OATdb Archive

2008 - 2009

Center Of Excellence In Digital Forensics

Goal
Curriculum Planning
The Center of Excellence in Digital Forensics will engage in a continuous curriculum planning to maintain currency in in-service training in Digital Forensics

Objective
Maintaining Quality Curriculum
The Center of Excellence in Digital Forensics needs to maintain  current, and high quality curriculum to meet the needs of its client base, which includes local and state law enforcement, federal agencies and other legal professional bodies.

Indicator
Curriculum Oversight Committee
The center has established a curriculum oversight committee to engage in an ongoing curriculum review process.  The committee initially consists of Dr. Karon Murff (Legal and organizational issues), Dr. Peter Cooper (protocol and procedure) and Mr. David Collins (technical)  The curriculum review is performed on a consensus view basis with additional external ad hoc members brought in as necessary. 

Criterion
Curriculum Review Process
The committee will be twice each semester to evaluate the curriculum. The committee members will use an agreed upon rubric to evaluate the curriculum. The curriculum will be considered of high quality if all three members are in agreement. If there is disagreement among the committee members, two additional individuals with expertise in the field of digital forensics will be asked to evaluate the curriculum. The additional members and the permanent committee members will cast votes. The committee will go with the majority vote.

Finding
Curriculum Review Results
The committee met as planned and required.  The curriculum was assessed as being of high standard and meeting the needs of its clientele.

Action
External Review
The curriculum review committee feels that some form of external review process would be beneficial.  The committee will identify potential external professional certification mechanism that might help provide validation for the curriculum.

Goal
Public Relations
The center serves police departments and federal agencies in the state of Texas. The center faculty and staff will maintain consistent and professional relations with its clientele base.

Objective
Public Relations
To maintain professional and consistent contact with the center’s clientele (police department and federal agencies in the state of Texas).

Indicator
Client Responses
The chair of the computer science department will select a representative sample of departments and agencies from the clientele base and contact directors from those departments and agencies on an annual basis. 

Criterion
Director's Rsponses
The directors will be asked if they plan to continue using the center’s services. If 80% of the directors respond positively to the question, the center’s public relations activities will be consider successful. 

Finding
Findings From Director's Responses
The department chair contacted directors in December of 2008 and May of 2009. 100% of the directors indicated that they intended to continue using the center’s services.  Although the directors gave positive feedback, the feedback not structured enough in terms of the clients’ specific likes and dislikes of the center’s performance.

Action
Public Relations Action
The center’s staff and faculty will consider developing an online anonymous survey to be administered annually to a representative sample of directors. 

Goal
Student Satisfaction
The center exists to provide training services to law enforcement and other legal groups. It is central to the mission of the Center that the trainees are satisfied with the quality of the services they receive.

Objective
Student Evaluation
The Center needs to maintain high levels of student satisfaction with the center’s services

Indicator
Student Satisfaction Survey
Each student will complete an anonymous exit survey upon completion of the program

Criterion
Student Evaluation
Student satisfaction will be considered high if the students’ answers average four or better on a five point scale. 

Finding
Student Satisfaction Survey Results
The student evaluations for 2008/9 averaged a score of 4.3 over all students surveyed.

Action
Student Evaluation Survey
While the results indicate that the criterion was met for 2008/9 the committee feels that it is possible to improve on these results and that there should be a long term upard trend in evaluation scores.

Goal
Technical Competency
THe curriculum is structured in the form of continuing professional education and must result in the students developing and attaining technical competence.

Objective
Technical Competency
To develop students’ technical skills in the areas of legal and organizational issues, procedure and protocol and tan understanding of the underlying concepts associated with the forensics of digital storage and communications devices.

Indicator
Student Learning Assessment
Students are required to complete a test at the end of each training session and the tests are developed by a group of faculty with expertise in the appropriate areas and professionals in the field of digital forensics. A rubric for evaluating students’ performances was developed by the faculty and professionals who developed the test. At the end of each training session a committee of faculty with expertise in the relevant areas will randomly select 10 tests and evaluate the test using the rubric. Faculty will score the tests on a scale of 1 – 5

Criterion
Student Learning Success Criterion
Students’ technical skills will be considered well developed if the committee members score the tests at four or better.

Finding
Student Learning Results
Committee members’ assigned each test a four or better. Although the goal of developing students’ technical skills was fulfilled, the committee believes that there is a need to refine the grading rubric so that it is more explicit. 

Action
Student Learning Rubric
The committee needs to refine the grading rubric  


Update to previous cycle's plan for continuous improvement

Plan for continuous improvement The Center of Excellence in Digital Forensics has a need to maintain and develop its curriculum planning process to include some forms of external validation though mapping material to professional certification bars and/or comparison with commercial training options.  The Center needs to formalize its public relations processes and should seek to improve the student satisfaction survey results.  In addition the Center needs ot reassess its approach to evaluating student learning and refine the grading rubric.