syllabus
1. Information regarding the programme
1.1 Higher education institution 	Babeş-Bolyai University of Cluj-Napoca	
1.2 Faculty	Faculty of Mathematics and Computer Science	
1.3 Department	Departament of Computer Science	
1.4 Field of study	Computer Science	
1.5 Study cycle	Master	
1.6 Study programme / Qualification 	High Performance Computing  and Big Data Analytics	

2. Information regarding the discipline 
2.1 Name of the discipline	Methodology of Scientific Research in Computer Science	
2.2 Course coordinator 	Prof.Dr. Militon Frenţiu	
2.3 Seminar coordinator	Prof.Dr. Militon Frenţiu	
2.4. Year of study	2	2.5 Semester	3	2.6. Type of evaluation	C	2.7 Type of discipline	Compulsory	

3. Total estimated time (hours/semester of didactic activities) 
3.1 Hours per week 	3	Of which: 3.2 course	2	3.3 seminar/laboratory	1 sem
	
3.4 Total hours in the curriculum 	42	Of which: 3.5 course	28	3.6 seminar/laboratory	14	
Time allotment:	hours	
Learning using manual, course support, bibliography, course notes	35	
Additional documentation (in libraries, on electronic platforms, field documentation) 	45	
Preparation for seminars/labs, homework, papers, portfolios and essays	28	
Tutorship	15	
Evaluations	16	
Other activities: ..................	-	
3.7 Total individual study hours 	129	
3.8 Total hours per semester	171	
3.9 Number of ECTS credits	6	

4. Prerequisites (if necessary)
4.1. curriculum		
4.2. competencies		

5. Conditions (if necessary)
5.1. for the course	•	Students will attend the course with their mobile phones shut down	
5.2.  for the seminar /lab activities	•	Students will attend the seminar with their mobile phones shut down 
•	Room with computers as needed; 	

6. Specific competencies acquired 
Professional competencies	•	Understanding the concepts, methods and models used in research activities.
•	Understanding the principles, design and implementation of various research methods
•	Learning to conduct incipient original research in computer science	
Transversal competencies	•	The ability to review a scientific paper.
•	Application of efficient and rigorous working rules.
•	Manifest responsible attitudes toward the scientific research.
•	Respecting the professional and ethical principles.	

7. Objectives of the discipline (outcome of the acquired competencies)
7.1 General objective of the discipline	•	To introduce the student in research methods 	
7.2 Specific objective of the discipline
	•	To present the existing results in a given computer science field
•	To write reports on a given subject
•	To accustom the students the with doing research and writing a scientific paper	

8. Content
8.1 Course	Teaching methods	Remarks	
•	Week 1: The fields of computer science. ACM classification 
•	Reference:  [fre14, cap.1]	•	Interactive exposure
•	Explanation
•	Conversation		
•	Week 2: Theoretical, experimental, and applied research in computer science
•	Reference:  [Fre14, sec.2.2,  Hol06; Hus]	•	Interactive exposure
•	Explanation
•	Conversation
•	Didactical demonstration		
•	Week 3: Organizing the research activity.
•	Reference:  [Buc01;  Kit05; Nie04]	•	Interactive exposure
•	Explanation
•	Conversation
•	Didactical demonstration		
•	Week 4: The content of a scientific paper
•	Reference:  [Fre14, sec.2.3;  Ler96]	•	Interactive exposure
•	Explanation
•	Conversation
•	Didactical demonstration		
●    Week 5: Writing a research paper.
•	Reference:  [Fre14, sec.2.4;  Kit05; scitext]	•	Interactive exposure
•	Explanation
•	Conversation
•	Didactical demonstration		
•	Week 6:  Speaking at conferences and other presentations
•	Reference:  [CSL; Fre14, sec.2.5; Rad; Sp00]	•	Interactive exposure
•	Explanation
•	Conversation
•	Didactical demonstration		
•	Week 7:  People and research article evaluation.
•	Reference:  [Fre14, sec.3.1; Hir05; Moe05]
	•	Interactive exposure
•	Explanation
•	Conversation
•	Didactical demonstration		
•	Week 8: Evaluation of Journals and publishers
•	Reference:  [Fre14, sec.3.2; ISI11]	•	Interactive exposure
•	Explanation
•	Conversation
•	Didactical demonstration		
•	Week  9: Ranking Research centers, and Universities.
•	Reference:  [Fre14, sec.3.3; IPK07, QSmet; Wik01]	•	Interactive exposure
•	Explanation
•	Conversation
•	Didactical demonstration		
•	Week  10: Research Ethics
•	Reference:  [ACM; Con06; Fre14, sec.4.1; lege04; ***cluj]	•	Interactive exposure
•	Explanation
•	Conversation
•	Didactical demonstration		
•	Week 11: Financing the research activity. Grants
•	Reference:  [Fre14, sec.4.2;	•	Interactive exposure
•	Explanation
•	Conversation
•	Didactical demonstration		
•	Week 12: Romanian school of computer science
•	Reference:  [Fre14, sec.3.3 şi anexe]	•	Interactive exposure
•	Explanation
•	Conversation
•	Didactical demonstration		
Bibliography
[ACM] ACM Council, Code of Ethics, http://www.acm.org/about/code-of-ethics
[Buc01] B. Buchberger, Thinking, Speaking, Writing,  Springer-Verlag
[Con06] L. Consoli, Scientific misconduct and science ethics:  a case study based approach, Science and Engineering Ethics, 12 (2006), 533-541.
[CSL]  Psych 290: How to give a talk, www-psych.stanford.edu/~lera/290/lecture5.html
[Day75] Day, How to write a scientific paper, IEEE Trans. On Professional Commmunication,  ASM News, vol.41 (1975), no.7, 486-494.
[Fre14] M.Frenţiu, I.A.Rus, Metodologia Cercetării în Informatică, Ed.Presa Universitară Clujană, 2014
[Hir05] Hirsh, An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output, http://www.pnas.org/content/102/46/16569.abstract
[Hol06] H.J.Holz et al, Research Methods in Computing: What are they, and how should we teach  them?, ITiCSE’06, June 26-28, 2006, Bologna, Italy.
[Hus] U.Hustadt, Research Methods in CS, Dept. of CS, Univ. of Liverpool
[IPK07]  J.P. Ioanniis, et all, International ranking systems for universities and institutions: a critical appraisal, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2174504
[ISI11] ***, The Thomson Reuters Impact Factor, (seen  15.01.2014) http://thomsonreuters.com/products_services/science/free/essays/impact_factor/
[Kit05] R.Kitchin,& D. Fuller, The Academic’ Guide to Publishing, SAGE Publications, London, 2005.
[lege04] www.lege5.ro/.../legea-nr-206-2004-privind-buna-conduita-in-cercetarea-stiintifica
[Ler96] K.Lertzman, Twenty one suggestions for Writing Good Science Paper, Bulletin of Ecological Society of America, 1996, http://course1.winona.edu/mdelong/ecolab/21%20Suggestions.html
[Moe05] H.F. Moed, Citation Analysis in Research Evaluation, Springer, 2005.
[Nie04] M.A.Nielsen, Principles of Effective Research, 
http://michaelnielsen.org/blog/principles-of-effective-research/
[QSmet] http://www.topuniversities.com/university-ranking-articles/ /qs- world-university-ranking/qs- world-university-ranking- methodology/
[Rad] J.Radel, Oral Presentations, 	
http://people.eku.edu/ritchisong/oralpres.html
[Scitext] ***, Principles of Science Writing, www.scitext/writing.php/
[SP00] B. Spillman, I. Parberry, How to Present a Paper: A Speaker’s Guide, http://www.sfu.ca/~jeffpell/Ling480/ParberryMembrane.pdf 
[Wik01] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/College_and_university_ranking
[***Cluj] http://www.ubb.ro/ro/regulamente/Codul_Etic_al_UBB.pdf
[***ie3] IEEE Citation Reference 	
8.2 Seminar / laboratory	Teaching methods	Remarks	
1. Administration. Survey of the sources of information available on Internet and Intranet. Chosing the paper topics and scheduling the presentations.	•	Interactive exposure
•	Explanation
•	Conversation		
2. Delivery of a review of a scientific paper	•	Interactive exposure
•	Explanation
•	Conversation		
3. Delivery of scientist presentation	•	Interactive exposure
•	Explanation
•	Conversation		
4. Delivery of a subject of an important research subject	•	Interactive exposure
•	Explanation
•	Conversation		
5. Delivery of a scientific paper in the field of the student’s dissertation	•	Interactive exposure
•	Explanation
•	Conversation		
6. Evaluation of student’s reports 	•	Interactive exposure
•	Explanation
•	Conversation		
Bibliography
[Fre14] M.Frenţiu, I.A.Rus, Metodologia Cercetării în Informatică, Ed.Presa Universitară Clujană, 2014
[Day75] Day, How to write a scientific paper, IEEE Trans. On Professional Commmunication,  ASM News, vol.41 (1975), no.7, 486-494.
[Hol06] H.J.Holz et al, Research Methods in Computing: What are they, and how should we teach  them?, ITiCSE’06, June 26-28, 2006, Bologna, Italy.	

9. Corroborating the content of the discipline with the expectations of the epistemic community, professional associations and representative employers within the field of the program

The content of the discipline is consistent with the similar disciplines from other romanian universities and universities from abroad, as well as with the requirements that potential employers would have in the intelligent data analysis field. 	

10. Evaluation
Type of activity	10.1 Evaluation criteria	10.2 Evaluation methods	10.3 Share in the grade (%)	
10.4 Course	•	The correctness and completeness of the accumulated knowledge.	Oral exam (in the regular session)	50%	
10.5 Seminar/lab activities	•	A review of a scientific paper	Evaluation of the review	10%	
	•	A presentation of a scientist in the field of student’s research 	Evaluation of the presentation
	10%	
	•	A writen scientific paper in the field of student’s dissertation	Evaluation of the research paper
	30%	
10.6 Minimum performance standards	
•	Each student has to prove that (s)he acquired an acceptable level of knowledge and understanding of the research methods and activities in computer science
•	Each student has to prove that he knows the content of acientific paper and is able to write such a paper in the field of his dissertation 
•	Penalty points are awarded for delays in submission of proposed topic choices and submission of final reports.

Date				Signature of course coordinator 	Signature of seminar coordinator
30.09.2012		            Prof. dr. Militon Frenţiu		    Prof. dr. Militon Frenţiu	
Date of approval  				 		          Signature of the head of department
									Prof. dr. Bazil Pârv