ISE 5730
Transcript Abbreviation:
Info Anal & Synth
Course Description:
Professional information analysis in engineering, intelligence/security, business, and health care that identifies the factors that make the analytical process shallow or rigorous.
Course Levels:
Undergraduate (1000-5000 level)
Graduate
Designation:
Elective
General Education Course
(N/A)
Cross-Listings
(N/A)
Credit Hours (Minimum if “Range”selected):
3.00
Max Credit Hours:
3.00
Select if Repeatable:
Off
Maximum Repeatable Credits
(N/A)
Total Completions Allowed
(N/A)
Allow Multiple Enrollments in Term:
No
Course Length:
14 weeks (autumn or spring)
12 weeks (summer only)
Off Campus:
Never
Campus Location:
Columbus
Instruction Modes:
In Person (75-100% campus; 0-24% online)
Prerequisites and Co-requisites:
Prereq: Sr or Grad standing, or permission of instructor.
Electronically Enforced:
No
Exclusions
(N/A)
Course Goals / Objectives:
Learn the cognitive components of professional information analysis
Describe what is a good analytic process
Know basic vulnerabilities that can lead to shallow, narrow, erroneous analyses
Carry out the steps in hypothesis exploration in order to find the best explanation and avoid surprise
Critique an analysis based on the definition of what is sufficient rigor
Develop a briefing of analytical results for policy or decision makers (what is actionable intelligence)
Test whether new computer and visualization tools support good analytic process and reduce the vulnerability to shallow/narrow analysis
Check if concurrence sought:
No
Contact Hours:
| Topic | LEC | REC | LAB | LAB Inst |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Introduction: What is a good analytical process (the basics of professional information analysis)? | 3.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0 |
| Surprise in information analysis Analyze a case of surprise in international affairs. Sample case—the Yom Kippur war intelligence surprise | 3.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0 |
| Cognitive factors in analysis Data overload Finding valuable sources Avoiding premature closure Conflict and corroboration (finding and resolving discrepancies Sense making | 4.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0 |
| Engineering safety analysis. Sample case—The return to flight decision after the Columbia space shuttle accident. | 1.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0 |
| Energy security in an international humanitarian and sectarian crisis | 1.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0 |
| Critique the quality of an information analysis. Sample case—detecting accounting fraud. | 1.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0 |
| Do a professional information analysis: Sample case—How does the threat of terrorism change the risks of where to put liquefied natural gas transport hubs and how to safeguard liquefied natural gas tanker operations for a government body? | 3.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0 |
| Adversarial Intent Typical errors | 1.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0 |
| Connecting analysis to action plans Actionable intelligence, analysis and re-planning (tactical analysis), briefing policy/decision-makers. | 1.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0 |
| Integration Review of fundamental principles | 1.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0 |
| How can automation, computers, visualizations support good analytic process (visual analytics) | 1.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0 |
| Hypothesis exploration (avoiding surprise)—how to determine the best explanation Managing multiple constraints | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0 |
| Collaboration and analysis. The role of multiple perspectives in analysis How to avoid error in analysis? How broadening checks reduce the tendency to premature narrowing. | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0 |
| Total | 24 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Grading Plan:
Letter Grade
Course Components:
Lecture
Grade Roster Component:
Lecture
Credit by Exam (EM):
No
Grades Breakdown:
| Aspect | Percent |
|---|---|
| Homework | 20% |
| Exercises and project | 40% |
| Exam | 40% |
Representative Textbooks and Other Course Materials:
| Title | Author | Year |
|---|---|---|
| Course readings | Various |
ABET-CAC Criterion 3 Outcomes
(N/A)
ABET-ETAC Criterion 3 Outcomes
(N/A)
ABET-EAC Criterion 3 Outcomes
(N/A)
Embedded Literacies Info
(N/A)
Attachments
(N/A)
Additional Notes or Comments
(N/A)