This article examines the relationship between ABET CAC standards for undergraduate programs of information systems and IS 2010 curriculum specifications. We have reviewed previous work that identifies course structures from accredited IS programs. In addition, the discontinuity observed in curriculum advancement over the years courses with IS 2010 provided background for comparison of required courses within IS 2010 and those of accredited programs. Also, we utilized survey of industry and government data to compare ABET/CAC expectations with IS 2010. A disconnect exists in comparing IS 2010 and ABET/CAC. It is suggested that new work is necessary to resolve these differences.

This paper describes an instrument designed for assessing learning outcomes in data management. In addition to assessment of student learning and ABET outcomes, we have also found the instrument to be effective for determining database placement of incoming information systems (IS) graduate students. Each of these three uses is discussed in this paper. We describe the use of a pre/post test, item validation, and correlation techniques for the purpose of validation and assessment. Although the instrument was developed for local assessment, its design is based on international information systems curriculum guidelines rendering it suitable for use in any program which incorporates database management in its curriculum.

This article presents the results of research to explore the nature of changes in skills over a fifty year period spanning the life of Information Systems model curricula. Work begun in 1999 was expanded both backwards in time, as well as forwards to 2012 to define skills relevant to Information Systems curricula. The work in 1999 was based on job ads from 17 major national news papers. The ~3000 ads enabled generation of 37 skills and defined major areas of skills: software development, web development, database, operating systems and telecommunications, strategic organizational development, interpersonal and team skills, and project management. During the development of this research a ninth skill area was added: information and security assurance. The original 37 skills had been expanded to 69 skills, and within this effort, 69 additional skills were added. Analysis of the skills as of today suggested elimination of retired (24) and too new (13) skills. Of the remaining skills a set (35) of skills was common to all curricula, a large set of current skills (64) was abandoned by IS 2010 which added new skills (2). Deletion of programming as a requirement of IS 2010 accounts for a significant proportion of deletions.

This paper builds on prior work defending innovative information systems programs as ABETaccreditable. A proposal for a four-year degree program in health informatics, initiated at the authors’ university to combat enrollment declines and to therefore help information systems to survive and thrive, is described. The program proposal is then evaluated against ABET-CAC criteria for information systems degree programs. The results of the evaluation were used to refine the authors’ program proposal and provide further evidence of the defensibility of innovative IS degree programs as ABET-accreditable.

The Information Systems (IS) undergraduate curriculum has consistently valued the same core Information Technology (IT) skills as those of the professional marketplace. The conundrum faced by department chairs and curriculum committees is how to adjust to changes in the IT environment and marketplace while fostering a core of basic IT skills. That core is the consistent tradition of IT skills for the IS discipline. Argyris and Schon’s work on organizational learning is used as a philosophical and theoretical lens through which the curriculum decision-making process can be better understood. Cycles of skills and learning assessment, which utilize key constituents to provide feedback loops for error detection and correction, both promote and restrain the tendency to react and over-react in curricular decision-making. In light of this, the 2010 Association for Information Systems/Association for Computing Machinery (AIS/ACM) model curriculum is compared to previous model curricula in order to examine the degree to which the need for basic IT skills has actually changed. Future research directions are discussed which will facilitate inquiry into which IT skills have consistently mattered in the Information Systems discipline over the last 20 years. It is our position that a cycle of reflective learning is needed to undertake appropriate error correction and detection in the process of curricular decisionmaking.

In addition to being a relevant program for health information technology workers, a recently proposed Health Informatics program was designed with additional objectives in mind: that the program is compatible with the IS 2010 Model Curriculum and that it satisfies the International Medical Informatics Association recommendation for undergraduate curricula. In this paper, we show that the program meets the IS 2010 guidelines based on an analysis of skill expectations for health informatics graduates. We produce a three-way mapping of IS 2010 knowledge and skill sets to IMIA learning outcomes to health informatics course sets. The program is comprised of three course sets: information systems courses, health informatics courses, and courses comprising the clinical environment. Courses in all three sets contribute skills in adequate depth with no gaps in coverage of required skills in either model. The success of the mappings indicates that health informatics should be a robust information systems program that will increase the productivity of individuals and organizations through the application of health information technology. The health informatics curriculum is largely an organizational systems-based program designed to enable new workflow models for health environments.

This is a progress report on actions to align vendor neutral certification for computing and Information Systems professionals with academic standards as codified by the IS2002 Model Curriculum.

This paper encourages a reflective long-view of the IS undergraduate curriculum which suggests that the professional marketplace has consistently valued the same core IT skills. The conundrum faced by department chairs and curriculum committees is how to adjust to changes in the IT environment and marketplace while also fostering a core of basic IT skills which lead to a consistent tradition of IT skills for the IS discipline. We highlight Argyris and Schon’s (1974, 1978, 1996) work on organizational learning as a philosophical and theoretical lens through which the curriculum decision-making process can be better understood. To wit: cycles of skills and learning assessment, which utilize key constituents to provide feedback loops for error detection and correction, both promotes and restrains the tendency to react and over-react in curricular decisionmaking. Towards this end, the 2010 AIS/ACM model curriculum is considered against previous model curricula in order to examine the degree to which the need for basic IT skills has actually changed. Future research directions are discussed which will facilitate inquiry into which IT skills have consistently mattered in the Information Systems discipline over the last 20 years. It is our

1. INTRODUCTION The learner-centered approach(Huba and Freed, 2000) with its emphasis on actively engaging the learner in the educational process and on assessing well-defined educational outcomes, represents a paradigm shift in higher education. The Saulnier et al. paper, found elsewhere in this issue, introduces the learner-centered paradigm and provides a stark contrast between it and the more traditional and dominant teacher-centered paradigm. As a general educational approach, the learner-centered paradigm informs all fields of study. So, why do educators in postsecondary information systems(IS) programs especially need to consider the value of the learner-centered approach? This paper attempts to answer that question. When referring to the paradigm, this paper uses the terms learner-centered and outcomes-based interchangeably, because they are both part and parcel of the same approach. Usually the term learner-centered is used when the emphasis is on issues relating to the student, while the term outcomes-based is used when the emphasis is on the learning outcomes and their assessment. In this remainder of this paper, we look at five major trends and issues that are critically important to postsecondary IS education. For each IS education trend or issue, we discuss the relevance of the learner-centered paradigm and offer one or more propositions to stimulate critical thought among IS educations and to drive future research that synthesizes the learner-centered approach with that IS education area. 2. IS EDUCATION TRENDS AND ISSUES The five key areas for IS education include recruiting and retention of students in information systems programs, the issue of learning in a dynamic field, the prevalence of professional certifications, the presence of a longstanding outcomes-based model curriculum, and the increasingly outcomes-based approach required by accrediting agencies. 2.1 Recruiting and Retention The learner-centered paradigm's emphasis on engaging students and focusing on student success is critical to attracting and retaining students. The recent enrollment declines in computing programs nationally have been a wakeup call to IS programs accustomed to a healthy flow of students motivated by career opportunities. With fewer students, IS programs cannot afford a selective admissions orientation nor survive with courses with low success rates that threaten to further weed out students from the program. The learner-centered paradigm challenges us to find a successful approach for all students. Its emphasis is on actively engaging the student in a learning process that promotes student satisfaction and success. The leaner-centered paradigm offers an alternative, by engaging students in the learning process using techniques such as active learning. By exploring rather than listening, and with incremental feedback, students are likely to learn more(Huba and Freed, 2000, p. 153). This concept is analogous to a fundamental tenet of information systems, which has long held that user participation in systems development leads to increased levels of involvement, system acceptance, usage, and satisfaction(Barki and Hartwick, 1994; Baroudi, Olson, and Ives, 1986; Hartwick and Barki, 1994; Hunton and Beeler, 1983) and reduces the potential for user resistance(Markus, 1983). Likewise, a student who is actively engaged is likely to be more involved, successful, and satisfied as a learner. More successful and satisfied learners should increase the rate of retention. Through greater student satisfaction, success, and retention, a program's reputation will improve, leading to increased enrollments both through switching of majors and new recruits from feeder schools through word-of-mouth. Therefore, Proposition 1: Actively engaging learners leads to higher learner satisfaction, success, retention, and increased program enrollments 2. …

1. IS2002 SPECIFIES DESIRED OUTCOMES Two of the biggest challenges facing any industry are correctly and consistently identifying the knowledge, skills, and abilities(KSAs) needed to perform the job and adequately developing and training its entering members so that they will be prepared with those KSAs that will help ensure success on the job. The field of information systems is not immune to these challenges. One of the major challenges for the industry at large is properly and consistently equipping students with the skills needed in an industry that deals with rapidly changing problems. One way that the IS field has dealt with the issue of defining the primary KSAs needed for success is though the IS2002 project. IS2002(Gorgone et al., 2002) specifies learning units in terms of behavioral outcome statements that learners should know by the time of graduation. The learning units of both IS2002 as well as IS'97(Davis et al., 1997; Couger et al., 1995, 1997) are written behavioral terms, and are explained in terms of the cognitive levels of Bloom's taxonomy(1956). One of the primary goals that IS2002 was designed to address was to ensure that graduates had sufficient skills to be effective in the workplace(Landry et al., 2000). [FIGURE 1 OMITTED] The curriculum, as based on IS2002, was designed to enable sufficient time to be allocated to ensure a cognitively paced skill development path, or skill thread. Based on 150 outcome statements, multiple skills were blended within each learning unit to comprise the skill threads need to achieve the desired output skill levels. Landry's 2000 skill levels were the basis for development of IS2002. Given that those skill levels were found to have insignificant differences from the measurements used to develop IS2002(Colvin 2007), the learning units were mapped to the identified skills of Landry et al.(2000) demonstrating the skill threads (www.IS2002.org). 2. DEVELOPMENT OF NATIONAL NORM FOR OUTCOMES Once a definable set of skills for any industry has been identified, the next step is to set the standards of training for those skills. This is most often achieved through a process of examination and certification. In this way, not only can an industry certify members with minimum levels of skills (McKell et al., 2004). The ICCP grants to anyone passing the ISA exam the right to apply for a distinguished certificate, the Information Systems Analyst Certificate, the ISA(McKell et al., 2005, 2006). The Center for Computing Education Research(CCER) provides a mechanism for institutions to map the outcomes (Daigle et al., 2004) of their courses to the learning units of IS2002. Therefore, as students of the institution take the ISA exam, the scores on each of the learning units provide a nationally normed direct measure of effectiveness on the 60 learning units as well as on the 37 sub-skills. With this direct assessment(McKell et al., 2007), it is possible for the institution to identify areas of weakness, and work on these areas. 3. THE CURRENT SITUATION: TRAINING GAPS An examination of the data presented in Figure 1(provided by the CCER Longenecker et al., 2007) suggest that the top quarter of Universities participating in the ISA more closely meet expected sub-skill levels measured by Landry et al. (2000) and revalidated by Colvin(2008) than do the lower deemed necessary for the job, but also can assess the current state of their members' KSAs and identify critical gaps in training needs. The Institute for Certification of Computing Professionals through its Education Foundation agreed to sponsor a project to meet this measurement need and develop an exam to test the skills of graduating Information Systems majors(Landry et al., 2003, 2004). The initial exam was developed using subject matter experts made up of a team of faculty and industry professionals. The exam was successful in measuring the competencies of the examinees, but was not designed to specifically map the trainable skills and learning units to actual outcomes. …

1. FROM TEACHING TO LEARNING Over the last two decades a paradigm shift has been taking place in American higher education. The traditional, still dominant paradigm is the Instruction/Teaching Paradigm. In this paradigm a college is viewed as an institution that exists to provide instruction. Under it, colleges have created structures to provide for the activity of teaching, an activity conceived primarily as delivering 50-minute to 75-minue lectures; i.e., the mission of a college is to deliver instruction. As a discipline some now recognize that our dominant paradigm mistakes a means for an end. It takes the means or method--called or teaching--and makes it the college's end or purpose. To say that the purpose of colleges is to provide instruction is like saying that the business of Chevrolet is to operate assembly lines. Some now see that the mission of our higher education system is not instruction but rather that of producing learning with every student by whatever means work best. This paradigm is usually referred to as the Learning Paradigm. 2. COMPARISON OF TEACHER-CENTERED AND LEARNER-CENTERED PARADIGMS When comparing alternative paradigms, we must take great care in making the comparison. A paradigm is like the rules of a game: one of the functions of the rules is to define the playing field and the domain of possibilities on that field. But a new paradigm may specify a game played on a larger or smaller field with a larger or smaller domain of legitimate possibilities. Indeed, the Learning Paradigm expands the playing field and the domain of possibilities, and it radically changes various aspects of the game. In the Instruction Paradigm, a specific delivery methodology, the lecture, determines the boundary of what colleges can do, whereas in the Learning Paradigm, student learning and success set the boundary. Not all elements of the new paradigm are contrary to corresponding elements of the old; the new includes many elements of the old within its larger domain of possibilities. For example, the Learning Paradigm does not prohibit lecturing. Rather, lecturing becomes one of many possible instructional alternatives, all of which are evaluated on the basis of their ability to promote appropriate learning. In the Instruction Paradigm, the mission of the college is to provide instruction, to teach. The method and the product are one and the same. The means is the end. In the Learning Paradigm, the mission of the college is to produce learning. The method and the product are separate. The end governs the means. In the Learning Paradigm a college's purpose is not to transfer knowledge but to create environments and experiences that bring students to discover and construct knowledge for themselves, to make students members of communities of learners that make discoveries and solve problems. The college aims, in fact, to create a series of ever more powerful learning environments. The Learning Paradigm does not limit institutions to a single means for empowering students to learn; within its framework, effective learning technologies are continually identified, developed, tested, implemented, and assessed against one another. The aim in the Learning Paradigm is not so much to improve the quality of instruction--although that is not irrelevant--as it is to improve continuously the quality of learning for students both individually and in the aggregate. The Learning Paradigm shifts what the institution takes responsibility for: from quality instruction(lecturing, talking) to student learning. Students, the co-producers of learning, can and must take responsibility for their own learning. Hence, responsibility is a win-win game wherein two agents take responsibility for the same outcome even though neither is in complete control of all the variables. When two agents take such responsibility, the resulting synergy often produces powerful results. …

1. INTRODUCTION There has been a growing demand for assessment throughout education. From K-12 schools and "No Child Left Behind", to the push from regional accrediting agencies to others like AACSB and ABET, agencies external to the academic environment want to know if students are learning. According to Wikipedia, Assessment is "the process of documenting, usually in measurable terms, knowledge, skills, attitudes and beliefs"(Wikipedia). Assessment is not an end in itself but a vehicle for improving the information systems(IS) curriculum. Its effective practice begins with and a vision of the kinds of learning we most value for students and strive to help them achieve. Learning is a complex process. It entails not only what students know but what they can do with what they know. By assessing our IS programs, we are attempting to find out what students have actually learned. The focus of the assessment effort is enhanced student learning and a process by which IS program accomplishments may be identified and validated. 2. WHY DO ASSESSMENT So, why should academic consider assessment? Southern Illinois University at Edwardsville stated: "Two reasons for doing assessment come to mind rather quickly. First, assessment is what we faculty members can do in order to demonstrate to ourselves that we actually do what we say we do. It is our source of in-process feedback. As opposed to grades, assessment decomposes the curriculum(or an assignment, class, or course) into component parts and makes those parts visible. Second, assessment satisfies the demands for accountability by external agencies. Physicians, surgeons, lawyers, and nurses all practice their professions daily in front of their peers. They are constantly subject to peer review and feedback. Professors are perhaps the only professionals who habitually isolate themselves from peers behind closed [classroom] doors, there to practice the major activity for which they receive payment. Given the immense costs of higher education, if we the faculty don't use assessment to provide accountability, surely someone else will do it for us(Southern Illinois University Assessment, 2005). Palomba and Banta(1999) in their work Assessments Essential, stated: "Assessment is the systematic collection, review, and use of information about educational programs undertaken for the purpose of improving student learning and development." AACSB(The Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business) states in their accreditation criteria: "The team makes a judgment regarding the degree to which the school(1) is focusing its resources and efforts toward a defined mission and strategic management activities,(2) is maintaining a mix of both student and faculty participants that achieve high quality in the activities that support the school's mission; and(3) has defined its learning expectations and can demonstrate that graduates have achieved those expectations."(AACSB Assessment Overview, 2008) ABET has the following statement in their criteria for standard 1 for accreditation of Information Systems program: "The program has documented educational objectives that are consistent with the mission of the institution. The program has in place processes to regularly assess its progress against its objectives and uses the results of the assessments to identify program improvements and to modify the program's objectives.(ABET 2008) Gloria Rogers, the ABET director of Assessment states: "We need to have a culture of assessment, rather than a climate of assessment".(ABET Assessment, 2008) By this, she is indicating that assessment must be ingrained in the whole academic effort and be part of who we are and what we do. 3. TYPES OF ASSESSMENT Assessment can come in many forms: direct assessment, indirect assessment, assignment assessment, course assessment, program assessment and more. And assessment can be done with many tools and processes. …