and ECE 479Digital Control Systems are two examples. In addition, ECE 493Special Topics can be used to introduce advanced embedded systems concepts such as real-time systems, programmable logic controllers (PLCs), hardware/software codesign, and design verication, validation, and testing. This collection of courses provides exibility in the

Authorized licensed use limited to: Don Biosco Inst of Technology. Downloaded on January 24, 2009 at 01:08 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

RICKS et al.: EMBEDDED SYSTEMS CURRICULUM

267

TABLE VIII OVERALL SUMMARY OF COVERAGE OF MODEL CURRICULUM CONCEPTS. L = Lecture Coverage; W = Written Assignment; A = Laboratory Assignment

curriculum and leads to increased breadth and depth of coverage of model curriculum topics and learning outcomes. H. Overview Table VIII presents an overall summary of model curriculum embedded systems coverage in the UA curriculum. Only the core courses are included. The UA curriculum demonstrates breadth specically addressing95% ofthetopicsand100%ofthelearning outcomes from the model. Depth is provided by overlapping coverage areas across multiple courses and using references among thecourses.Specically,64%ofthetopicsand71%ofthelearning outcomes are covered in multiple UA courses. V. ASSESSMENT To evaluate the effectiveness of the new curriculum, a comprehensive assessment was performed. The goals of the assessment are to evaluate the breadth and the depth of student understanding as they progress through the curriculum. The assessment data was collected in the fall 2005spring 2006 academic year. The essentialcomponentsoftheassessmentprocessincludestudentperceptions of their abilities, collected through surveys, and quantitative measures of student performance using both written assignments and laboratory assignments.

A. Student Survey Organization The rst component of the assessment is the perception students have of their own understanding of embedded systems concepts. For this data, students were asked to complete precourse and postcourse surveys. Table IX shows which courses were used to assess specic learning outcomes through student surveys. ESY1, ESY2, ESY6, and ESY7 are assessed in all courses. These knowledge units are used for general assessment for various reasons. ESY1 and ESY7 represent the core and elective knowledge units, respectively, incorporated into the most courses in the curriculum. ESY2 and ESY6 are used because they address very different concepts related to embedded systems and can aid in assessing the breadth of the curriculum. On all surveys, students were asked to rate their accomplishment of the associated learning outcomes. Each learning outcome was phrased into a statement to which students could respond with one of ve possible answers: Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Neutral, Agree, and Strongly Agree. An example survey question is shown below for ESY1-LO1. I understand the role of the central processing unit (CPU) in the context of a complete system with I/O and memory.

Authorized licensed use limited to: Don Biosco Inst of Technology. Downloaded on January 24, 2009 at 01:08 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

268

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON EDUCATION, VOL. 51, NO. 2, MAY 2008

TABLE IX RESULTS OF THE STUDENT SURVEYS. NUMBERS IN PARENTHESES REPRESENT THE NUMBER OF STUDENTS THAT COMPLETED EACH SURVEY.

NA = Data Not Available

B. Student Survey Data Table IX shows a general summary of the student survey data. For each survey, student responses are converted to a scale of , ). The 15 ( average for all responses for each learning outcome is calculated for the precourse and postcourse surveys. These averages include all courses where a learning outcome was assessed and all semesters the course was taught. Table IX also shows the difference between the precourse and postcourse averages. Taken together, Tables VIII and IX show that the UA curriculum effectively addresses the broad range of embedded systems topics identied in the model curriculum. Table VIII shows the wide range of coverage integrated into the curriculum. Table IX shows that for every knowledge unit in the model, the students believe their understanding of every learning outcome improved. This consistency of survey data demonstrates that the UA curriculum is not focusing on one area of the model over another. The perceived improvements

are consistent across all the knowledge units and learning outcomes demonstrating the effective integration of a broad range of concepts. Additionally, the fact that all learning outcomes within each knowledge unit show improvement also demonstrates depth of perceived knowledge and understanding. It is believed that the overlap of coverage within the curriculum and the forward and backward references among courses contribute to the depth of understanding. As seen in Table IX, no postcourse average is less than 3.34. These postcourse averages represent a considerable improvement over the precourse averages which are as low as 2.22 and provide more support for the breadth and depth of the UA curriculum. Representative course-specic survey data further demonstrates the breadth and depth of student understanding. Table X shows the course-specic survey results from ECE 383. The total number of each response is given and averages for precourse and postcourse data and improvements are also calculated.

Authorized licensed use limited to: Don Biosco Inst of Technology. Downloaded on January 24, 2009 at 01:08 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

RICKS et al.: EMBEDDED SYSTEMS CURRICULUM

269

TABLE X ECE 383 COURSE-SPECIFIC STUDENT SURVEY RESULTS. NUMBERS IN PARENTHESES REPRESENT THE NUMBER OF STUDENTS THAT COMPLETED EACH SURVEY

Several observations are made from this data. For all eight learning outcomes, ECE 383 students believe they have greater understanding at the end of the course than at the beginning. The average improvement across all learning outcomes is 0.78. These results are representative of the results seen in all the courses. Other data of note include the percentage of respondents answering Strongly Disagree and Disagree to each learning outcome. For ECE 383, the percentage of students responding in both categories on the precourse survey ranged from 18.52% to 54.54% with an average percentage of 31.63%. This average drops to 11.43% in the postcourse survey. Similar results are seen in the other courses as well. These data clearly show a signicant improvement in student condence regarding achieving the learning outcomes. This data indicates that students are more comfortable with their understanding of these concepts after each course. This result is expected and in itself does not lead to any nal conclusions about student knowledge breadth or depth. However, the consistent improvement across all knowledge units and across all learning outcomes associated with each knowledge unit does indicate that both breadth and depth have been integrated into the curriculum. C. Quantitative Data In this section, representative quantitative data of student performance is presented and used to evaluate the effectiveness of the UA curriculum. Student performance on specic test questions and laboratory assignments corresponding to learning outcomes in the model curriculum is used. Representative questions are taken from courses ECE 383, ECE 480/481, ECE 484,

and ECE 486/487. Results for each assignment are normalized to a ve-point scale based on the percentage of points earned , ). The quantitative data are shown in ( Table XI. As seen in Table XI, student performance on these representative test questions and laboratory assignments is quite good. Althoughnotcomprehensive,theseassignmentsassesslearningoutcomes from a broad range of knowledge units in the model curriculum. The positive results show the UA curriculum is effective at addressing a broad range of these topics. Also, this set of assessmentswasspecicallychosentocoverallthelearningoutcomesin oneknowledgeunit,ESY1.Theresultsindicatethatmanystudents achieved all three learning outcomes from ESY1 demonstrating that students gained in-depth knowledge, as opposed to a general introduction, of the topics in this knowledge unit. VI. CONCLUSION As embedded systems are integrated into more and more curricula, educators must nd a way to unify the many customized approaches to teaching in this area. The unication must also address the breadth problem, where institutions often nd it difcult to cover all the necessary components of the eld in sufcient depth. One place for educators to start is with the embedded systems component of the 2004 IEEE/ACM computer engineering model curriculum. This model was created by embedded systems and educational experts to provide a unied set of concepts necessary in this eld. This paper describes a new embedded systems curriculum created at UA and based on the model curriculum. Descrip-

Authorized licensed use limited to: Don Biosco Inst of Technology. Downloaded on January 24, 2009 at 01:08 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

270

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON EDUCATION, VOL. 51, NO. 2, MAY 2008

W = Written Assignment A = Laboratory Assignment

TABLE XI AVERAGE RESULTS OF QUANTITATIVE ASSESSMENT DATA. ;

tions of each course in the curriculum are provided including the specic areas of the model curriculum covered. Assessment data, both student surveys and quantitative data, are presented that show the UA curriculum to be effective at addressing the broad range of embedded systems concepts from the model curriculum in sufcient depth. The authors believe this approach can be adopted by other educators to integrate embedded systems into their curricula. Future work will involve further assessment of the learning outcomes specied in the model curriculum to keep pace with the dynamic nature of the UA curriculum. As course content shifts, even slightly, the effects on student performance can be measurable due to the overlapping coverage areas and course dependencies. Adjustments will be made to the curriculum to address areas where assessment data suggests student performance can be improved. Breadth will be added as needed using the elective courses. Where necessary, depth will be improved by introducing additional explicit references to link embedded systems concepts among courses and by increasing the amount of overlap among the course coverage areas. REFERENCES
[1] Joint Task Force on Computer Engineering Curricula, Association for Computing Machinery, Computer Engineering 2004: Curriculum Guidelines for Undergraduate Degree Programs in Computer Engineering, IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos, CA, Jul. 2006, pp. A.43A.45. [2] G. C. Gannod, F. Golshani, B. Huey, Y. H. Lee, S. Panchanathan, and D. Pheanis, A consortium-based model for the development of a concentration track in embedded systems, in Proc. American Society for Engineering Education Annu. Conf. and Exposition, Montreal, QC, Canada, Jun. 1619, 2002, pp. 12699 12711 . [3] W. Wolf, Rethinking embedded microprocessor education, presented at the American Society for Engineering Education Annu. Conf. and Exposition, Albuquerque, NM, Jun. 2427, 2001. [4] W. Wolf and J. Madsen, Embedded systems education for the future, Proc. IEEE, vol. 88, no. 1, pp. 2330, Jan. 2000. [5] J. Sztipanovits, G. Biswas, K. Frampton, A. Gokhale, L. Howard, G. Karsai, T. J. Koo, X. Koutsoukos, and D. C. Schmidt, Introducing embedded software and systems education and advanced learning technology in an engineering curriculum, ACM Trans. Embed. Comput. Syst, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 549568, Aug. 2005. [6] R. Seviora, A curriculum for embedded system engineering, ACM Trans. Embed. Comput. Syst., vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 569586, Aug. 2005. [7] M. Paulik, M. Krishnan, and N. Al-Holou, Work in progressDevelopment of an innovative curriculum for undergraduate electrical and computer engineering students, in Proc. 34th Frontiers in Education Conf., Savannah, GA, Oct. 2023, 2004, pp. S2C-13S2C-14.

[8] J. R. Vallino and R. S. Czernikowski, Thinking inside the box: A multi-disciplinary real-time and embedded systems course sequence, in Proc. 35th Frontiers in Education Conf., Indianapolis, IN, Oct. 1922, 2005, pp. T3G-12T3G-17. [9] K. G. Ricks, D. J. Jackson, and W. A. Stapleton, Incorporating embedded programming skills into an ECE curriculum, SIGBED Rev., vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 1726, Jan. 2007. [10] J. W. Bruce, J. C. Harden, and R. B. Reese, Cooperative and progressive design experience for embedded systems, IEEE Trans. Educ., vol. 47, no. 1, pp. 8392, Feb. 2004. [11] J. Turley, The two percent solution, Embed. Syst. Program., vol. 16, no. 1, p. 29, Jan. 2003. [12] B. Haberman and M. Trakhtenbrot, An undergraduate program in embedded systems engineering, in Proc. 18th Conf. Software Engineering Education and Training, Ottawa, ON, Canada, Apr. 1820, 2005, pp. 103110. [13] C. Atman and J. Turns, Integrating knowledge across the engineering curriculum, in Proc. 29th Frontiers in Education Conf., San Juan, Puerto Rico, Nov. 1013, 1999, pp. 13b7-2013b7-25. [14] W. A. Stapleton, K. G. Ricks, and D. J. Jackson, Implementation of an embedded systems curriculum, in Proc. 20th Int. Conf. Computers and Their Applications, New Orleans, LA, Mar. 2005, pp. 302307. [15] D. W. Lewis, Fundamentals of Embedded Software; Where C and Assembly Meet. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 2002, p. 8. [16] K. G. Ricks, D. J. Jackson, and W. A. Stapleton, Addressing embedded programming needs within an ECE curriculum, in Proc. Workshop Embedded Systems Education in Conjunction With EMSoft, Seoul, South Korea, Oct. 26, 2006, pp. 2228. [17] K. G. Ricks and D. J. Jackson, A case for the VMEbus architecture in embedded systems education, IEEE Trans. Educ., vol. 49, no. 3, pp. 332345, Aug. 2006. [18] K. G. Ricks, W. A. Stapleton, and D. J. Jackson, An embedded systems course and course sequence, in Proc. Special Session Embedded Systems Education Workshop Computer Architecture Education in Association With 32nd Int. Symp. Computer Architecture, Madison, WI, Jun. 5, 2005, pp. 4652. Kenneth G. Ricks (M04SM06) received the B.S. degree in electrical engineering from The University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, and the M.S. and Ph.D. degrees from The University of Alabama, Huntsville, in 1989, 1997, and 2002, respectively. From 1989 to 2002, he worked at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) where he was involved in the development of real-time simulations of orbital vehicles. He is currently an Assistant Professor in the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa. His primary areas of research include embedded systems, real-time systems, and parallel processing. Dr. Ricks is a member of the International Society of Computers and Their Applications (ISCA). David Jeff Jackson (M84SM06) received the B.S. degree in physics and the M.S. degree in electrical engineering from Auburn University, Auburn, AL, and the Ph.D. degree in electrical engineering from The University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, in 1984, 1986, and 1990, respectively. He is currently a Professor and Department Head of Electrical and Computer Engineering at The University of Alabama. His research interests include image processing, digital signal processing systems, parallel processing systems and applications, code optimization and proling, VHDL hardware description language, programmable device technologies, microprocessor based design, and embedded systems design. Dr. Jackson is a senior member of the International Society of Computers and Their Applications (ISCA) and a member of the American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE). William A. Stapleton (S87M95) received the B.S., M.S., and Ph.D. degrees in electrical engineering from The University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, in 1990, 1992, and 1997, respectively. He is currently an Assistant Professor in the Department of Electrical Engineering, Ingram School of Engineering, Texas State University, San Marcos. His research interests include microprocessor-based embedded system design, parallel and distributed computing applications, digital image processing applications, and engineering education pedagogy. Dr. Stapleton is a member of the American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE) and the International Society of Computers and Their Applications (ISCA).

Authorized licensed use limited to: Don Biosco Inst of Technology. Downloaded on January 24, 2009 at 01:08 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.