Computer Graphics Education Column
Judy Brown and Steve Cunningham
SIGGRAPH Education Committee
SIGGRAPH has a very active education committee. We will be providing information in each issue of Computer Graphics about our activities, projects and concerns. This issue contains an update of current projects. New ideas, and especially new volunteers, are always needed. Contact Steve Cunningham, chair, SIGGRAPH education committee, California State University—Stanislaus, Turlock, CA 95380, (209)667-3176, mail: rsc@csustan.uucp.
Comments concerning the content of the educational column should be addressed to Judy Brown, vice-chair, SIGGRAPH education committee, Weeg Computing Center, The University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA 52242, (319)353-3170, mail: awcjrbwy@uiamvs.bitnet.
Careers in computer graphics
Concern about careers in computer graphics has been one of the focal points of the SIGGRAPH education committee since it began, with an emphasis on obtaining information about career descriptions and requirements. An article in Computer Graphics 20(2), February, 1986, highlighted some of the areas where there are interesting careers: researching, designing and marketing graphics hardware, managing a production environment, developing software, writing technical documentation, consulting and teaching. The article also gave some details on application areas where computer graphics is an important tool such as geography and cartography, medicine, molecular modeling, education, computer-aided design, engineering and the fine arts.
A meeting of the SIGGRAPH education committee career interests subgroup was held in Dallas at the SIGGRAPH'86 conference. There was a lively discussion of technical and artistic skills and the need for more market research into these areas. One result is that more detailed articles on concerns in the fine arts will appear in a forthcoming issue of Computer Graphics. Annette Burr Coan, Publishing Technology, Inc., will discuss computer art and artists in advertising. Theresa Marie Rhyne, bay area contract design artist, will address computer art and design, as well as computer art copyright concerns.
We still need people with knowledge and experience in other areas to research and share this information. Anyone interested should contact Judy Brown at the address given above.
Graphics curricula
We continue to work on the establishment and/or improvement of computer graphics curricula. Our draft curriculum for an elective course in computer graphics, intended for a computer science program or anyone else wanting an algorithms-oriented approach, has been prepared by Mark Ohlson and is published in this issue. A somewhat different approach to the graphics course has been taken by Eurographics. Review its curriculum proposal for a core course in graphics for computer science presented briefly in this issue. Both are well thought-out proposals for somewhat different courses that deserve careful study by computer science programs.
In other areas, Barbara Mones-Hattal's study of computer graphics curricula in the arts has yielded a careful survey of a number of programs which will be published later this year. Our work on graphics within engineering programs is being reorganized as a cooperative effort with the appropriate engineering societies under the direction of Mike McGrath, and we are looking forward to its results.
Finally, we would like to consider the role of computer graphics within MIS programs. Anyone who has experience with such courses; please write or call Steve Cunningham at the address given above.
Educational resource grants
The SIGGRAPH education committee has developed the pilot program of educational resource grants which brought 15 educators to SIGGRAPH'86 in Dallas. We are very pleased with this program and hope it can be continued (a report on this pilot program is in this issue of Computer Graphics).
Educational slide set
In October 1985, we issued a call for slides for a first educational slide set. Several slides were received, but there were not enough for a complete set which met SIGGRAPH's standards. This project is being continued under Marek Holynski's direction, and further slide contributions are welcome. David Sealey, University of Iowa, has agreed to help with this project by creating the slides needed to complete the set and to make the set more consistent. This set should be ready by the 1987 conference.
Graduate student session at SIGGRAPH'87
We are aware that the extremely high quality of the technical program at the SIGGRAPH conference makes it difficult for graduate students to make their research work known. To help relieve this, we are organizing a ``brag session'' for SIGGRAPH'87 at which graduate students can describe their original work to interested parties. This is being organized by Ed Ferguson, Computer Science Department, The University of Maine at Orono, Orono, ME 04469, (207) 581-3941, Ferguson@Maine.bitnet. More details will be announced later, but you may contact him to register interest for yourself or your students.
Educational equipment grants and discounts
Finally, Judy Brown is developing information on foundations and vendors that make educational grants and offer discounts. She has made extensive contacts with vendors who display at SIGGRAPH, and she expects to make this information available early next year.
Educational Resource Grants
Steve Cunningham
SIGGRAPH Education Committee
SIGGRAPH'86 included 15 grantees from SIGGRAPH's pilot program of resource grants to computer graphics educators. This program was developed in response to a suggestion from ACM President Adele Goldberg after SIGGRAPH'85 and was supported by the SIGGRAPH executive committee at the pilot level of 15 grants. Each grant consisted of the registration fee for two days of tutorials, current SIGGRAPH video reviews, slide sets and conference proceedings, and up to $500 for technical session registration and/or partial travel support.
These initial grants were intended to support individuals undertaking a new computer graphics course or a significant expansion of an ongoing graphics program. Formal applications were solicited, and each was asked to contain four things: a cover letter with signatures of the proposer and his or her dean or department chairperson; a statement of the proposer's plans, background, conference course selection and available equipment; a statement of the institutional commitment to the proposer and to the planned development; and a short budget including institutional travel support. Evaluations were made by a panel consisting of Judy Brown, Mike McGrath and Steve Cunningham based on the following criteria, which were known to the proposers: the quality and appropriateness of the planned development, the appropriateness of the proposed SIGGRAPH courses to the planned development, the preparation of the proposer to do the planned development and the support shown by the home institution for the planned development. Proposals were evaluated without regard to the proposer's discipline, the home institution or the proposer's country.
The availability of the pilot grants was announced by a mailing to persons listed in SIGGRAPH's Computer Graphics Education Directory and by as many personal contacts as possible. The timing of the final decision to support the program made it impossible to reach a wider audience with more usual announcements. In spite of this, over 100 inquiries and over 40 complete proposals were received.
Most of the proposals received were worthy of support, and the 15 grants finally made should prove very beneficial. The grants were distributed in proportions very close to the original proposals: six in the arts, six in the computer sciences and three in engineering. The 1986 grantees were:
Vera Anand, Clemson University
Hubert Callihan, University of Pittsburgh—Johnstown
Robert Coon, Kean College of New Jersey
Sharon Ford, Rancho Santiago College
David Hart, Weber State College
Kenneth Jacker, Appalachian State University
William Joel, Marist College
Michael Jordan, Dalton Junior College
Merry McDonald, Northwest Missouri State
University
Toni Noah, Massachusetts College of Art
Theresa Marie Rhyne, independant art educator
Larry Richards, University of Virginia
Thomas Schlosser, College of Saint Mary
John Schnell, Fashion Institute of Technology
Steve Simmons, Eastern Washington University.
These individuals were very active at the conference, with one organizing a birds-of-a-feather meeting and another agreeing to write an article on graphics careers.
At an evaluation meeting held after the conference courses, the grantees were unanimous in emphasizing the value of these grants. Nine of the grantees had never been to a SIGGRAPH conference and none were regular attendees, and at least 10 could not have come this year without their grant. Most said that their grant influenced their dean or department chair to provide more travel support than was otherwise possible, and several felt that their award would give them a better ability to get equipment or curriculum changes to improve computer graphics education at their institution. Overall, the grantees were quite positive about the quality of the courses they attended and the benefits of these courses in their own teaching. In an ongoing phase of the evaluation, the grantees are asked to send the education committee information on their courses and copies of any materials they develop so we may determine the longer-term value of these awards. At this point, however, our evaluation is that the pilot program has been quite successful.
Given the success of this pilot effort, its continuation will be proposed for 1987. Persons interested in applying are invited to write to Steve Cunningham, SIGGRAPH education committee chair, Computer Science Department, California State University—Stanislaus, Turlock, CA 95380 and further information will be forwarded as it is available. We believe this program will result in long-term benefits to computer graphics education and ultimately to the graphics field itself.
UK—Eurographics
Proposed Course Syllabus
Steve Cunningham
SIGGRAPH Education Committee
The UK chapter of Eurographics recently held a workshop on teaching computer graphics. The result was a draft syllabus for a course in computer graphics developed by a distinguished group of educators from the UK and continental Europe. Since this course differs somewhat from the course proposed by SIGGRAPH's education committee, it is presented here in summary form for SIGGRAPH members' information. A complete article on this course should appear in Computer Graphics Forum, the Eurographics newsletter, about the same time as this issue of Computer Graphics.
The context of the UK proposed course is somewhat different from SIGGRAPH's. The SIGGRAPH proposal is for an elective course focusing totally on computer graphics through its fundamental algorithms, while the UK proposal is for a course which is in the core curriculum for all computer science students. As they define it, ``this syllabus is intended to define the material that every computer science student should know.'' Thus the material is naturally broader and less deep than the SIGGRAPH proposal. We believe that the UK course has some interest for computer science programs internationally, although this course is more of a programming and applications course than the one proposed by the SIGGRAPH education committee. The UK proposal calls for 45 hours of lecture and 20-45 hours of practical work. Its outline follows, though the order is flexible.
(1) Scope of computer graphics (2 hours): motivation, applications, techniques, equipment, software, history.
(2) Graphics devices (3 hours): output (displays and hardcopy, calligraphic and raster), input.
(3) User interfaces (11 hours): culture, user, application program, graphics subsystem, workstation, local intelligence.
(4) Graphics concepts and algorithms (14 hours): picture primitives, coordinate systems, segments, transformations, clipping, other.
(5) Introduction to object modeling (6 hours): lines, curves, polygons, representations, DDA's, surfaces, solids.
(6) Presentation of the image (2 hours): drawing, symbolism, painting, animation.
(7) Object visibility (5 hours): visibility as segment attribute, fundamentals in point, line, and area oriented algorithms.
(8) Overview of advanced topics (2 hours).
(9) Practical work (20 to 45 hours).
If you are interested in this syllabus, please read the Computer Graphics Forum article carefully. Any comments should be sent to its author: David A. Duce, Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, Informatics Division, Chilton, Didcot OXON OX11 0QX, United Kingdom.
Microcomputers in
Computer Graphics Education
SIGGRAPH'86 Birds-of-a-Feather Meeting
William J. Joel
Assistant Professor of Computer Science
Division of Computer Science and Mathematics
Marist College
Poughkeepsie, NY 12601
jzem@marist.bitnet
On the Thursday of the SIGGRAPH'86 conference a group of 12 attendees met informally in a birds-of-a-feather meeting to discuss the use of microcomputers in computer graphics education. Those attending included
Robert Coon, Kean College of NJ
Steve Cunningham, CSU-Stanislaus
Linda Ettenger, University of Oregon
James Freeman, Cornell University
David Hart, Weber State College
Jonathen Hazen, Denver, CO
William Joel, Marist College
John F. Krupka, American Academy of Art
Chester Mazur, G. M. Research Labs
Dean Sanders, Illinois State University
John Schnell, Fashion Institute of Technology
Steve Simmons, Eastern Washington University
The experiences of using microcomputers in computer graphics education for the group ranged from none to fully implemented graphics labs. Several items were discussed during the meeting including
" the advantages and disadvantages of using microcomputers
" the reasons for selecting microcomputers
" possible cost-effective means of obtaining quantities of microcomputers
" the integration of microcomputers into computer graphics programs
It was generally agreed by the group that microcomputers can provide a very viable means of supplying ample computing power for a computer graphics course. The disadvantages range from limited graphics capabilities (resolution, number of colors available, etc.) to the uncertainty of purchasing quantities of a particular microcomputer only to later discover that the manufacturer has gone out of business.
It was mentioned that more sophisticated micro-computers, such as Commodore's Amiga and Apple's Macintosh, afforded the user better graphics functions while not putting a drain on a school's equipment budget. In fact, it was suggested that if a large enough number of units were purchased sizeable discounts could be arranged.
Also discussed was how apparently most of the microcomputer graphics hardware and software being marketed was targeted for the IBM PC and compatibles, as opposed to the models mentioned above.
The author also uses microcomputers extensively in computer graphics education and welcomes further discussion of the area in future issues of Computer Graphics.